I'm pretty sure Pat Lyons and Bill Richardson aren't running against each other for anything next year, but maybe I missed something.
Based on their comments this week, it seems perhaps I did.
The spat between the Republican land commissioner and the Democratic governor started earlier this week when Lyons blasted Richardson for implementing five days of furloughs for state employees, calling it "cruel."
In short, Lyons said he'd been fiscally conservative so his shop wouldn't have to force employees into unpaid vacations. Richardson apparently didn't like that, and suggested Lyons was out to score political points. Richardson said Lyons had "yet to take an active role in helping the state shore up its budget shortfalls."
Lyons responded late Thursday, saying his office "generates an average of $500 million a year for public schools, universities, hospitals, correctional facilities, and the other state supported programs that rely on the Land Office to meet their budgets."
He went on to say “I’m not the one who hired 400 friends and paid them excessive salaries, or spent exorbitant amounts of money on my pet projects, or paid corporations and movie producers to do business with the state, or spent every penny of last year’s $400 million revenue windfall, which by the way is pretty close to what we need to bridge the budget gap. I’m not the problem, I’m the solution.”
The state budget shortfall is an important issue, but it just seems an odd one for these two to be crosswise over. Is Lyons running for something else? How 'bout Richardson?
Update, 3:18 p.m.
Yep, Lyons is running for something: PRC. (Knew I was missing or forgetting something.) That could explain some of this...But is Richardson running for the regulatory panel as well?
"I’m extremely concerned about proposed land swaps between the State Land Office and private land owners in the Whites Peak area," Richardson said. "I am told the swaps would result in a net loss of almost 4,000 acres to the state, much of it pristine mountain, alpine meadow, lake and riparian territory. These are some of the finest public hunting and sporting grounds in the state."
"I’m particularly concerned about the process by which this swap apparently has been arranged – namely, a behind-the-scenes deal with virtually no public input or notification, sealed bids, and inadequate opportunity for examination. This should not be acceptable for any major transaction involving public trust lands, much less lands that for centuries have been used for traditional purposes such as hunting, trapping and recreation."
Expect a rebuttal from Lyons next. . .
