I want to send a thank you card to State Rep John Kefalas (D-Fort Collins).

In a press release bragging about the House Health and Human Services Committee passing his “Transparency Trojan Horse” bill, a.k.a. HB 1330 The Health Care Cost Transparency Act, Kefalas said, “You can’t manage what you can’t measure.”  In other words, Kefalas needs to measure the quality of my health care so that he can manage it for me and my family.  Thank Goodness!  I’ve been waiting for someone to take care of me and my children.  What a relief!

HB 1330, the All-Payer Database,  is dangerous because it creates a database with all your personal health care transactions.  It grants unlimited power to the state’s Executive Director of Health Care Policy and Financing to mandate the collection of any health care data, to conduct audits, to give the data to third parties without seeking permission and to impose unlimited fines for refusing to provide data to the database.

Just think…all your personal health care information forced to be made available to the state so it can “manage” it for you!

Independence Institute Health Care Policy Center Director Linda Gorman warns the state may have access to individual information on physical functioning, medical treatment, supposed mental stability, marital problems, family structure, sexual habits, addictions, adherence to government health recommendations, and individual financial arrangements.

Remember it’s for your own good.  How else can the state “manage” your health care for you?

Also troubling, transparency means citizens get to see inside government, and NOT the other way around.  Funny, some Democrat lawmakers were so worried about privacy issues when Rep BJ Nikkel presented her Colorado Taxpayer Transparency Act that required the state to provide detailed spending information.  No such concern from them with HB 1330.

Check out Linda Gorman’s excellent analysis of the “Trojan Horse Transparency.”  Also call John Kefalas and thank him for being willing to “manage” your health care.

The good news is that Greeley Evans School District Six has finally learned a lesson about transparency…well, sort of.  Lack of transparency is a major reason why the school district endorsed massive tax increase 3A went down in flames.  In response to the public’s demand for more transparency, the school district placed its check registry online for taxpayers to see.  Each month beginning July 2009 is available in PDF.

The bad news is that the district provides no context for or description of the expenditures.  When I, as a taxpayer, must spend an entire afternoon trying to figure out why the district wrote hundreds and hundreds of checks, that is only partial transparency.  Then I am left to speculate how all these expenditures improve student achievement and graduation rates.

The district appears to have spent a significant amount of money ranging from thousands to hundreds of thousands on various educational programs, management and IT consultants including Windsor Management Group, Ashlock Consulting, Alpine Achievement, Edison Learning, Didax, Avid, Raising a Reader, Educational Based Services, Dell Marketing, Sage Management, Greeley Dream Team, Pearson Assessments, Gallup Organizations, and Productive Offices and School Environment — just to name a few.

One check of interest was for $21,134.16 to Corporate Environments.  The company’s Web site (if I found the correct one) says it was founded

to meet the growing demand for state-of-the-art workplace furniture that not only enhances our client’s image, but increases efficiency and healthful productivity.

Exactly how does this help student achievement?

UPDATE:  Corporate Environments turned out to be a company out of Lakewood, CO, a division of Office Liquidators, which provides new and used office furniture.

Also discovered: more than $30,000 of taxpayer dollars to Colorado Association of School Boards, $1800 to the Colorado Eagles, and more than $7200 to various pizza establishments (some of this may be for fundraising but there is no way to tell from the information provided).

I give District 6 credit for taking steps towards providing more information.  Taxpayers should review the check registry, ask questions and demand more transparency.  Check out the Jefferson County School District for a fabulous transparency Web site that seems sincere in its attempt to provide taxpayers with information about how Jeffco spends taxpayer dollars.

I am sending a Colorado Opens Records Act (CORA) request to the school district to explain the reasons for some of these expenditures.  I’ll keep you posted.

Governor Bill Ritter spent more than $200,000 on TV, photographs and videos of himself, an Associated Press investigation revealed.   According to AP, “taxpayers paid that amount for photos of the Democratic governor signing bills and attending a lavish production for the state film commission.”

Evan Dreyer, the Governor’s spokesman, says Ritter is simply “meeting increased demand” from social networking sites such as facebook and twitter as well as Web sites that are demanding better quality.  As a result:

Ritter’s official state Web page features 31 pages of photos of the governor, and he invites people to download them as well as videos from his galleries. Some were taken by state employees, while others were paid for by taxpayers. Among them: A video of Ritter at the National Western Stock Show that cost $375, and $200 in taxpayer-paid photos of Ritter signing a job creation bill in May.

