denver | I’m having trouble with Colorado’s online checkbook.
This transparency website allows Coloradans to log on and see how their state government spends their money, from the last clips and GPS collars used to track wolves on the West Slope, for example. It should be possible to track it in real time.
In some cases, it’s working. One entry shows his $32,000 was paid to his Vectronic Aerospace Inc. for a wolf tracking collar last year.
But KUNC News found more than 16,000 checkbook entries last year that did not include the names of individuals or businesses that received taxpayer money. Instead, a generic code is entered in the space where the vendor name should be.
Missing data prevents the public from knowing where billions of dollars worth of government spending is being spent. A KUNC News investigation found that items without specific vendor names accounted for more than $600 million in government spending in the last fiscal year alone.
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are now voicing concerns about the issue. The issue appears to violate a law passed two years ago that requires greater transparency in online checkbooks. And government officials told KUNC they are researching ways to fix it.
State Sen. Janice Rich, R-Grand Junction, said Monday after KUNC News asked her to try the checkbook website to see recent payments from Congress.
Although the checkbooks showed complete spending data in some cases, including records of checks the state sent out to lawmakers for mileage reimbursement, Rich did not provide the names of the individuals and businesses who received the checks. I quickly discovered some entries that were missing.
Missing recipient names are most common in a category of government spending called “professional services,” a broad category that includes government-employed contractors for everything from legal services to table refinishing. .
“And this is another (entry) for $125,000, but we don’t know who that (check) was sent to,” she said. “That doesn’t tell us anything. How much easier would it be if we just demanded transparency from our government? I can’t believe the bureaucracy continues to hide where the money is being spent.”
Missing entries can be found across government agencies, from the Secretary of State’s office to the governor’s office.
Transparency advocates say the data gap prevents people from using their checkbooks to hold the government accountable for spending.
“It’s becoming harder and harder to trust what you’re seeing,” Jeff Roberts, president of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition, said Tuesday. “Information is not useful if it is entered incorrectly or displayed incorrectly.”
The missing data also appears to violate the bipartisan Transparency Act of 2022, which the state Legislature unanimously passed. The law requires states to display all specific vendor names on checkbooks, with a few exceptions.
Senator Rich led the effort to pass the bill.
“If you don’t have that information[in your checkbook]this website is useless,” she told KUNC in 2022 when she first introduced the bill. “Let’s let voters know where that money is going. This is the people’s tax money.”
She now says she is disappointed that the new law has not had the impact she had hoped.
evolving explanation
So why is my checkbook missing data? This website is maintained by the Colorado Office of Personnel Management. When KUNC News first asked about the missing vendor’s name last week, spokesman Doug Pratt said the checkbook was “not malfunctioning.”
He noted that individual government departments may not have entered that information into their accounting systems before the checkbook sweeps the data weekly to import financial data.
But Natalie Castle, chief of staff for the Legislative Council on Capitol Hill, said vendor names are one of the first things government departments enter into their accounting systems when making payments.
She confirmed to KUNC that her department entered the names and did not request any edits. Redactions are only allowed under state law if the information “harms the public interest” or violates medical privacy laws.
Using accounting software, she could look at her department’s recent payment entries and quickly find out who received the check. That included payments to Capitol tour guides, an auditing firm and a caretaker for the Colorado River Drought Task Force.
However, the names of these vendors did not appear on the public version of the website, and Castle did not know why.
“It’s very rare that a vendor name isn’t listed,” she said of accounting software reports. “Transparency is one of our greatest values.”
KUNC also asked the governor’s office about the fact that all entries in the department’s checkbook do not include the name of the person receiving the money.
The next day, after Governor’s Office officials announced they had begun an investigation, the Department of Personnel Management contacted KUNC and said it had “investigated some more.”
The agency found a new explanation for the missing data.
Adrian Schulte, another spokesperson for the state Human Resources Department, said it’s a software configuration issue. He said each government department was entering the data correctly. Checkbook’s website itself just isn’t programmed to display it.
Schulte emailed a statement from the Secretary of State’s Office.
“We will make the necessary changes to the configuration of the (online checkbook) system to ensure that vendors are listed for entry,” it said in a statement.
Transparency at your fingertips
Back at the state Capitol, state Rep. Judy Amabile (D-Boulder) said she was disappointed when KUNC showed her the missing checkbook data. Amabile co-sponsored a bill calling for greater checkbook transparency.
“This is clearly not what we had in mind,” she said after seeing a number of vendor names missing.
She said she hopes the problem will be resolved soon.
“It’s about helping people understand where their money is going,” she says. “So if there are people who are receiving money that they shouldn’t be receiving, if there is any corruption, fraud or bad actors, we need to know about it.”
Jeff Roberts, president of the Colorado Freedom of Information Coalition, said the checkbook could also be used to quickly verify spending information that could take days to go through a public records request.
“Transparency is at your fingertips, that’s what it should be,” he said. “So you don’t have to file a records request and you don’t have to wait for that information. It’s just there. And it’s useful. But sometimes the categories don’t display properly or the information isn’t entered properly. Otherwise, it’s very difficult to trust what you’re seeing.”
KUNC News first discovered the missing vendor names this month when Congress tried to use its checkbook to find out how much it spent on lawyers defending the secret ballot system in court. A search for the law firm listed on the checkbook revealed no payments.
However, when KUNC obtained the invoice from the law firm through a public records request three days later, the payment amount matched recent entries in the checkbook. The checkbook did not say who received the money.
Colorado’s online checkbook was created in 2009. Congress requires updates every five days. Please access here.
