Errors of Enchantment » csdavis

Tax Waste at UNM

csdavis — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 21:39:49 +0000

With state revenues down, lobbyists from UNM are scrambling to secure funds from the legislature. Instead of working to cut a more crucial slice of the public pie this year, it might be a good time for citizens, legislators, and educators to come up with strategies for making higher education more self-sufficient.
In their ’08-’09 budget plans, University administrators diverted revenue and increased tuition to fund a series of projects with a $1,650,000 price tag. Under the guise of strengthening the University’s “core mission,” “enrollment management,” and “academic departments,” administrators made some expensive promises that deserve analysis.
$200,000 was allotted to keep Zimmerman Library open 24/7. This goal never saw the light of day, and librarians aren’t aware of any such plan. Instead of fulfilling their budget “goal,” University administrators decided to extend Parish Library’s operating hours, a smaller business library with fewer resources for the average student.
Almost half a million was portioned for “Enrollment Management,” which developed a “Parent Relations” website that helps parents understand the issues necessary for their youngsters’ college success, including suggestions for classes. It seems costly and excessive to encourage parents to continue pampering their children throughout college.
Another half million was diverted to offset the increasing costs of copying paper, telecom and other equipment, so the Provost’s office could hire more teachers instead of worrying about standard operational costs. Despite this goal, the University was forced to implement a hiring freeze because of funding shortfalls.
In November, New Mexico voters approved $7,000,000 in bonds to fund a new Science and Mathematics Learning Center. The University planned to break ground for the new facility during the fall semester, but even now, midway through the spring semester, no progress has been made.
These unfulfilled or superfluous projects represent only a tiny fraction of the University’s total budget. There are surely millions more taxpayer dollars funding broken promises and extraneous projects. High costs to the public could be countered if the University was encouraged to become more self-sufficient.
Although far from ideal, the UNM Health Sciences Center is an example of an educational enterprise that is far more sustainable than most at the University. With only a fraction of the total UNM student population pursuing a degree in a health-related field, the patient care services of UNM Hospitals provides 23% of UNM’s total revenue. However, the Health Sciences Center and UNM Hospitals combined account for 54% of UNM’s expenditures, so we can conclude that the medical programs at UNM are almost halfway self-sufficient. If these programs doubled their efficiency, they would be nearly sustainable and wouldn’t require billions in tax money to operate.
Professor Sharon Warner, former director of the Creative Writing program at UNM, organizes the annual Taos Summer Writers’ Conference, an entirely self-sufficient educational program. Warner’s program pays its own rent for the University property it utilizes, as well as pays well-known writers to teach at the conference. Her conference is a shining example of education that does not rely on taxes for funding. Students pay to attend because they know that the teachers have established reputations in the field, reputations that extend beyond the tangle of scholarly journals and the trappings of state run Universities. The product that these writers generate is paid for willingly, instead of through taxation.
When taxes meant for education are funneled through the bureaucratic machine it leaves way too much room, as we’ve seen, for mismanagement and dishonesty. Our educational system needs to reflect the more clear and direct trade that Professor Warner has been able to establish. Educators should be able to demonstrate more obviously that they possess knowledge that is monetarily valuable to students, instead of relying on a Ph.D. as an all-season pass to tax graft.

Higher education vouchers will ensure that schools operate efficiently and effectively