Is this expenditure going to bankrupt the state? No, but as my boss at the Independence Institute Jon Caldara said, “this shows an arrogance on Ritter’s part that it’s OK to do self-promotion at taxpayer expense.”

Taxpayers in Greeley will be happy to know that the city has placed online a wealth on 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.

City Manager Roy Otto made a good point in a prepared press release.  He said, “During and after the last election cycle City Council members noted that they could not find this type of information on the City’s website. In fact, the information was there, it was just difficult to find.”  

Otto is correct.  Many governments provide information but it is difficult to find.  Making it easier to access is a large component in transparency.

Now, let’s hope Greeley Evans School District 6 be next.

Hide information and someone somewhere will find it.  Two stories, Climategate and Ritter-inaugural fund gate, are great examples.  I’ve discussed Climategate on my show before and will discuss Ritter’s dilemma today.

Enjoy this entertaining YouTube parody of Tommy James’ “Draggin the Line” called “Hide the Decline.” Global warming alarmists and eco-totalitarians are in full panic mode over Climategate.  Maybe these “scientists” shouldn’t have let their ideology get ahead of the data!

My Independence Institute colleague Todd Shepherd explains how Governor Bill Ritter, who bragged about full transparency when problems arose with his inaugural fund, now is being less than open about the “strange method of deposits” into the account.   Tune in to News Talk 1310 KFKA at 9:30 a.m. to hear Todd Shepherd full accounting.

Voters stood up to school bullies with a resounding NO VOTE on 3A, the massive, forever property tax increase.  The results: 66 percent NO; 34 percent YES. 

Taxpayers sent a strong message to the big spending school bullies.  Live within your means like the rest of Colorado working families, and show taxpayers some respect by opening your books.  Be transparent.  Colorado Spending Transparency predicted the tax increase would be a tough sell without it.

Despite the bullies’ establishment support and the ridiculous amount of money they raised, Citizens Against School Bullies and taxpayers beat them!  Bullies raised over $90,000 (monetary and in-kind) in contributions.  We raised $1100.  Bullies spent $55,000.  We spent $900.

Congratulations and thank you to everyone who supported us.

3A is a massive 16 mils property tax increase for Greeley Evans District 6.  District voters will be asked to decide the tax increase with an all mail-in election.   Ballot will be mailed the week of October 12.  Ballot must be returned no later than 7 pm on November 3, to the Weld County Clerk and Recorders office.

 Below, readers will find some facts about the District and the tax increase. Following is the full text of 3A.

• Greeley Evans District 6 funding per pupil:  $9049 for 2007-2008 according to the Colorado Department of Education.
• Total funding from all sources — local, state and federal: $158.8 million according to CDE.
• District says it spends 87 percent of its budget on personnel costs.  According to MLO supporters the District cannot reduce personnel funding.
• District graduation rate for 2008: 65.75%  State: 73.9%
• District composite ACT: 18.2  State: 19.6
• Additional tax per $100,000 of residential property:  $127.36
• Additional tax per $100,000 of commercial property: $464.64
• Accountability: District says it will create a citizen’s advisory board to “monitor and report” how the additional tax dollars are spent.  This board has no authority.   School Board member Bob Stack testified at the state capitol against transparency.

3A full text courtesy of the District Web site.

BALLOT ISSUE NO. 3A:
SHALL WELD COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 6 TAXES BE INCREASED $16,000,000 ANNUALLY, BEGINNING IN TAX COLLECTION YEAR 2010, AND THEREAFTER BY WHATEVER AMOUNTS AS MAY BE COLLECTED ANNUALLY IN EACH FISCAL YEAR FROM A MILL LEVY INCREASE OF NOT TO EXCEED 16 MILLS, TO BE DEPOSITED IN THE GENERAL FUND OF THE DISTRICT AND EXPENDED FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES, INCLUDING:
• PURCHASE TEXTBOOKS, COMPUTERS AND OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCES REQUIRED BY STUDENTS AND TEACHERS FOR HIGHLY EFFECTIVE, HIGH-QUALITY ACADEMIC INSTRUCTION;

