Colorado Spending Transparency

Last Wednesday, transparency supporters faced their first battle when they testified in support of the School District Financial Transparency Act.  Twenty people testifed in favor. Initially it seemed as if supporters (including COST) lost because as posted earlier,  a few members of the Senate Education Committee gutted the bill.  It now suggests that public schools put their spending and revenues online in a searchable database.  Original bill language required schools to do this.  Essentially the legislation was reduced to resolution status.

According to COST sources, opponents of transparency wanted this bill killed.  They never wanted it out of committee.  While they changed the spirit of the bill, they could not deny all those who showed up to support transparency!  The bill passed out of committee because of public testimony, phone calls and emails.

According to our friend Natalie Menten, supporters of transparency are ”not done yet.”

Pro-transparency Senators will fight this Tuesday morning, February 3, on the floor of the State Senate.  Senator Ted Harvey, prime sponsor of the school district transparency act, suggested that transparency supporters pack the Senate Gallery on Tuesday morning for second reading of the bill.  He will ask supporters to stand and be recognized. He plans to fight to have the original language of the bill be reinstated.  According to friends of COST, transparency supporters plan to be in the Senate Gallery at 9 a.m. Our friend Natalie will have more information her website www.nataliementen.com.

If you would like to find out where your Senator stands on financial transparency, below is a list of email addresses and phone numbers so you can ask.
bob.bacon.senate@state.co.us,
betty.boyd.senate@state.co.us,
greg@gregbrophy.net,
bill.cadman.senate@state.co.us,
morgan.carroll.senate@state.co.us,
joyce.foster.senate@state.co.us,
dan.gibbs.senate@state.co.us,
peter.groff.senate@state.co.us,
ted.harvey.senate@state.co.us,
rollie.heath.senate@state.co.us,
mary.hodge.senate@state.co.us,
senatorhudak@gmail.com,
isgarsenate@frontier.net,
moe.keller.senate@state.co.us,
electkenkester@hotmail.com,
keith@keithking.com,
mike.kopp.senate@state.co.us,
kevin@kevinlundberg.com,
shawnmitch@aol.com,
john.morse.senate@state.co.us,
joshpenry@gmail.com,
scott.renfroe.senate@state.co.us,
chris.romer.senate@state.co.us,
nwden34@yahoo.com,
senatorschultheis@gmail.com,
gail.schwartz.senate@state.co.us,
brandon.shaffer.senate@state.co.us,
nancyspence@qwest.net,
abel.tapia.senate@state.co.us,
lotochtrop@aol.com,
jennifer.veiga.senate@state.co.us,
al.white.senate@state.co.us,
suzanne.williams.senate@state.co.us,

All of us here at COST don’t do this for the fame or fortune — both in very short supply.  However, we do appreciate it when we are recognized by our peers.  We’d like to thank the academy — Sunshine Review — for recognizing COST as its “Ray of Sunshine.” 

For all breaking Colorado transparency news, follow us on Twitter.

Since the anti-transparency forces won the battle today, COST has decided to honor them by making them Charter Members of our Transparency Wall of Shame.  This wall will feature those legislators,  other elected officials and bureaucrats who do not believe that taxpayers need to know where or how their tax dollars are spent. 

Of course we have to build it first but as soon as we do, Senators Bob Bacon, Evie Hudak and Rollie Heath will find themselves at the top!

Hijacked then gutted and neutered. That’s the only way to describe what happened when the Senate Education Committee amended Senator Ted Harvey’s bill on school district financial transparency. 

Senator Bob Bacon introduced an amendment that establishes a “voluntary pilot program” for transparency.  It passed and is now on its way to the full floor of the Senate.  Senator Harvey asked to open up the bill for additional testimony since it had been altered dramatically.  Bacon, chair of the committee, said no.  Senator Harvey also tried to kill his own bill.  Harvey did say he would bring the bill back next year.