csdavis — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:35:03 +0000

There is a lot of talk at UNM about making the school more environmentally responsible. A new degree is even being offered in sustainability studies. In keeping with this trend, the University and the state government should also consider making UNM more fiscally responsible.
With President David Schmidly implementing a freeze on hiring and faculty raises, University students are becoming increasingly critical of fiscal policy on campus. They have reason to be concerned. After all, major facility renovations and upgrades, including a $60 million renovation of The Pit, are moving forward despite the freeze on faculty spending. Some students have suggested Schmidly take cuts out of his own salary – which is $387,000, according to UNM’s public records – and administerial operations to ensure that the educational function of the University isn’t jeopardized.
Although the state has allocated less money to the University this year, UNM’s operating budget has increased by 10.4 percent. State allocations to the school are likely to continue their decline due to tax revenues taking a hit from dropping oil prices. If the school’s budget keeps increasing and state allocations continue to dwindle, the University will find itself having to compromise the quality of education just to keep itself afloat.
Unfortunately, the University’s incentives aren’t necessarily aligned with its purported educational goals. That’s because a relatively minor percentage of the school’s operating budget is collected from tuition – only 6.4 percent. Far more, 38.6 percent, comes from local, state and federal taxpayers.
New Mexico policymakers should consider realigning those incentives by routing a greater percentage of government money through students in the form of a voucher rather than directing it to the bureaucracy. Colorado is one state that has enacted this reform to positive effect. If New Mexico’s universities are forced to compete for students, and therefore money, student needs will begin taking precedence over basketball and administration. A voucher program will give students the ability to allocate government funds to whichever school they choose. In a free-market system like this, schools will naturally focus more on the quality of their product – education – rather than sports facilities or outrageous administrator salaries.
(The above letter was published in UNM’s student newspaper, The Daily Lobo.)
UNM’s President David Schmidly is also worried about the likely cuts in government allocations to the school. Hopefully this recession can give the university an opportunity to learn to operate more efficiently.

Iron Curtain over Santa Fe

csdavis — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:23:57 +0000

Democracy in New Mexico is hard to come by because most citizens don’t know what’s going on in the opaque shadows of government. Unless you’re actually attending the legislative sessions and committees in Santa Fe, odds are you won’t be able to see through the impenetrable iron curtain surrounding the Roundhouse.
New Mexico is one of only four states nationwide that don’t broadcast any part of the legislative process. Thanks to the efforts of Senator Mark Boitano, the state Senate will begin web casting its floor sessions starting January 20. Excellent; this is a big step for a government whose transparency is nearly non-existent.
Unfortunately, the House of Representatives and the myriad of legislative committees remain largely undocumented. Every time a bill is introduced in either house, it’s assigned to at least one, usually three, committees for deliberation (One committee is perfectly normal. The speaker assigns bills he and/or the majority don’t like to multiple committees in order to bring about their deaths. In addition he’s been known more than once to change a bill’s committee assignments in mid-stream.) Minutes, if they’re kept, are not made public for any of these standing committee hearings. The only time anything is publicly documented is if they actually decide to take a vote on it.
In 2007 (the last 60-day legislative session), three groundbreaking bills aimed toward increasing government transparency were introduced, and only one actually made it through without getting lost in the usual veil of secrecy. Rep. Brian K. Moore introduced House Bill 235, which would’ve forced the state to disclose exactly who was getting special exemptions through the tax code and how much the state was foregoing. The bill passed through the House and Senate with flying colors. According to the Senate Chief Clerk’s Office, Senator Michael Sanchez of Valencia County was the only legislator in the entire state to vote against the bill… before Bill Richardson used a pocket veto to kill the legislation after the Legislature adjourned.
Reps. Larry Larranaga and Kathy McCoy teamed up with House Bills 554 and 993 (respectively) to create a searchable transparency website where all state revenues and expenditures would be made available to the public (including the recipients of all state contracts). Both bills were “postponed indefinitely” in the House Taxation and Revenue Committee.
Without some detailed, written record of the committee hearings, we’ll never be able to actually know what was discussed unless we attend. Democracy will not be able to succeed until the citizens of New Mexico are allowed to watch everything the politicians are doing in government. That’s a right to which we are entitled. Unfortunately, there are probably plenty of bad reasons why Governor Richardson doesn’t want us to know who’s getting special favors in the tax code and why Lujan and the House Taxation and Revenue Committee want to make it hard for us to know where our money’s going.