• SUPPORT COLLEGE, ACADEMIC, CAREER AND VOCATIONAL PROGRAMS TO PREPARE STUDENTS IN THE BEST POSSIBLE WAY FOR THE FUTURE;

• ENHANCE THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF STUDENTS, STAFF AND SCHOOL PROPERTY;

• ACQUIRE, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN BUSES TO IMPROVE STUDENT TRANSPORTATION;

AND SHALL SUCH TAX INCREASE BE AN ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAX MILL LEVY IN EXCESS OF THE LEVY AUTHORIZED FOR THE DISTRICT’S GENERAL FUND, PURSUANT TO AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 22-54-108, C.R.S.; AND SHALL THE DISTRICT BE AUTHORIZED TO COLLECT, RETAIN, AND SPEND ALL REVENUES FROM SUCH TAXES AND THE EARNINGS FROM THE INVESTMENT OF SUCH REVENUES AS A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE AND AN EXCEPTION TO THE LIMITS THAT WOULD OTHERWISE APPLY UNDER ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION?

Thank you to Theresa Myers of the Greeley Tribune for her honesty about why she edited out a  key line about Bob Stack  in my Sunday guest column opposing Greeley District 6’s attempt to mismanage more taxpayer dollars.   All I wanted to know is why the newspaper chose to edit out the fact that Stack testified against transparency at the state capitol. 

It’s pretty much what I suspected.   She believes that stating a fact about elected school board member Bob Stack is an attack on him personally.  In an email to me, Myers explained:

As an editor, I felt the line about Bob was a bit of a personal attack, and
strayed away from the topic of the mill levy, the subject you were asked to
write about.

What’s funny is that Myers goes on to attack me personally while claiming the Tribune takes the “high road.”  I’m pretty sure that Mayor Ed Clark and Marilyn Musgrave wouldn’t accuse the Tribune of taking the “high road.”

On my show tomorrow I’ll share Myers’ entire email.  But if you want to read it before my show,  I’ve copied it below.  I’ll share my response to Myers as well.

Amy:
I feel the need to reply to a couple of points in your e-mail to Randy,
since I was the person editing your column.
First, the column was submitted over the length of our requirement under our
policy. Because of that, I edited several lines, not just the one you are
referring to about Bob Stack.
As an editor, I felt the line about Bob was a bit of a personal attack, and
strayed away from the topic of the mill levy, the subject you were asked to
write about. We are trying to keep discussions of this emotional topic on
the high road. Obviously that is not a tactic you use on your radio program.
As I tell all our writers, ALL submissions are subject to editing. If
writers have a problem with that, then they should think about whether they
really want to submit letters or columns. That said, we are extremely
careful not to change the meaning or intent of any submission. Your intent
of your column is more than intact, despite your dispute with the line in
question.
Also, I would like to point our, your column was about 100 words longer than
the pro column we ran. So in effect, your side still got more ink.
I'm sure you will continue to debate this on your radio show. But please,
this time at least, make sure you have some facts in that discussion.
Thanks. Call me anytime.

Theresa

Randy Bangert, editor of the Greeley Tribune, asked me to write a guest editorial because he “heard from a reader” that I am opposed to 3A, Greeley-Evans District 6’s attempt to mismanage more taxpayer money.  The request made me laugh because I’m guessing the Tribune editorial board would rather see Marilyn Musgrave’s words in print before granting me precious column inches on the Sunday editorial page.   But I’m probably the only person they could think of who is cold-hearted enough to vote against “the children.”  To their credit, the newspaper published the requested column today.  You can read the Tribune’s version here. 

However, the edited version left out a key sentence about transparency and district 6.  Supporters of the massive tax increase say the district will be more accountable because it is creating yet another citizens’ panel to tell us how responsible the school district is with our money.  Color me skeptical since school board member Bob Stack testified against transparency at the state capitol. 

Below is the complete text of my op-ed.  The crucial line that the Tribune chose to exclude from both the print and online version is emphasized in bold.

District 6 needs to focus on how not how much it spends

By Amy Oliver Cooke

 

Below state average is the best District 6 can do unless it gets more cash from taxpayers. Don’t buy it. It’s time District 6 focus on how it spends taxpayer dollars, not how much.

 

The business-as-usual suspects: school board, teachers union, Chamber of Commerce, Greeley Tribune, and a citizens’ panel want voters to approve a mill levy increase that will add nearly $200 per year to the property tax bill for a $150,000 home.