Bacon, a former educator, used words like “cruel” and “fear” to describe how school districts may respond to financial transparency.  Fear is only present when there is something to hide.

Bacon also stated that he is concerned that school districts may not have the personnel to implement transparency online in a searchable format.  If that’s the case, then perhaps the school districts can ask one of their students because I promise you, students know how.  It does make me wonder who should be doing the teaching.

A moment of humor came when Senator Kopp responded to Bacon by asking, “are these school districts using a pencil and paper?” When the committee laughed, Kopp said he was serious.  He wanted to know if the school disticts to which Bacon referred were computer literate.

Senator Bacon showed a great deal of concern toward school districts and their burdens but absolutely no concern for taxpayers or the 18 plus people who testified yesterday in support of transparency.

Today, anti-transparency forces (Senators Hudak, Bacon and Heath) prevailed but as Senator Chris Romer said, “this is a trend that won’t stop.” Then he said to Senator Harvey, eventually “you will win.” 

He is right.  They aren’t going to stop this train.  Yesterday’s testimony proved that taxpayers want to know how their money is spent.

In the meantime, taxpayers are at the mercy of school districts that may or may not want to share how they are spending taxpayers’ dollars.

One bright spot:  Despite voting for the amendment, it appears that Senators Groff and Romer won’t just tow the teachers’ union line.

Transparency supporters do not despair.  We may have lost this battle but as Senator Romer pointed we will win the war.

Remember: No taxation without information!

“Nobody comes.”

“Kill the bill.”

Displaying an  an extraordinary amount of arrogance and disrespect for taxpayers Glenn Gustafson, CFO of School District 11 in Colorado Springs, implied that people don’t care about how school districts spend money so therefore he (and other districts) shouldn’t be bothered with transparency. 

Gustafson made the statements when testifying against SB09-57 the School District Financial Transparency Act in the Senate Education Committee on Wednesday, January 28, in what turned out to be a much longer than anticipated hearing on the transparency legislation.

Problem is that the oblivious CFO waltzed in at the end of two hours of testimony — not having heard a thing that had been said earlier — and addressed a committee room packed with transparency supporters.  Eighteen Colorado residents, taxpayers, citizens took time out of their day to testify in favor of transparency.  More came to lend moral support. The ratio of supporters to opponents 6 to 1.  Imagine what the ratio would be if taxpayers actually cared about transparency!

Tom Stone drove all the way from Eagle County.  Scott Helman made the hour-plus trip from Weld County.  Terrance Mangen used a vacation day just to make his voice heard. The Colorado Press Association lent its support. One of the best visuals came from Tom Kellor who brought just one box of papers he received from a CORA request. 

Interestingly enough, one of Kellor’s CORA requests was sent to District 11.  Gustafson also testified that taxpayers can get information with a simple CORA request.  Another problem with that bit of testimony — after the hearing, Kellor reminded Gustafson about his obstructionist tactics when Kellor submitted a CORA request to District 11.  Guess those CORA requests aren’t so simple after all.

Gustafson also said that his district and some others put their budgets online. And for that we should be thankful?  In the words of my friend and colleague Ben DeGrow, a budget is merely a “promise” of where money is going to be spent.  It does not tell us where the money goes.

Senate Education Committee member and former State Board of Education member Evie Hudak could not mask her hostility towards the legislation and its supporters.  She parroted the warn out arguments against transparency for school districts including cost, lack of local control and possible privacy violations.  COST has addressed the cost issue before and was glad to see that many citizens were able to do so today.  And Colorado Spending Transparency Project Director Amy Oliver testified that transparency only includes information that is already a matter of public record — so Hudak has nothing to worry about there.

Funny, Hudak didn’t seem to mind being a big spender while on the State Board of Education.  Also, she didn’t mind dictating to individual school districts that their high schools could no longer sell diet soda to students. And she has had her own issues with divulging confidential information.  This might be a “do as I say not as I do” type of thing.

