Bill to put state’s checkbook on Web advances

State Sen. Mike Kopp will shepherd transparency bill through the Senate.

DENVER – A bill that would put the state government’s checkbook online is heading for the Colorado Senate after clearing the House 61-4.

The overwhelming bipartisan support in the House could mean an easier road through the state Senate, where a similar bill that would have required schools’ to post their finances online passed 28-6 earlier this year.

That legislation, Senate Bill 57, died in the House Education Committee, where Democrats broadsided the Public Schools Financial Transparency Act 8-5.

The House bill requiring state transparency gained overwhelming bipartisan support on the floor of the House Thursday. It challenges Gov. Bill Ritter’s recent executive order that opponents say provides only a semblance of transparency to those who want to see the state’s checkbook.

The four votes against the bill were cast by Reps. Gwynn Green, D-Dist. 23; Joel Judd, D-Dist. 5; Su Ryden, D-Dist. 36; and Sara Gagliardi, D-Dist. 27.

Ritter’s order requires expenses and revenue to be posted online, but under broad departmental categories that make it impossible to see who is spending the public’s money, how much they spend, what they spend it for and where it is spent.

House Bill 1288, the Colorado Taxpayer Transparency Act, would require more detailed tracking and would carry the force of law.

Supporters of the legislation fear the governor’s plan won’t go far enough and say Ritter’s decision to issue the executive order was a ploy to derail the Colorado Taxpayer Transparency Act.

“I do think it is an end-run around my transparency bill, which is about true transparency vs. his executive order, which is about token transparency,” said the bill’s sponsor, Rep. B.J. Nikkel, R-Dist. 49.

Ritter’s order requires a “free, searchable web-based system providing access to descriptions of the state’s revenues and expenditures” but doesn’t specify how detailed those descriptions would be. It also says “where access to each individual transaction is likely to hinder, rather than foster this goal, the system may provide access to aggregated information.”

Nikkel is concerned that wording provides a loophole that would allow entire departments to lump spending under a single figure, providing far less information than what is currently required under the Colorado Open Records Act.

Ritter later claimed he is was not aware there were any differences between his order and Nikkel’s bill.

“This executive order expands our strong commitment to a transparent, accountable and open government for Colorado’s citizens,” Ritter said as he signed the executive order earlier this month. “The TOP system ensures that citizens can get timely, free, accessible and meaningful access to the state’s financial information.”

The order establishes the Transparency Options Project (TOP) to implement online access to state government’s spending and revenue records. It will be compiled through the Office of Information and Technology and the Office of the State Comptroller.

Ritter’s lack of specifics also bothers Sen. Mike Kopp, R-Jefferson County.

“Obviously, I’m glad that the state is going to move this direction,” Kopp said. “But my feeling is that we brought this bill (HB1288) forward because we could never get any clear definition as to how meritorious his executive order was going to be.”

Kopp is the Senate sponsor of the bill.

Nikkel’s bill would require all financial information required by the Colorado Open Records Act to be provided on a line-item basis in a searchable database with regular updates. Ritter’s order falls well short of CORA requirements.

When Nikkel’s bill was before the House Finance Committee, members questioned whether an executive order – then only a possibility – would serve the same purpose.

A number of witnesses expressed concern that an executive order could be undone with little or no public process. Instead, the supporters said, transparency should carry the weight of law and stand until the legislature decides otherwise.

“An executive order can be rescinded at any time, any place by any governor. The taxpayers deserve to have this made permanent in statute,” Nikkel said.

HB 1288 is the only survivor among three transparency bills presented in the current session of the legislature.

SB 57, which died in the House Education Committee, would have required school districts to compile their spending and revenue in an online searchable database. Districts and charter schools with no web access would have been exempt.

The bill was sponsored by Sen. Ted Harvey, R-Highlands Ranch and Rep. Amy Stephens, R-Dist. 20.

Another bill, SB 236, never cleared committee. It would have required school districts to conduct at least one public hearing before building a school, providing neighbors of the school site a chance to comment.