STILLWATER, Okla. – In a letter dated Aug. 8, Mark Rey, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Undersecretary for Natural Resources and the Environment, offered Oklahoma state conservationist Darrel Dominick a “directed reassignment” – official jargon for a demotion and forced transfer out of state – or termination of his federal employment.
Dominick, a member of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, decided to take an early retirement rather than be transferred to Texas or fired from the Natural Resources Conservation Service job he loved and in which he had served with numerous honors and awards for six years.
Dominick’s early retirement reduced his annuity and ended his 28-year career with the USDA, including a stint in 1999 as acting director for all USDA American Indian programs. He was the third generation of his family who had worked for the federal department for a combined 91 years of service.
“It’s extremely disappointing to have to go in this direction, but despite the financial hardship, our family has found that if you have friends like we have, friends from the tribes and support from our Choctaw Nation family, we’re the richest people in the world and I believe the truth will be known,” Dominick said.
“They didn’t realize I’m enough Indian so that it was never about the money. It’s about honesty and integrity, and that’s what we’ve always been about and always will be about.”
When news of Dominick’s forced retirement surfaced, USDA Secretary Mike Johanns was deluged with dozens of letters from the Choctaw Nation and other tribes, Oklahoma’s elected officials and conservationists praising Dominick’s work and protesting his departure.
Dominick and his supporters assert he was targeted for political retaliation because they had probed the federal agency regarding $500 million in conservation technical assistance funding that had not been distributed to the states.
Rey’s letter to Dominick stated, “The action plan you developed [to address funding inquiries from officials and conservation partners] placed most of the responsibility for solutions on the national headquarters. In addition, your draft plan called for providing in writing, notice to all conservation partners and NRCS employees in Oklahoma of the ‘serious nature of declining funds.’ Neither of these actions is acceptable … In view of the above, the agency can no longer retain you in your current position.”
What Rey failed to mention directly in his letter was the fact that unanswered inquiries about declining conservation funds led Rep. Frank Lucas, R-3rd District, to pass a bill last May cutting $810,000 in funding for Rey’s office, including his personal salary and travel expenses.
“I’ve been working for almost two years to get this funding problem rectified between the state and federal NRCS offices. Maybe this will get their attention,” Lucas, chairman of the Agricultural Subcommittee on Conservation, said.
The funding cut did get Rey’s attention, but he turned to Dominick to fix the problem. Dominick was asked to write an action plan “to address partner dissatisfactions,” but Rey rejected Dominick’s recommendation to provide “the needed transparency” on the funding shortfall.
Doug McKalip, Rey’s spokesman, said he could not discuss the contents of Rey’s letter.
“We are bound to protect the privacy of our employees’ personnel folder, even former employees. All I can say is the reassignment was not retribution. The letter will have to speak for itself because there isn’t any more that we can say at this point,” McKalip said.
Jim Leutkemeyer, Lucas’s spokesman, said the congressman “let the folks in Washington know that he had had nothing but positive experiences with Mr. Dominick, but they were involved in a personnel dispute and the congressman for several reasons cannot get involved in personnel disputes at the federal level.”
Lucas’s bill, with Rey’s zeroed-out budget, awaits a Senate vote.
Paul Feeney, in the USDA’s Office of the Inspector General, said department policy prohibited him from responding to a query about whether an investigation is under way regarding the circumstances of Dominick’s departure from the USDA.
But, according to a USDA employee who asked to remain anonymous, questions still remain concerning hundreds of millions of dollars that are being diverted from the states to grants to farm organizations, foundations and other groups that could provide political support in future elections.
In response to a question about whether the inspector general is investigating the distribution of NRCS funding, Feeney said the OIG’s planned work for fiscal year 2007 includes “reviews of NRCS’ effectiveness in implementing various programs. … We will also conduct a review of NRCS’ administration of certain contracts. OIG also audits financial statements of USDA agencies on an annual basis.”
Deficit budgets and
missing funds
With his early retirement from the NRCS, Dominick is free to discuss the details of events that led to his termination.
As with other federal agencies, the head of NRCS and other administrative positions had become a political appointment rather than merit-based advancements of career employees after the Bush administration came to power. Both Rey and Merlin Bartz, Dominick’s immediate supervisor, were appointees, Dominick said.
Although Bartz gave Dominick three performance awards during his tenure, he did not speak out against Dominick’s departure.
“He’s part of the administration and works with the administration. It goes in both directions – one minute you’re the best in the business and the next minute they’re reassigning you because you didn’t keep people from asking questions,” Dominick said.