Hudak didn’t even bother to listen to much of supporters’ testimony.  After grilling Senate sponsor Ted Harvey and enjoying opposition testimony from two lobbyists, she exited the committee room shortly after transparency supporters began to tesify.  She was gone for more than 30 minutes during which time supporters urged committee members to pass the bill on to the full senate.  When Hudak did bother to come back, she paid more attention to messages on her cell phone than to what was being said by supporters. 

Hudak finally became interested again in the testimony when Gustafson began his comments. 

Sources tell COST that opponents were “shocked” at the number of supporters and that the committee might have to actually pass the bill out of committee…but probably not without a bunch of amendments that will be designed to waterdown transparency.

The committee will hear amendments on Thursday, January 29, at 1:45 p.m. in SCR 354. 

COST believes it will be very difficult for the Senate Education Committee to ignore the articulate comments from so many dedicated Colorado citizens. If the committee fails to pass the School District Spending Transparency legislation on to the full Senate, then it proves that two lobbyists and a bureaucrat have more power and influence than a roomful of taxpayers and citizens.

Then voters can show legislators how much power and influence they have during the next campaign cycle.

Remember: No taxation without information!

According to a press release from the Independence Institute:

Four years after RTD assured voters that it could build six new rail transit lines for $4.7 billion, RTD continues to deceive voters about the high costs and lack of benefits from its FasTracks plan.  Web of Deceptions, a new report from the Independence Institute’s Center for the American Dream, documents sixteen major deceptions that RTD has used and continues to use to encourage voters to raise taxes even more.  

A few of the deceptions are highlighted below:

1. RTD spent 28 percent more than its original cost estimate on the Southwest light-rail line and 59 percent more on the Southeast line. Yet RTD continues to insist it has always built its transit projects on budget.

2. Denver’s light-rail lines use more energy and generate more greenhouse gases per passenger mile than the average SUV. Yet RTD maintains that light rail is good for the environment.

3. RTD light-rail trains are the emptiest in the country. RTD wants you to think its trains are full, but in 2007 RTD light-rail cars carried an average of less than 14 people, compared with 24 on light-rail cars in the rest of the country.

4. Denver-area traffic grows more every five months than all the cars FasTracks is projected to take off the road. Yet RTD claims FasTracks will significantly reduce congestion.

5. U.S. light-rail lines built with public-private partnerships went an average of 60 percent over budget. Yet RTD insists that public-private partnerships can save 30 percent on construction costs.

6. By failing to negotiate agreements with BNSF and Union Pacific prior to the 2004 election, RTD’s poor planning added more than $300 million to the projected cost of FasTracks. Yet RTD blames all of the cost increase on increased materials costs.

Despite RTD’s obvious inability to manage taxpayers’ dollars, the agency says with a straight face that voters likely would approve a tax hike to bailout FasTracks.  In fact according to the Rocky Mountain News, RTD commissioned a poll of 700 likely voters and “found 64 percent either strongly or somewhat support an increase of up to 0.4 cents - four pennies on a $10 taxable purchase - to complete the system by 2017.”

And the emperor has a fabulous new suit of clothes!  COST is going to go out on a limb and predict that voters will not approve another massive tax hike to bailout RTD’s boondoggle.  Maybe if RTD was a bit more forthcoming about all its expenditures…a little transparency goes a long way with taxpayers.

Remember: No taxation without information!

Below is the text of a great op-ed from Independence Institute education policy analyst Ben DeGrow.  Ben makes the case for transparency in Colorado’s school districts.   

Financial Transparency strengthens the “public” in public education
By Ben DeGrow

Colorado has a tremendous opportunity to lead the way in making public education a more truly public enterprise.

School officials should place detailed and useful spending information where citizens can access it freely: the Internet. Such a simple and highly cost-effective approach promotes public accountability and transparency.

Public schools in Colorado are funded through taxpayer dollars and governed by boards accountable to taxpayers and parents. But school boards generally set policies and oversee affairs from a high-perched mountain view.

