How can NM be more transparent?

Welcome to The Independent Forum. Every week we ask a different question and solicit responses from a diverse group of New Mexico thinkers, pundits and other observers of the state’s political landscape. We’ll add more responses as they come in, so keep checking back to see how the conversation progresses.

We also invite readers to participate — so please share your thoughts on this question in the comments section. If you have suggestions for how we can improve this feature or have have an idea for a future question, send us an e-mail.

As NMI reported, the federal government has launched a major transparency initiative and will be putting heaps of information online for citizens and journalists to rake through.

And in New Mexico, the New Mexico Foundation for Open Government has given out a series of transparency awards. Earlier this year, the governor signed into law a bill that creates a Sunshine Portal for state information. And so…

QUESTION: “What more can New Mexico state and local governments, businesses and others do to be more transparent?”

BILL TURNER, hydrologist and former director of the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District:

Posting all of that data is interesting but could be a waste of time when it comes to transparency.  The lack of transparency is caused by politicians and bureaucrats with hidden agendas who deliberately hide information and claim it doesn’t exist.  For example, some time ago, I requested specific information under an IPRA request to John D’Antonio, our state engineer.  Now, I knew it existed because John’s Secretary had shown it to me directly from the files in his office.  Further, I had put it there in a letter to him.  Under the IPRA request, I found it didn’t exist.  Even after a law suit, I never got it.  Recently, the State Engineer refused to accept a declaration of water rights by a Doña Ana County farmer because, they said in writing, it was not their policy to accept declarations where a permit exists.  I sent an IPRA request to the State Engineer for the permit and got nothing but a wild goose chase.  Two weeks ago, I filed another IPRA suit for the permit.  They know and I know the permit does not exist. Hence no transparency.  Our state legislators don’t even want webcasts of legislative sessions and committee sessions.  How about a webcast from the Bull Ring?

PAUL GESSING, president of the Rio Grande Foundation:

1. Eliminate the “or as otherwise provided by law” exception to the Inspection of Public Records Act. This is being abused. For instance, state agencies cite federal FOIA law exemptions to create exemptions to the New Mexico obligation to produce records. They are two distinct governments. The exemptions and coverage of FOIA are separate from IPRA. The same reasoning would allow a state agency to cite tribal law, or the municipal law of Tupelo, Mississippi, or the internal code of Zimbabwe as they search for some law, somewhere–anywhere–that might give them an out.

2. Require NM state and local government entities, including school districts, to provide information electronically whenever requested, in response to information requests. It is the 21st century after all. Government entities hurt the environment and increase costs when they insist on providing information on paper.

3. Reduce the amount that entities are allowed to charge for information provided on paper. It does not cost $1 to make a copy.

4. Require government officials and bureaucrats to strive toward giving information as freely and easily as they possibly can.

5. Require government entities to give preference to the citizen and the taxpayer over government and bureaucrats.

6. Legally set uniform, across-the-board criteria for state and local government entities for providing information, in favor of the citizen, including fees.

7. Require the state and local school districts to post online the percentage and total amount of money appropriated that goes to administrators and bureaucrats vs. teachers and the classroom.

8. Bureaucrats who deal with the public should be required to wear name tags. There should be signs posted at each of their windows/counters notifying the public of the right to file a complaint if they feel the bureaucrat has violated their rights, or abused power. Provide forms periodically for the public customers to rate them. Private companies do this willingly. Government should be required to, to post the results publicly. There should be a way for these complaints to be resolved by an entity that is not solely government members.

9. Require local governments to launch transparency cites like the one Mayor Berry is about to launch for Albuquerque.

10. Require calls and emails to be returned to customers within two business days.

11. This is a big one — Require judicial records to be posted online. There should be a layman’s summary of each case and the result. What are the DUI conviction rates? What kinds of sentences do they hand down for what crimes?

STEVEN ROBERT ALLEN, executive director of Common Cause:

The Sunshine Portal is a huge step forward. As the Lieutenant Governor has mentioned, though, it’s just one step. The concept needs to be expanded to make other areas of state government more accessible to New Mexicans. The expansion of webcasting in the state House of Representatives during this last legislative session is also an impressive development. Let’s hope similar efforts in the state Senate are more successful during the 2011 session. We also desperately need a stable, functional online campaign reporting system in the state. For whatever reason, this last project has been years in the making. A new system is in the works at the Secretary of State’s office, and it looks promising. This needs to get done in the near term.