 

Supporters claim the district needs the additional funding because it ranks 147^th out of 178 Colorado school districts in terms of per-pupil funding. Without the funding, popular programs such as International Baccalaureate, Advanced Placement courses and magnet programs could go away.

 

Essentially, the school district is placing a fiscal gun to the head of taxpayers: “Give us the money or the programs get it.”

 

Also, the district claims it doesn’t have enough money for textbooks, buses and security. It does leave one to wonder how the district prioritizes its budget.

 

Before succumbing to fear, voters should demand answers to two questions. First, how has the district managed the money it currently spends? Second, will increased spending result in a higher quality of education?

 

Based on information from the Colorado Department of Education, District 6 spent $9,049 per pupil in fiscal year 2007-2008. For $9,049 District 6 taxpayers get below-average scores on state standardized tests, below-average graduation rates, above regional average for teacher salaries, and 557 central administration employees, roughly one for every 33 students.

 

Those are general numbers. The school district doesn’t provide detailed spending information. State legislation that would have required more financial transparency from Colorado school districts was defeated this year. District 6 Board member Bob Stack testified against the Public School Financial Transparency Act despite overwhelming public support.

 

The second question the district must answer is how increased funding leads to increased student achievement and higher graduation rates. The argument that District 6 needs additional funding because it ranks 147^th out of 178 is silly. If money were the only factor necessary to ensure a quality K-12 education, Washington, D.C., and New Jersey would be graduating Nobel Prize winners, while Utah, with the lowest per-pupil spending, would be lucky to graduate anyone.

 

Studies prove it. According to a Heritage Foundation report “Does Spending More on Education Improve Academic Achievement?” despite more than doubling education spending since 1971, academic achievement has not increased significantly and graduation rates have remained flat.

 

Heritage concluded that there is no consistent proof to show that simply increasing school funding results in higher academic achievement and increased graduation rates.

The Independence Institute came to the same conclusion.  “Counting Cash,” a 2006 “comprehensive analysis of relevant research, overwhelmingly showed no link between education spending and student performance, with several studies showing a negative relationship.”

How much is far less important than how school districts spend taxpayer resources. One area of how the district should address is teacher compensation. Studies have shown that automatic pay raises for teachers who advance their own education have no significant effect on student achievement. With our dismal achievement scores and graduation rates, it’s time the district embrace teacher compensation reform. Not all teachers are equal. As a community we must reward good teachers for their performance and not just for their time. Conversely, bad teachers must go.

 

If simply raising per-student spending led to increased achievement scores and higher graduation rates, the tax increase probably would pass even in this economy. But it’s not that easy. How the district allocates taxpayer resources is at issue. Until District 6 proves it is willing to focus on the how and not how much, I’ll vote no – despite having two kids in the system.

 

Amy Oliver Cooke is Director of Colorado Transparency Project for the Independence Institute and host of the Amy Oliver Show on 1310 KFKA. She can be reached at amy@i2i.org.

In the spirit of my friends over at Colorado Spending Transparency (COST), here’s a message to district 6: No taxation without information!

COST (Colorado Spending Transparency) just published the following post:

“..we are a board very concerned about transparency and oversight — about letting our constituency know what it is we are doing,” Greeley Evans District 6 school board member Judy Kron said at a meeting last night.

Really?

Perhaps Kron should read COST.  Then she would know that her fellow school board member Bob Stack testified against school spending transparency just a few months ago.

The Greeley school board voted last night to ask taxpayers to shell out an additional $16 million for textbooks, academic programs and buses.  The question will be on the ballot in November.

While the school board won’t provide taxpayers with detailed spending information, the board did approve a resolution to create an “accountability committee” charged with monitoring and reporting how the additional tax dollars are spent.

According to the Greeley Tribune print edition, Kron went on to say:

It would be very nice if we could say ‘trust us,’ and you would do so.  This isn’t an age of elected officials being trusted just because we are elected officials. So we want to do all we can to assure you that we will spend the dollars as you have asked us to.

Point of clarification — the school board is the one doing the asking, not taxpayers.

Perhaps the school board and school district should have been a bit more serious about transparency and accountability BEFORE asking for more money. 

I’ll pass along COST’s advice to District 6 taxpayers:  No taxation without information.