Colorado Spending Transparency

A reporter asked Colorado Transparency Project Director Amy Oliver Cooke, a member of the Colorado Long Term Economic Stability Commission, if real cuts in spending need to be made in Colorado’s budget where would she make them?  She answered,

I don’t know because I don’t have specifics on where the state spends its money.  That’s why we need transparency.  If we can see where every dime is spent, then all of us can make suggestions.  Right now if we had full transparency, we would have almost 5 million sets of eyes, stakeholders and taxpayers, engaged in the process — coming up with their ideas for efficiency and cost savings.  Vendors and suppliers could be providing goods and services in a more competitive process.

Amy does agree with Governor Ritter’s Budget Director that TABOR, while on time-out the last five years, has helped to cushion Colorado from some of the problems that other states such as California have.  Under TABOR, Colorado lawmakers could not spend like drunken sailors on shore leave.  As the Denver Post said:

Colorado is not California and is not in any danger of becoming California with its $24.8 billion budget gap, in part because of a different budget structure.

The fact that “we are obligated to balance the budget each year has actually protected Colorado,” Saliman said.

He never mentioned TABOR by name, but Saliman also credited “constitutional budget provisions that rein in spending.” The 1992 Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights, or TABOR amendment, controls taxation and spending.

With Colorado starting fiscal year 2009-2010 nearly $400 million in the red, this budget crisis is just another reason why this state desperately needs complete transparency in all levels of government.

Technically the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights prevents lawmakers from raising taxes without a vote of the people.  They can raise fees but fees are supposed to cover the cost of services provided only.  And the Tooth Fairy and Easter Bunny are real.

Natalie Menten and Face the State cooperated to show us just how much the General Assembly raised fees in the last legislative session. 

59 bills were introduced during the 2009 session that established or changed fees. Of the lot, only eight were killed, with the balance signed by the governor for a total of $562,969,430 in revenue for fiscal year 2009-2010.

Pick your favorite fee by checking out the 2009 Fee Increase Spreadsheet.  The new fees provide some 560 million reasons why Coloradans need complete transparency.

COST praised candidate Obama for his commitment to transparency, but as a president he has failed miserably.  If the 1200 page Waxman-Markey global warming bill passes through Congress and the president signs it, he will once again break his pledge to be the most transparent administration.  The legislation, which the Wall Street Journal calls the largest tax increase in history, is being pushed through at lightning speed.  Introduced this week, Speaker Pelosi wants a vote right now.

Republicans are right to call Democrats on breaking their pledge to be more transparent.  Politico writes:

Republicans say Democrats are ramming their climate-change legislation through the House without enough time for members to read the bill — let alone to understand it — all in violation of their promises about creating a more transparent legislative process.

Furthermore, 300 of the 1200 pages were added late last night.  How could any legislator read, let alone understand, the impact of this massive legislation in such a short period of time?  The answer is they couldn’t; yet they are willing to increase the tax burden on American working families.

So much for transparency.  This is a prime example of taxation without even knowing the information!

UPDATE: The House just passed 219-212.  Reports say not one House member read the bill.

COST actually agrees with State Senate President Brandon Shaffer.  The Democrat legislative committee chairs desperately need some training on how to treat the public! 

In an article explaining how Shaffer spent $4300 in taxpayer money to pay for a Democrats-only retreat, the Colorado Springs Gazette reports that Shaffer ”organized the retreat partly because of complaints about committee chairs being disrespectful to the public and other lawmakers. All committee chairs are Democrats since the party controls the Senate as well as the House.”

COST knows first hand how rude some legislators were to Colorado citizens during testimony.  During testimony on SB 57 Public School Financial Transparency, our own Amy Oliver watched as Representative Judy Solano scolded citizens whose only crime was to endure hours of waiting just to get their 3 minutes of time before the House Education Committee.  They simply wanted to tell the committee that they supported SB 57and hoped the committee would pass it on to the full House.  Instead, they got a lecture from Solano and no vote from the committee.

Also, Senator Bob Bacon lectured Amy when she took time off work to testify against HB 1299, the legislation to destroy the Electoral College.  At the same time Bacon nearly gave attorney/lobbyist Mark Grueskin a standing ovation.