In 2005 and again in early 2006, the Oklahoma NRCS received deficit budgets. Although the total amount was not reduced, the funding for employees’ salaries and benefits was cut while financial assistance to farmers and ranches increased.
“We worked with the national headquarters on deficit reduction plans. They confirmed we had deficits in both years. Our operations are very intertwined with local conservation districts and the state conservation commission in partnership to deliver conservation out here. We also have tribal resource conservationists and points of contact that work directly with the 38 tribes in Oklahoma and a very good, strong working relationship with most of these tribes on their conservation issues. All of this was declining even though the amount of work was increasing tremendously. It was like squeezing blood out of a turnip,” Dominick said.
With the largest Indian population and workforce in the country, the tribes, local conservation districts and the state conservation commission became concerned about the reductions in the NRCS’s operation and workforce. Last March, the conservation partners scheduled a meeting in Washington, D.C., with Lucas and the NRCS administrators.
At that meeting, the administrators gave the Oklahoma contingent a record of appropriations to the agency from 2001 – ’06 and how the money was allocated to the states. Dominick did not have access to that record, he said.
The state Conservation Commission analyzed the information and, according to Executive Director Mike Thralls, discovered that around $500 million had been withheld in 2005 and 2006 and that was why there was a deficit budget in Oklahoma’s NRCS.
Thralls and the other conservation partners continued to ask questions about the missing funds but did not get any answers, and in May Lucas passed the bill that cut Rey’s funding. A week later, Dominick was summoned to a meeting with Rey; NRCS Chief Bruce Knight; and his supervisor, Merlin Bartz.
“I get there for the meeting on that Tuesday morning after Memorial Day and we go to a conference room, those three individuals are there, and I’m told, ‘This is a f—– up mess.’ And they tell me that Congressman Lucas is very upset. They’d gone up on the Hill and tried to work with Congressman Lucas since that amendment was passed and, basically, they told me it was my responsibility to go back to Oklahoma and make Congressman Lucas happy and quiet the conservation partners from asking any questions,” Dominick said.
Dominick told the administrators that he needed the facts on “what had happened with the funds, because the questions were going to continue until they were answered.” And he repeated his recommendation for transparency in the draft action plan he was asked to prepare.
“It was a draft because I didn’t exactly know what they were looking for. I didn’t get any feedback until July 1, when I was told by my supervisor that there were too many actions in the plan requiring them [the NRCS administrators] to do something. I said I cannot answer the questions and I’m not going to make up answers without facts,” Dominick said.
In early August, Dominick was called back to Washington for another meeting with Rey and Dana York, another NRCS administrator.
“Mr. Rey said I had not made Congressman Lucas happy and because of the importance of the upcoming 2007 Farm Bill they need to be able to work with Congressman Lucas and that my leadership had shown them they would not be able to do that if I was in Oklahoma.”
Rey told Dominick he would be reassigned.
“They just told me I was going to be reassigned basically because I had not provided a partnership that supported them. I told them they still hadn’t answered the questions about the funding. Three times I asked them for an opportunity to keep my position in Oklahoma that I had worked all those years for and had performed admirably at, and I was denied that three times,” Dominick said.
When the “directed reassignment” letter arrived Dominick and his family decided they really didn’t want to move to Texas.
“Our hearts are in Oklahoma. Our family is in Oklahoma. My heart would not be in the job and I could no longer work for a group of people that could do this to a loyal employee whose family had spent three generations working for them. I’m learning the hard lessons we have to learn out here so we can go back and help the people back home. I’m gong to move on and help Indian people and help conservation, and I’m going to go find the path the Creator wants us on,” Dominick said.
In a twist of irony that reiterated Dominick’s long, award-winning record of excellent performance as state conservationist, the Oklahoma Association of Conservation Districts announced on Sept. 14 – a day before Dominick’s early retirement – that one of his conservation teams had won a prestigious national USDA 2006 Secretary’s Honor Award for Supporting the President’s Management Agenda and Civil Rights.
“We are extremely proud that Oklahoma once again has been recognized for its outstanding conservation work,” said Oklahoma Association of Conservation Districts Executive Director Clay Pope, Cherokee.
“It should be noted, however, that the team that pulled off this amazing feat was organized and encouraged by our former NRCS State Conservationist Darrel Dominick. The same Darrel Dominick that USDA Undersecretary Mark Rey saw fit to demote supposedly for his inability to build partnerships and reach out to non-traditional partners. While we are happy that this good work has been recognized, we think this shows how misguided the move against Darrel Dominick by Mr. Rey was.
“It’s pretty clear that Darrel wasn’t fired because he didn’t do his job. He did his job better than anyone else in the country,” Pope said.