I’d like to point out that there’s a much greater justification for transparency in government than there is for transparency in the private sector. This is because we (that is, taxpayers) fund everything that goes on in government, so we have a fundamental right to monitor how government operates, to ensure that we’re being represented fairly and effectively. I’m proud of our state in this regard. We still need to do better, but we’ve come a long way in just the last couple years.

CARTER BUNDY, political action representative, AFSCME:

One of the biggest obstacles to transparency and accountability is privatization.  There’s a big misconception about privatization–this isn’t about whether the private sector is good or bad.  It’s about whether we use taxpayer dollars to enrich private companies while preventing the public from knowing what’s going on, and about whether we hold private companies getting rich off of taxpayers to the same standards that we hold government agencies.

It should be a requirement of any private contract paid for with taxpayer dollars that the private company comply with the same transparency and FOIA requirements that a public agency is subject to.  For example, New Mexico is one of many states which uses a private company to supply voting machines and the computer programs to count the votes.  It is an outrage that we roll over and say that no one has a right to see the code to make sure that votes are counted correctly.  If it were a public system, it would be open to the public.

So first, we should avoid outsourcing as much as possible.  Second, where absolutely necessary to use a private vendor to do the taxpayers’ work, we should have transparency.  While there are understandable proprietary systems concerns by the companies, it is insane that our state government doesn’t have the courage to stand up for the rights of citizens and our democratic process by requiring that, at the very least, state officials and representatives from each party be allowed to examine the computer codes.  Even if they had to sign a confidentiality agreement (which happens all the time in dealings between two private businesses), at least we’d know that someone had scrutinized the systems.

Instead, the very people who say “government should be run like a business” turn around and say “government shouldn’t question its contractors”–even if that’s exactly what any other business would do.  If you want a contract paid for by taxpayers, you should be willing to comply with transparency and accountability rules to make sure that taxpayers are getting their money’s worth.  If you can’t or won’t comply, then go back to the private free market and make your money there.

TERRI COLE, president and CEO, Greater Albuquerque Chamber of Commerce:

The most important, critical work New Mexico must do with respect to transparency and ethics is to get legislation – with teeth- passed and then signed by the governor. It is very difficult to pass legislation in Santa Fe that is sensible when dealing with transparency and ethics. Legislation gets drafted but often in ways that really doesn’t make a big difference. If we could get two strong bills passed, one that creates a strong and accountable ethics commission and the other that prohibits campaign contributions, a cultural shift in New Mexico would take place. We could then take off and become a leader in the nation in open government, ethics and transparency. Until that cultural shift occurs, it’s painful-slow-going.

BILL JORDAN, policy director, New Mexico Voices for Children:

Every year, lawmakers pass a general fund budget by looking at every item in every agency of state government and making a decision about how much to spend for the next year. This spending is limited by how much money the state expects to collect in tax and other revenue.

On the other hand, if a tax credit, deduction or exemption is passed into law, the amount of tax paid out (or not collected) is never tallied and not limited.  It certainly isn’t budgeted every year like direct spending is.  A dollar spent as a ‘tax expenditure’ costs taxpayers the same as a dollar of general fund spending, but spending on the tax side of the equation has no transparency and little accountability.

In New Mexico, we spend almost as much every year on tax credits, deductions and exemptions as we spend on education, health care, public safety, and everything else in our general fund budget.  During a revenue crisis like the one the state is experiencing, every general fund dollar is scrutinized.  Spending on the tax side of the equation can’t be seriously considered because the state lacks a tax expenditure budget (TEB).  If we had a TEB, lawmakers could choose to roll back some antiquated tax incentives that are no longer worth their value instead of raising some other tax. Without a TEB, they don’t even know what taxes they’re not collecting.

All but a handful of states prepare a tax expenditure budget along with their general fund budget.  Lawmakers unanimously passed a law requiring a tax expenditure budget a couple of years ago and Gov. Richardson vetoed it. The House passed it unanimously again this year, but the Senate Corporations Committee soundly defeated it.  Accountability and transparency in the budget process aren’t possible without a tax expenditure budget.