Spurred on by the Internet, government transparency has become a recurring theme at the General Assembly in recent years, yet some lawmakers say we still have a long way to go in making the public’s business publicly accessible. Their goal: someday to see the day-to-day operation of all government functions available online.

The legislature took a few more steps down that path during the 2010 session, passing several measures that enhance the public’s ability to examine how their tax dollars are being spent and how their government does its job.

Morgan Carroll, a Democratic senator from Aurora, and Amy Stephens, a Republican representative from Monument, are two lawmakers who have been persistent in their recent efforts to increase transparency, and both agree that the ability to glean wide-ranging information online has raised public expectations for government bodies and agencies to place their proceedings, expenditures and other affairs on the Web.

Carroll said she believes increased transparency in government not only is fundamental to good government but also could help restore the public’s confidence in their government.

“It just seems to me that this is clearly where we need to be going.  To the extent that there is a crisis in the confidence in government, I think the more transparency we put out, the more information we put out–the more accountability we’ll have,” Carroll said. “It would actually help people gain more confidence in what their government is doing.”

Stephens says government transparency is a basic right of taxpayers.

“The taxpayer should be able to see as much as possible about what’s going on with the budget process, with the way that government works. Transparency says you, the consumer, the taxpayer, should be able to see what the government is funding and how it’s running, ” said Stephens adding that  while progress is being made, “We are a long way away from providing the degree of transparency in government that is needed.”

Transparency-in-government legislation has had mixed results in the last few years and has met with considerable resistance  from lawmakers and from state agencies, Stephens and Carroll say.

Stephens said sometimes state departments are resistant to transparency because “they don’t want everybody in their business,” citing her school-district transparency bill that she ran in 2009 along with Sen. Ted Harvey, R-Highlands Ranch. That measure, Senate Bill 09-57, was derailed by opposition from school districts, which under the legislation would have had to post all their expenditures online.

This year, Carroll sponsored a measure, Senate Bill 114, which would have required full transparency on transactions made between any entity and the state when public dollars are expended for a public function. That bill met the same fate as Stephens’ efforts last year; the bill died.   Carroll said that there is no question in her mind of the need for transparency in the transactions between government and anyone it contracts with for a good or service and that the bill seemed to have widespread support.

“Anytime you’re talking about a taxpayer dollar for any public function, I just think that 100 percent transparency is needed.  No one is entitled to ‘just get money from the state,’ and no one makes you contract with the state.  You can’t take taxpayer money and not have basic transparency that comes with the money,” Carroll said.

Despite some setbacks both Carroll and Stephens are encouraged by the progress that they are seeing for transparency in government.

This year, lawmakers approved, and Gov. Bill Ritter signed, House Bill 1036, requiring school districts to post their budgets, audits, financial statements, salaries and accounts payable, online in a downloadable format over a two-year period.  Nearly identical to last year’s unsuccessful school-district  transparency bill, HB1036 passed with near unanimity in the hands Democratic sponsors Christine Scanlon, of Dillon, in the House and Chris Romer, of Denver, in the Senate.

Stephens, along with the GOP’s Sen. Mark Scheffel, of Parker, successfully orchestrated the passage and approval by Ritter of House Bill 1178, requiring full disclosure of the sources of gifts, grants, and donations to the state, which are becoming a more common method of funding studies and commissions under tight budget constraints.  Proposed legislation is often born of such commissions.  HB1178 will take effect on Aug. 11, 2010.

Carroll said she is bemused by the hesitancy of those in power to accept transparency as part of governance.

“I don’t think that as a general principle we should have anything to fear with this.  If there are a few nuances that we might need to figure out, then we need to do so.  The fact is we can’t allow the small nuances to stop the bigger conversation,” said Carroll, who also noted that she found the process of running transparency legislation intriguing.   “The political dynamics became apparent.  Everyone loves transparency in concept and no one likes it in the specific. It was really interesting to see.”

Transparency bills introduced in 2010:

• HB1036 –Transparency in public schools:  in effect

• HB1078 – Transparency online changes: killed

• HB1119 – SMART Government Act: effective Aug. 11, 2010

• HB1178 – Transparency in the use of grant money: effective Aug. 11, 2010

• HB1393 – Transparency in publically accessed web-based state financial data: in effect

• SB91 –Transparency in public schools: killed

• SB96 – Transparency in utility bills: killed

• SB114 – Transparency in government contracts: killed