Colorado Spending Transparency

COST has learned that the Colorado Association of School Executives (CASE) discussed how to defeat SB 57, the popular, common sense legislation that would provide financial transparency to public K-12 education.  It seems that CASE is sensitive to the public relations nightmare of opposing transparency so its members are trying to figure out how to kill the legislation without appearing to oppose the intent.

One suggestion that anti-transparency forces are researching is to kill the bill on the grounds that it is unconstitutional because the bill title does not align with the bill’s requirements.  The bill drafter may have something to say about this but essentially this is an attempt to kill the bill through a technicality.

Another suggestion included loading the bill with amendments that would force it to go to the House Appropriations Committee where it would never pass.

Another suggestion was to introduce a new bill that would require transparency for counties and other recipients of public funds in hopes that other entities would then join school districts to defeat the bill.  This way it wouldn’t be just a school district issue.

COST finds this suggestion most enlightening because it exposes the true colors of the education lobby.  First, just because CASE is opposed to transparency it assumes other recipients of public funds are opposed to showing taxpayers how their money is spent.  COST suggests that CASE check out Greeley, Weld County, Fort Collins, and Falcon 49, Durango and Rangely school districts before making that assumption.

Second, it shows the confidence that the education lobby has in getting a late bill introduced into the state legislature.

Third, it shows that CASE is in desparate need of cover in order to kill transparency.  COST believes the reason for this is the enormous amount of grassroots support for SB 57.  It passed out of the Senate with strong bi-partisan support on a 26 to 8 vote.  In addition, both the Rocky Mountain News and the Denver Post penned editorials in favor of the legislation.

COST also learned that District 11 CFO Glenn Gustafson may be ready to concede that SB 57 will pass and that perhaps the best strategy is to amend the most troubling aspects of the bill rather than kill the bill altogether.  Apparently, what Gustafson finds troubling is payroll information, which is already a matter of public record.

COST suspects that Gustafson is most worried about administrators’ salaries.  Transparency might expose top-heavy school district administration costs.  Taxpayers might want to see those dollars allocated differently – say to teachers or school supplies.  Again, this information already is a matter of public record, but SB 57 would make is easier for taxpayers to access it because it would be online, searchable and free of charge.

COST also learned that Chair of the House Education Committee State Rep Mike Merrifield called Gustafson to discuss school spending transparency and SB 57.  We hope that Rep Merrifield receives a balanced education on transparency and also seeks input from those who support the measure.

Finally, as a last resort, sources tell us that CASE plans to lobby Governor Ritter to veto SB 57 should it pass.  The bill is scheduled to be heard in the House Education Committee on Thursday, March 19 at 1:30 p.m.