From our perspective, some arrogant legislators (including committee chairs) treated citizens with whom they disagreed with contempt and hostility.  So Shaffer was correct to address the problem with a cotillion-type class for legislators.  However, COST happily would have done it for free and saved Colorado taxpayers $4300.   Too bad Shaffer didn’t go through a more public, competitive bid process — another reason for transparency in all areas of government!

According to a recent article in the Fort Collins Coloradoan, Colorado State University “workers with university-issued purchasing cards spent more than $60,000 on everything from pizzas, coffee and bottled water to steak, seafood and sushi — all in a single month.”

Some of the expenditures were well justified by CSU employees.  For example:

CSU Athletic Director Paul Kowalczyk took a slew of current and potential donors out to lunch at Bahama Breeze in Las Vegas, spending $322.28 on everything from sodas and shrimp salads to grilled tilapia, crispy chicken and salmon tostada. Unlike most spending justifications, Kowalczyk provided a detailed listing of with whom he had lunch and why…Among the guests were longtime donors who own real estate and casino interests. The justification notes how much each guest has given to CSU over the years, and how much “capacity” they have to give more.

Others were not. 

A recently released internal audit of top-level administrators’ offices at CSU noted the literal rubber-stamping of some spending authorizations and numerous purchasing card violations in the Division of Advancement and Strategic Initiatives. That audit found no evidence of misspending, but a lack of appropriate oversight.

Higher education desperately needs more transparency.

Just minutes ago, Governor Bill Ritter quietly signed HB 1288 the Colorado Taxpayer Transparency Act.

According to Face the State, Governor Bill Ritter today plans to sign HB 1288 the Colorado Taxpayer Transparency Act, which creates a state expenditure and revenue database, in private.  Or will he?  Sources tell COST that the Governor still is struggling with this legislation – apparently not enough to veto it.  Despite his embrace of transpareny in his annual state-of-the-state speech, bill sponsor Rep. BJ Nikkel says the Governor tried to kill this overwhelmingly bi-partisan legislation.  It seems the Governor’s office doesn’t know his schedule today because it can’t tell Rep. Nikkel when the signing will be — keeping her and the public in the dark.  This isn’t the first time politics has come into play in a bill signing.

Candidate Barack Obama on Transparency:

Whether you believe Government ought to spend more or spend less or just spend differently, we all should be able to agree that Government spending should be transparent and that public information ought to be accessible to the public.

Following his Big Apple date night with First Lady Michelle Obama, the New York Post reports, “The White House declined to say how much the trip was costing taxpayers.”

Greeley Evans District Six, the largest Colorado school district ever to be placed on accreditation watch, wants more money.  According to the Greeley Tribune the district is asking for a mill levy override to fund $32 million in various projects. 

With a bad economy, a mill levy override is going to be a tough sell.  But also working against the district is its lack of transparency.  District Six school board member Robert Stack was part of the education lobby that testified against SB 57 the Public School Financial Transparency Act, which was defeated in the House Education Committee.  He did say in testimony that he represented himself and not the entire school board.  However, the Colorado Association of School Boards, which lobbies at the state capitol on behalf of Colorado school boards, actively worked to kill SB 57.

COST’s suggestion to District Six: show respect for stakeholders and taxpayers. Show them how you are spending their money before asking for more. 

Remember No Taxation without Information!

Remember Amendment 54 Clean Government Colorado?  It was the 2008 successful ballot initiative that forbids holders of no-bid government contracts of $100,000 or more from making political contributions for two years.  Ever since its passage, special interest groups with no-bid contract that donate millions of dollars to issue and candidate campaigns have been whining about a violation of their free speech. 

Just recently Director of the Colorado Transparency Project Amy Oliver attended a meeting of select Colorado non-profits where they discussed how to challenge Amendment 54 in court.  Plaintiffs are hoping for a preliminary injunction that would prevent its implementation.

However, they are not challenging the transparency requirement, which mandates government contractors (including a number of Colorado non-profits) submit an electronic summary of their contract for anyone to review on the Internet. The State Department of Personnel is responsible for maintaining the searchable, web-based database containing all sole-source government contracts.

Prepare to be underwhelmed.  Despite a December 31, 2008 compliance date, the Colorado Department of Personnel and Adminstration contract summary database, while available, is far from complete.  It appears that Colorado non-profits and others have been lax in getting their information about their no-bid contracts to the state.  

Good news is that those at the meeting were encouraged to comply with this transparency requirement.  COST will check the database in a few days to see if the advice was taken seriously.