GOVERNMENT WASTE

- COLORADO -

Date	Individual / State Agency	Who, What, Where?
04/21/05		Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights The possibility of taxpayers having a voice in government will never happen in the political dungeons of the east coast, but that’s not true elsewhere. The voters in Colorado actually passed a Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights a few years ago via referendum, which places severe constraints on the spending habits of politicians. Believe it or not, the bureaucrats must actually prioritize their spending splurges. Republican analyst Katy Atkinson stated, “Because of the spending limits of the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights, the only real ground to be won in budget debates is political.” According to the Denver Post, “Democrats argued for the need to be fiscally responsible, while Republicans urged investments in vulnerable populations (minorities).” Now that’s a situation we would never anticipate on the east coast.
04/28/05	City of Denver	New Courthouse Not Needed Denver plans on building a new 321,000 square foot courthouse at a cost of $127 million. But investigation has shown that a number of unused facilities exist that contain over 200,000 square feet of space, and they are city owned.. Sure, we all like spanking new facilities to practice our professions, but it would be much cheaper to retrofit the vacant space.
12/01/05	Department of Labor and Employment	State Wastes $50 Million on Computer Systems Keeping pace with the tremendous waste and mismanagement associated with both the Assembly and the School Construction Corporation (SCC) in New Jersey, we can be assured that other states suffer similar episodes of incompetence within the government infrastructure, as well. In Colorado, according to the Denver Post, after the state’s $39 million welfare-benefits computer system had major problems as soon as it was launched, the Department of Labor and Employment announced that the computer system didn’t work. This announcement came on the same day that the contractor, Accenture LLP, which was also responsible for the state’s new $10.5 million voter-registration system, was fired on that project. Anyone who has ever worked in the computer field knows that cancellation or seriously delayed delivery of computer systems is the norm and not the exception, so this situation, on the surface, is not surprising. However, the state had already spent 87 percent of the $44.8 million budget, and the three-year time limit to develop the system had long past. The state had sent a letter to Accenture asserting that they were in “breach of contract” because they refuse to complete the project without a “substantial increase in compensation, a demand the state calls a “refusal to perform and a material breach of the contract.“ It is unknown who is at fault in this debacle, as the contractor may have developed the system according to the specifications they were provided by the state, or they were simply incompetent. But one thing is known that the contractor wanted substantial funding increases to complete the effort at the last minute, which suggests they were holding the proverbial axe over the state’s head. Dana Williams, spokeswoman for the secretary of state, said the state decided that continuing the contract with Accenture would be “throwing good money after bad.” Colorado has experienced a maelstrom of computer system failures over the years, so it does suggest that the fault most likely falls on the heads of the state bureaucrats and not necessarily the contractors. The state spent $200 million on a new Colorado Benefits Management System, and it too had serious problems the day it was launched. The Legislature authorized an additional $5.75 million to beef up the system. When will these state governments finally get their act together?
01/01/06	University of Colorado	University of Colorado Coaches Paid King’s Ransom At least nine assistant football coaches were given raises to work at youth football camps that have been in the center of ongoing investigations by federal revenue agents and state auditors. This news cam at a time when state auditors have chastised the athletic department for its lavish and often uncontrolled spending. Three coaches received salary increases of at least 80 percent, while one coach, Craig Bray, saw his pay go from $1,500 in 2004 to $11,000 last summer, a 627 percent increase. In this day when professional football players are paid outlandish sums of money to play a child’s game for 6 months of the year, and college coaches rake in millions of dollars in salaries and endorsements, it often seems that we are sending our children to college so they may earn a living as a professional athlete and not to learn business or technology skills I mistakenly thought was the primary objective of college. At about the same time, Colorado discovered that they have $100 million to spend through increased state revenues. The governor wants to spend $80 million for road construction, while the Colorado Department of Education is seeking $74 million to make up for “unfunded enrollment” at state colleges and universities. After meetings with state lawmakers, it is likely that an additional $20 million will be added to the budget for education even though some simple house cleaning would easily find $20 million or more. Of course, no one even vaguely suggested that the $100 million be applied to reduce the state’s debt. While this was going on, according to the Denver Post, an audit of the Colorado athletic department described loose spending that included more than $10,000 in gifts for coaches and their wives, but more importantly, highlighted a lack of basic accounting for thousands of dollars flowing through football camps and alleged violations of NCAA rules and federal tax laws. State Senator Ron Tupa (Democrat, Boulder) said some of the audit findings were “the most disturbing thing” he had heard in 11 years of hearing state audit reports. Of $753,900 in football-camp cash receipts for 2002 through 2004, auditors could verify the source of funding for only $425,000. The 70-page audit report revealed that the failures ranged from ordinary staff members who bought women’s fleece jackets, briefcases, video games and other accoutrements for bowl-game gifts, to 25 athletic department employees who got free cars from local dealers, to $43,000 in payments which were made out to people who had no employment contracts whatsoever with the football camps.
