Colorado Spending Transparency

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.

During the last legislative session, COST came to realize that anti-transparency forces not only exist but they work very hard to block the sunshine on government.  We exposed how lobbyists, State Controller David McDermott, some legislators, school administrators and Governor Bill Ritter all tried to kill transparency legislation. 

But the state of Maine did Colorado anti-transparency forces one better (or worse depending on your perspective).  According to the Bangor Daily News, Maine state legislators actually introduced a bill that would make “public information unavailable to the public.” 

The bill was directed at state based, free market think tank the Maine Heritage Policy Center after it published the names, titles and salaries of state employees on the organization’s transparency Web site. 

Fortunately the bill recently failed but we must never forget how far those who can spend our money will go hide it from us.  That legislators would try to pass a law to forbid public information is chilling.  COST realizes that transparency is more important than ever.

Sources tell COST that HB 1288 the Colorado Taxpayer Transparency Act has been “prepared” and “delivered” to Governor Bill Ritter’s desk.  We don’t know exactly what that means but we look forward to the Governor’s signature.  In all honesty what we really are looking forward to is the database of expenditures and revenues that it establishes.

COST learned that Governor Bill Ritter is not very transparent when it comes to bill signing.  Colorado Transparency Project Director Amy Oliver called State Representative BJ Nikkel to find out when the Governor would sign HB 1288 the Colorado Taxpayer Transparency Act.  Amy reported this morning on her blog:

The legislator [BJ Nikkel] known among her colleague as “Miss Transparency” has no idea.  Not that she hasn’t asked.  The Governor’s office won’t tell her.  So much for transparency from the Executive Branch.  They even keep bill signings secret.

He could not sign it in which case it becomes law anyway, or he could veto it.  Either way, his office isn’t telling.

This wouldn’t be the first time that Governor Ritter didn’t invite Rep. Nikkel to the transparency party.  Despite Nikkel’s reputation as the champion of transparency, Ritter didn’t think to invite her to his press conference unveiling his “pointless” and “weak” executive order.  Maybe he thought she would say no.

A big thanks to Face the State for recognizing the work of Colorado Transparency Project Director Amy Oliver and naming her “Hottest Radio Host” for their 2009 Legislative Superlatives.  For those who don’t know, Amy also hosts a radio show on News Talk 1310 KFKA in Greeley.  In this case, FTS cited Amy’s work on transparency as the reason for her award:

Amy Oliver may not be an elected state leader, but her recent activism surrounding transparency has done Colorado a lot of good. One of her blogs, Colorado Spending Transparency, boasts the motto “no taxation without information” and her dedication to the cause has helped further the Colorado Taxpayer Transparency Act. Oliver also hosts a daily radio show on KFKA in northern Colorado that she uses an outlet to spread her message of financial accountability. You go, Amy!

Check out all the Superlatives!  You will recognize some of the names such as Andy Kerr and Evie Hudak.

COST believes that tranpsarency is more than just online databases of government expenditures and revenues.  It’s about good government — transparent, accountable and completely open.  That’s why we were so disappointed to read about SB 297, which allows state agencies to circumvent standard competitve bidding practices for “high dollar projects” if agencies feel they may be in danger of missing federal stimulus deadlines. 

Legislators put a price on good goverment in Colorado.

Troubling to COST is how this bill passed with no public input. According to the Denver Post, the bill sponsored by Democrat Senator Paula Sandoval and Democrat Representative Joel Judd, “zipped through the House and Senate with no public scrutiny despite concerns from financial watchdogs inside state government that it could become the rule instead of the exception.”

Furthermore the legislation passed both the House and the Senate over objections from state officials.

[S]tate procurement officials aired strong concerns about waiving such standards, fearing they could lead to bad precedent and widespread circumvention of rules, according to two people with knowledge of the debates who are not authorized to speak to the media. Managers in that division did not return phone calls from The Post.

The Post also reports that Governor Bill Ritter had a hand in crafting the legislation, but Mark Cavanaugh, director of the governor’s economic-recovery team said,  ”the idea here was not to have a way to get around (state law), but in those situations where our back is up against the wall, we’d have an option.” In other words, state agencies need to have a way around the law.

In Colorado good government is available to the highest non competitive bid using federal stimulus dollars, also known as your tax dollars.

COST learned that on Tuesday both houses of the Colorado General Assembly unanimously passed an amended version of HB 1288 the Colorado Transparency Act, the bill that proved to have “more lives than even the luckiest of felines.”  It is now headed to Governor Bill Ritter for his signature.

The amended version builds upon Governor Ritter’s Executive Ordercreating the Transparency Online Project.  The good news is that transparency is now in law and cannot be repealed or tweaked with changing administrations.  Also, the legislation – not the executive order — requires that the Web-based system be available for download in a structured data format, allow for users to provide feedback, include archived financial information and be updated at least every five days.

CAUTION: The amended version allows for the state to decide if financial information should be aggregated or not. Sources tell COST that Senator Paula Sandoval introduced an amendment that included the language from the Executive Order warning that more information may be hazardous to taxpayers:

Regardless of the form of the data in the Financial Data Warehouse, Where access to each individual transaction is likely to hinder, rather than foster, this goal, the system may provide access to aggregated information.

In other words, the state doesn’t want to overload us with silly expenditure and revenue details.  COST will take Transparency Project Director Amy Oliver’s advice and reserve judgment until we see the Web site, but we do hope that the state respects taxpayers and the spirit of HB 1288 and provide detailed financial information.

Bottom line is that we are thrilled with the progress of transparency in Colorado, and we will continue to promote open government.

Things happen fast this time of year at the General Assembly.  Seems like COST just reported that SB 87, increased accountability requirements for special taxing districts, passed the House Finance Committee.  And now more good news.  Senator Morgan Carroll’s bill unanimously passed the full House.  All that’s left is a signature from the Governor.

COST wants to thank Senator Carroll and the Independence Institute’s Justin Longo for educating legislators on the growing problem with debt and lack of accountability with special districts and then doing something about it.  This is great news for all Coloradans.

Yesterday HB 1288 the Colorado Taxpayer Transparency Act passed the Senate Finance Committee with a unanimous vote to recommend it to the Senate Appropriations.  A few words of reassurance from the Office of Information Technology were enough to persuade anti-transparency legislators who aren’t thrilled about divulging how the state spends your money. 

Just this morning Senate Appropriations approved it.  Transparency faces one last legislative hurdle — a vote of the entire Senate.  COST is cautiously optimistic that it will pass the Senate and that Governor Bill Ritter will sign it into law.