Colorado Spending Transparency

Transparency: quality or state of being clear, transparent; also frank, candid, free from deceit.

COST believes that most Coloradans have come to understand transparency in government as detailed expenditure and revenue information.

With those definitions in mind, it is laughable that the Colorado State Treasurer’s Office called its latest interactive endeavor “Tax Tracks” a transparency Web site.  The site is long on generalizations and pretty pie charts but short on details.  In fact, the site even admits it provides nothing more than an “approximation” of taxes paid and where those dollars end up in the state’s coffers.

Even more insulting is that the site is designed to guilt taxpayers into believing they should pay more. Enter $50,000 in annual income and an “approximate” tax breakdown appears.  Click on the link for K-12 education.  Treasurer Cary Kennedy, architect of Amendment 23, explains how much taxpayers spend on public eduction, and using a thoroughly debunked statistic, she admonishes Coloradans for not spending more:

Colorado ranked 49th in spending on pre-school through twelfth grade public education measured as a percent of personal income in fiscal year 2006-07.

Under “Gasoline Tax” visitors discover this gem:

The gasoline tax has not been adjusted since 1991. From 1991-2008, it lost 40% of its purchasing power adjusted for inflation (Denver-Boulder consumer price index).

Translation: Coloradans don’t pay enough in state gasoline tax.

However, Colorado’s 22 cents per gallon tax is close to the national average.

The interactive site also lets visitors vote on whether the amount paid for K-12 education and other areas of government is the “right amount”, “too little”, or “too much.”

Furthermore, these state taxes aren’t paid in a vacuum.  According to the Tax Foundation, Coloradans didn’t see Tax Freedom Day, “the day when Americans finally have earned enough money to pay off their total tax bill for the year”, until April 12 last year. The state ranked 16th highest in the country.

Tax Tracks makes a mockery of transparency.  Just because Treasurer Kennedy calls it “transparency” doesn’t mean it really is.  In fact the only transparency in this Web site is its motive to convince Colorado taxpayers that they should pay more.

Facing substantial budget cuts, Colorado’s K-12 education establishment may have to rethink how it spends money courtesy of the transparency movement we have championed.  Using transparency Web sites from Jeffco and Douglas County Schools as well as information from Denver Public Schools, the Denver Post found “found millions of dollars being spent with limited oversight on food, travel and other discretionary items.”

Among the expenses buried in the thousands of transactions: $270 for scented pencils for a Douglas County school, $1,228 for books at a Denver school from a company that uses color-scheme psychology, and $4,113 for doughnuts and burritos for breakfast meetings at a Denver high school

In response to the investigation, one school district already has changed its policies on spending. With ”so much charged in food, entertainment, travel and other discretionary items” Denver Public Schools “issued new rules for credit-card holders in response to The Post’s findings.”

For anyone interested in bringing transparency to their school district, Independence Institute policy analyst Ben DeGrow’s paper “What Should District Financial Transparency Look Like?” is a must read.

Residents of the Poudre School District in Fort Collins realize that transparency means more than financial.  The Fort Collins Coloradoan and some taxpayers are demanding more transparency when it comes to school district policies.  

According to Coloradoan editor Bob Moore, the district’s deliberate withholding of information about the arrests of two employees was unlike anything he had ever seen and ”has prompted the Coloradoan to investigate the issue and compile the ongoing coverage regarding transparency in Fort Collins area schools…”

Moore also stated that the trust between the school district and the community has eroded.  Facing a nearly $12 billion budget shortfall, the district is contemplating asking voters for a property tax increase this fall.  Poudre School District need only look east to Greeley Evans School District 6 to see how voters feel about giving more of their money to a school district that doesn’t respect taxpayers enough to share information whether its financial or policy related.

Check out the Coloradoan’s extensive coverage of the Poudre School District and transparency.  Also check out Transparency Czarina Amy Oliver Cooke’s podcast on iVoices with Bob Moore.

Some Colorado school districts aren’t waiting for the General Assembly to mandate financial transparency.  Greeley Evans School District Six in Northern Colorado has placed its check reigstry online.

But most impressive is what Colorado’s largest school district Jeffco Public Schools has provided for taxpayers on its financial transparency Web page.  Interested taxpayers set the date parameters, and then search Jeffco expenditures by vendor, account number, fund or department number.  The search results can be easily downloaded into an individual xcel file.  For instance, in just a matter of minutes COST determined that Jeffco spent $313,199.46 on meals/refreshments from July 1 to December 31, 2009.   It’s not up to COST to make a judgement on those expenditures.  That is the responsibility of Jeffco taxpayers.

We will however make a judgement on Jeffco’s transparency Web site, and we have yet to find a better one in the country.  COST believes Jeffco is on the cutting edge of transparency.  We encourage other school districts to take Jeffco’s lead and provide the same type of detailed financial transparency. 

The state of Colorado should take lessons as well.  Governor Bill Ritter’s transparency Web site TOP is an embarrassment.

The Greeley Tribune, in its Sunday house editorial, acknowledges the role that transparency played in the recent defeat of 3A, a massive property tax increase for Greeley Evans School District 6.

A lack of transparency in its financial records was one of the reasons some cited for voting against the recent mill levy override. It became evident during that election that there is a significant mistrust between the district and some of its residents over how the district is spending its money, and if it is making the best use of the funds it now has available.

The editorial also recognizes that taxpayers have a right to know how their money is spent.

We believe there is merit to the idea of government doing all it can to disclose as much information as possible about its operations and finances. As taxpayers, we have a right to know how governmental entities are spending our money and the decisions that affect the services we receive.

