EDITORIAL: Leaner and meaner

A controversy over converting a handful of failing schools into charter campuses continues to rage in Clark County. The potential change threatens the established order and those who prosper in it.

Imagine, then, the likely reaction to state Controller Ron Knecht’s bill draft to apply a similar concept to a scattering of Nevada bureaucracies, transforming them into “charter agencies” in an effort to improve efficiencies and save tax money.

Mr. Knecht’s plan is modeled after an Iowa experiment, in which the state’s Democratic governor granted six agencies increased flexibility, freeing them — just like in the charter school model — from certain bureaucratic, union and budgetary restraints. In addition, under Senate Bill 4, to be considered by the 2017 Legislature, employees in charter agencies that meet certain performance goals would be eligible for bonuses.

“The motivation is about changing the incentive structure that exists within the bureaucracy,” said Assistant Controller Geoffrey Lawrence, “so people are focused more on delivering services at low cost.”

A similar bill didn’t get a hearing at the 2015 session while Republicans ran both houses. With Democrats regaining majorities in the Senate and Assembly in the November balloting, prospects for innovative reforms now look slim.

Critics of the plan argue that an Iowa state auditor found the trial program there didn’t generate the anticipated savings. “Why should we adopt a failed policy from another state?” asked Assemblywoman Dina Neal, a Las Vegas Democrat.

Not so fast. Let’s not forget that the reform — which a subsequent governor discontinued — was widely hailed as a model for other states and even received the Innovation in American Government Award from Harvard.

In addition, a 2011 essay on governing.com by Jim Chrisinger and Cynthia Eisenhauer — who helped craft the program — notes that the auditor simply concluded he couldn’t find a cause and effect between tax savings and the charter conversions. In fact, though, the agencies that participated showed improved results on a number of fronts. For instance, the approach resulted in quicker state income tax refunds for many Iowans and an increase in the amount of restitution paid to crime victims.

“The most important question here was, ‘Can charter agencies create more public value and help close the budget gap better than “regular agencies”?’ the authors wrote. “We believe the results are a resounding, ‘Yes’.”

While Democrats will be tempted to run interference for their government union patrons on this issue, they should realize that making the public sector leaner and more productive might shore up taxpayer confidence in a number of their favored state programs.

Lawmakers would be unwise to simply dismiss Mr. Knecht’s proposal.