McHOSE SHOCKED THAT ADMINISTRATION DID NOT CONSULT AGRICULTURE EXPERTS IN CLOSING DEPT.

SUGGESTS MOVING CERTAIN AGRICULTURE FUNCTIONS FROM DEP TO AG DEPARTMENT MIGHT BE A BETTER WAY TO SAVE 

Assemblywoman Alison Littell McHose today said that she was stunned that it appears nobody with expertise in the agriculture industry was consulted as part of the process for eliminating the Department of Agriculture and reiterated her stance that the detriments of losing the department will outweigh any possible cost savings.

“If the administration is going to eliminate a department that oversees such an important industry, I would hope they consulted experts in that industry,” said McHose, R-Sussex, Morris and Hunterdon. “The impression I got from today’s testimony was that no such effort was made and that no experts on farming played any role in this decision.”

McHose noted that when Treasurer David Rousseau was asked whether anyone directly involved in the decision to close the Agriculture Department had knowledge of the farming industry, the treasurer was unable to answer affirmatively.

The assemblywoman went on to suggest that a better way to achieve cost savings might be to move some functions in the Department of Environmental Protection’s massive bureaucracy over to the smaller, more efficient Agriculture Department. These functions include parks and forestry, fish and wildlife, and shellfish and marine fisheries management.

“Since these functions are consistent with the work already done within the department and affect many of the same constituent groups the department deals with it, would make sense to move these functions,” McHose said. “This could allow for savings at DEP without adding to the costs in the Agriculture Department.”

#####