The newspaper’s previous anti-transparency position has puzzled COST.  We’ve never encountered a news organization that didn’t want more information from government. COST welcomes the Tribune’s enlightened opinion. 

But what COST really appreciates is the editorial’s first line: “Transparency has become the political battle cry of the year.” We, along with many others, have worked hard to make it so.

Taxpayers in Greeley will be happy to know that the city has placed online a wealth of information. On the city’s new transparency page visitors will find everything from the employee pay schedule to financial reports including the check registry.   The city even included a link with information on where to direct an open records request.

COST thanks the city of Greeley for respecting taxpayers.  Greeley Evans School District 6?

Apparently three members of the Greeley Evans School District 6 school board still have little respect for taxpayers.  According to the Greeley Tribune, in a split decision, the school board voted down a modest transparency proposal from new board member Brett Reese.  Reese’s proposal would have required the district to post on-line every transaction over $1000. 

Opposing board members — Mark Hinze, Judy Kron and Linda Trimberger — don’t think taxpayers are smart enough to understand the information:

 Dissenting board members worried about the resources that the district would expend in collecting such data and about whether those not associated with the district would be able to make sense of the documents — especially without seeing how the expenditures fit into the district’s plans.

It seems that some members of the school board still haven’t learned their lesson.  Just last month, voters overwhelmingly opposed 3A, a $16 million tax increase, in part because the district has not been transparent with how it spends taxpayer money.

The good news is two other board members agreed with Reese.  Taxpayers can thank Bob Stack, previously cited on this blog as an opponent of transparency, and new board member Doug Kershaw.

If you would like to contact school board members, information is listed below:

President Bruce Broderius

bbroderius@greeleyschools.org

970-353-4793

VP Linda Trimberger

ltrimberger@greeleyschools.org

970-330-2159

Sec/Treasurer Robert Stack

rstack@greeleyschools.org

970-351-6971

Director Mark Hinze

mhinze@greeleyschools.org

970-353-3003

Director Doug Kershaw

dkershaw@greeleyschools.org

970-397-9318

Director Judy Kron

jkron@greeleyschools.org

970-330-7163

Director Brett Reese

breese@greeleyschools.org

970-397-9322

We’ve warned elected officials before.  Oppose transparency, and pay a political price later. Transparency Czarina Amy Oliver Cooke reports that our predication came true as voters in Greeley Evans School District 6 overwhelming opposed 3A, a massive, forever property tax increase. 

Ridiculous amounts of money and institutional support can’t overcome the will of voters who simply want to know how their tax dollars are spent. 

At least one district says no taxation without information!

According to Governor Bill Ritter’s own transparency Web site TOP, the state paid $283,129.15 to Beaver Run Resort over the last two fiscal years (FY08-09 and FY09-10).   Several state government departments including Education, Governor’s office, Higher Ed, Human Services, Judicial, Corrections, Public Safety, Health Care Policy and Financing, and Local Affairs, spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars for official functions, customer workshops, in-state travel, food, equipment rental and more.

COST reminds its readers that we are not here to judge the expenditures, but we would like to know how Colorado taxpayers benefited.  What was the intended performance outcome of these expenditures?

Some context certainly would be helpful especially considering the Governor’s latest round of “budget cuts” which includes $145 million for Higher Education and more furlough days for state employees.

There is no guarantee that voters will reward a transparent government by approving a tax increase.  But it sure is easier for any government to make its case for more money when it has shown taxpayers the respect they deserve by providing detailed financial transparency.  With detailed, online financial transparency, government demonstrates that it wants to be a good steward of precious taxpayer resources.

In a few short weeks, Greeley Evans School District 6 will find out if it will have to pay a political price for resisting transparency and having a one of its board members Bob Stack, along with the rest of the education lobby, testify against the Public School Financial Transparency Act.  The Greeley school district is hoping for a massive property tax increase, ballot measure 3A.  Suddenly, the school district is bragging about its latest efforts at transparency.

In a recent press release, District 6 claims it “is providing more online access to its budget and financial documents and posting easy-to-understand explanations of district funding and how that money is used to educate students.”  While the Greeley school district brags about its latest feature, Money Matters, it’s clear the district either doesn’t know what transparency means or it doesn’t want to provide detailed information.

The information provided on Money Matters is aggregated and without context.  For instance, taxpayers can find out that the school district spent $20,363 on “advertising”, $24,134 on “miscellaneous”, and $18,620 on “other objects,” but they have no idea how those expenditures helped “educate students.” 

Let’s be honest, the District 6 school board and administration are more examples of how taxpayers have to drag government kicking and screaming into transparency.  The only reason they have put anything online is because they want a massive tax increase and “people are talking.” The only thing transparent about District 6 is its reason for suddenly embracing transparency.

District 6 voters can’t expect any help from the local newspaper the Greeley Tribune. In one of a series of op-eds supporting 3A, the newspaper blamed taxpayers, “Residents worried about accountability need to take responsibility. Volunteer for the advisory board. Attend school board meetings. Ask for budget information. Talk with teachers to see if they are getting what they were promised.” 

In other words, if taxpayers want to know how their money is spent, then they will have to take time out of their day to find out.  The school district can’t be bothered with transparency.  It’s too busy spending your money!

What remains to be seen is if voters will see the district’s desire for more money as a teachable moment with the lesson being: No taxation without information.

People interested in helping teach government a lesson can join the Facebook group Citizens Against School Bullies.

Voters interested in finding out more information about the pro 3A side can visit Citizens 4 Strong Schools.