03/01/06	Legislature	Lawmakers See Nothing Wrong with Freebies According to the Denver Post, Colorado is one of five states with no law on gifts to lawmakers. But Senator Ron Tupa (Democrat, Boulder) wants to change that by cracking down on the “office accounts” loophole in state campaign finance laws. The state legislature is considering a cash and in-kind gift ban that would leave those freebies untouched. The reality of the situation is that 65 out of 100 state lawmakers in 2005 reported accepting more than $29,000 worth of tickets, golf outings, ski-lift tickets, concerts, and fly-fishing and rafting trips, for a total of 322 tickets. Lobbyists who represent utilities, computer-services firms, skiing interests, casinos, healthcare providers, cigarette makers and numerous other interests provided the “freebies”. One legislator, Senator Peter Groff (Democrat, Denver), who was one of the legislature’s biggest gift recipients, said, “It’s not this big scandal. I don’t think you could find one legislator who has taken a ticket and then turned around and voted against their philosophy, against their district or against their principles. I would be stunned if you did.” Senator Ron Teck (Republican, Grand Junction) said the tickets he received from various lobbyists did not change the way he voted on issues. “I have never, ever had anything given to me with the slightest hint of a quid pro quo.” Pete Maysmith, executive director of Colorado Common Cause, a government watchdog, said, “We should ban all gifts to lawmakers. It (allowing gifts) doesn’t do anything to inspire confidence in our democracy.” Indicative as to how far our political process has strayed from the principles of our Founding Fathers, the majority of lawmakers see “nothing wrong with the practice.” As most of us recognize, that’s a sad state of affairs in the country.
03/01/06	Supreme Court	Another Irrational Supreme Court Decision It seems to be an epidemic across the country that Supreme Court justices apparently can’t read, especially when it comes to “activist” judges interpreting the Constitution. Years ago, taxpayers approved a Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR) to hopefully stop the insane increase in taxes mandated by the politicians. One of the provisions of that law is that voters must be notified if a ballot measure increases taxes. When the politicians in Colorado Springs put a ballot measure up in 2003 to extend the 0.1 percent sales tax for “Trails, Open Space and Parks” from 2009 to 2025, the politicians never informed the voting public that this was a tax increase, and the voters overwhelmingly approved the measure. Douglas Bruce, TABOR”s author, sued Colorado Springs claiming that the extension was in fact, just that, a tax increase. El Paso County District Judge Robert Lowrey agreed with Bruce, but the decision reached all the way to the Supreme Court. The court ruled that a decision to “extend” a tax is not the same as a “tax increase.” Naturally, government vultures hailed the landmark decision as a victory for all cities. Shane White, senior attorney for Colorado Springs, said, “We are very pleased with the outcome,” because now cities can pull the wool over the sheep’s eyes. Cole Finegan, Denver’s city attorney, welcomed the ruling. Sam Marmet, executive director of the Colorado Municipal League, said, “It is a victory for local governments concerned about expiring taxes and whether TABOR’s requirements apply.” Gee, if there is more money being taken out of my paycheck starting in 2009 than I expected, I suspect that any reasonable human being would constitute that as a tax increase. The little people are trampled again. I wonder what the justices on the court have been smoking?