Bringing more concerned eyes to keep tabs on the taxpayer money flowing in and out of the education bureaucracy can only help. Financial transparency provides incentives to focus spending on classroom activities and other priorities supported by the community. It also promotes better-informed public debate and greater taxpayer confidence in the management of their money.

Currently, a concerned citizen can access extensive amounts of detailed spending information, but almost exclusively through formal requests that tend to be costly, time-intensive, and stressful. The expense and difficulty varies from one school district to another.

Consumers should not have to pay to see grocery store or department store receipts. Likewise, taxpayers should have a free and easy way to view how their school tax funds are being used. Today’s technology makes it rather easy for officials to post detailed financial records online in a usable format.

For less than $10,000, a private group in Wisconsin can take existing government accounting data, quickly convert it into a searchable database, and host it online. Milwaukee Public Schools’ 432,000 invoices made up one of its first projects. As capacity grows, the cost for an agency to follow suit will continue to decline.

The federal government and a handful of state governments have taken advantage of current technology to build these kinds of user-friendly budget databases. One of the innovators is the state of Texas, where the Comptroller’s office accurately boasts their Where the Money Goes Web site allows users to drill their searches for expenditure information “down to the pencil.”

The best news from the transparency efforts in Texas is the nearly $5 million reported in cost savings, including $2.3 million in the site’s first year of operation. The direct public oversight of spending allowed the state to consolidate contracts, to find more affordable services, and to eliminate non-essential purchases.

No one can guarantee that Colorado schools will realize the same amount of savings by forging ahead with online financial transparency. But it remains distinctly possible that the largely nominal cost to post detailed spending on searchable databases could more than pay for itself.

In tight budget times, every little bit of savings can help. While transparency is an intrinsically worthy goal, the practical benefits of greater efficiency only makes the case for posting expenditures online all the more pressing.

Bill 57 before the Colorado legislature proposes to open up the books of every school district, charter school, and local public education agency in the state. With the bill enacted into law, citizens could search online databases to see if their money is being put to good use. School administrators could follow the lead of Illinois and Texas counterparts who have embraced transparency, adopting the policy that “if you can’t defend it, don’t spend it.”

On one hand, where citizens can see their tax dollars are being used frugally but needs not being met, they may be more likely to support requests to increase funding through property taxes or voluntary contributions.

On the other hand, where serious issues are raised, the impetus will be on local officials to implement reasonable public suggestions for cost savings before asking for more funds.

Shining sunlight on the detailed financial picture for all to see would help strengthen the “public” in public education.

Ben DeGrow is education policy analyst for the Independence Institute, a free market think tank based in Golden.

Colorado Transparency Project Director Amy Oliver has been exchanging comments on transparency.  Hard to believe there is someone out there who believes taxpayers already get plenty of information about where their money goes. 

Check our Larimer County’s Red County blog. 

Now you can get COST Twitter updates: http://twitter.com/COTransparency

Tell all your friends!

Crowded classrooms. Longer walks to school. Dirtier school buildings.  More likely – a few less lattes from Starbucks and smaller cabins for the carnival cruise.  How will they survive?  And to think some stingy Coloradans are suggesting that before school districts ask for any more money, they should be more transparent with their revenues and expenditures.  Imagine that — show taxpayers how their tax dollars are being spent. 

Mark your calendars. To discuss spending transparency in Colorado school districts and pending legislation, transparency advocate (and good friend of COST) Natalie Menten and Independence Institute policy analyst Ben DeGrow join host Jon Caldara on Independent Thinking. Tune in this Friday night at 8:30 p.m. to KBDI Channel 12; and repeated the following Tuesday evening at 5 p.m.

Also, be sure to check Ben’s latest Issue Backgrounder titled Shining the Light on Colorado School Spending.  The paper “makes the case for online financial transparency in K-12 education.”  Ben found that two Colorado school districts already put their check registries online.  Find out if your school district is one of them.  Read the paper.

Remember:  No taxation without information!