Feds stall on Native sovereignty and economic development

csdavis — Tue, 27 May 2008 16:51:17 +0000

The Navajo Nation is planning on building a coal-fired power plant near Burnham, NM. It applied for an air permit from the Environmental Protection Agency in early 2004, but still hasn’t received permission to begin construction. The Diné Power Authority, a Navajo enterprise, filed a lawsuit against the EPA on March 18 attempting to force the federal agency to make a decision on the permit, according to the Albuquerque Journal (Navajo Enterprise Sues EPA Over Proposed Power Plant, Mar. 19, 2008). “The lawsuit claims the tribe is losing $5 million in… revenue for every month the permit is delayed.”
“The EPA says it was initially delayed by climate-modeling uncertainties… and then by nearly 1,000 mostly negative comments posted on the agency’s Web site,” according to the Santa Fe New Mexican (‘We want the smoke to stop’, May 21, 2008). The Feds say they have to respond to every comment before issuing a permit.
With improved emissions technology, the new Desert Rock Energy Facility will be able to crank out ¾ of the electricity with only 1/5 of the emissions currently being produced by the Four Corners Power Plant in Fruitland, NM (The New Mexican). On top of that, the operators of the new facility are “exploring options that may prepare the project to capture and sequester CO2 emissions from the plant in the future when technology exists that makes this process technically and economically feasible.”
On March 19, New Mexico Environment Secretary Ron Curry, who has a hand in delaying the permit along with the EPA, issued a statement that said, “We respect the sovereignty of the Navajo Nation and the rights of tribal governments to determine their economic futures and to pursue positive change within their communities. However, the responsibility of taking strong action to combat global climate change is one we must all share.”
Curry is operating in quite a paradox. If the government recognizes the sovereignty of the Navajo Nation, then why is it being prohibited from starting a project that will “bring $52 million a year in revenues to the tribal government and provide up to 400 jobs on a reservation where unemployment hovers around 50 percent” (The New Mexican)?
This anti-development mentality on the part of outsiders, mostly wealthy outsiders, was the point of the Rio Grande Foundation’s recent showings of the film Mine Your Own Business. In fact, the film drew a crowd of nearly 100 to Farmington for a showing of the film.

$6 Million Wasn’t Enough for Santa Fe County

csdavis — Fri, 23 May 2008 20:08:31 +0000

In 2006, Santa Fe County voters agreed to a tax increase to fund improved emergency medical services to outlying communities around the city of Santa Fe and throughout the county, according to Julie Ann Grimm of The Santa Fe New Mexican (911 Stretched Thin, May 20, 2008). So far, $6 million has been levied from county taxpayers and given to the county government for this purpose, but the county’s emergency needs still haven’t been met.
The county’s been having a problem with recruiting and retaining enough paramedics. If a county resident calls 911 because of a heart attack, there may not be enough county paramedics to respond. Odds are the city of Santa Fe, which has its own fire department and adequately staffed emergency response team, will have to send its own paramedic team to far off county lands, leaving the city more vulnerable to a shortage. The city and county medical employees try to work together to meet the needs of citizens.
Unfortunately, the city and county governments don’t cooperate in the same way. Santa Fe city residents (who are Santa Fe county residents as well) are helping to pay for services outside of the city, but their city government is actually contributing to the county shortage by offering more competitive wages to paramedics, leaving the county fire departments in need.
While this competition drives paramedic wages up, it almost seems that the County and City should combine rescue efforts so services do not overlay. Even better, the City and County would likely save even more up to 2/3rds of the money it spends now by privatizing some emergency medical services.

APS “Computer-error” had District $20 million in black

csdavis — Tue, 20 May 2008 18:52:00 +0000

Yesterday’s Albuquerque Journal featured an article titled APS Will Cover $20M Funding Hit. Apparently, the state did an audit in 2007 that found that the Albuquerque Public Schools district was over-reporting teacher experience and special education staff. The state determined that it had given APS $20 million too much because of these errors.
Part of the problem was that from at least 1991 to 2001, APS was calculating teacher training and experience against state rules. APS’ criteria for “teacher training” were more lax than the state rules allowed. Even after the state warned APS in 1991 and forgave the errors, the district continued to miscalculate for another decade.
APS also used a “computer program that accidentally doubled its number of special education staff.” Who knows how much that computer program cost the city? My little cousin could’ve designed a program that can count numbers. He probably would have done it for free too.
APS will not have $20 million of state money in ‘08-’09 that it’s used to receiving. APS says it can “cover the loss with its cash reserves next year.” But, unless APS suddenly hires teachers that actually meet its over-reported levels of training and experience, and unless it doubles the size of its special education staff, it will be $20 million ‘short’ every year.
The district’s chief business officer, Gina Hickman, said that we were giving APS $13 million too much for teacher training and experience, and $7 million too much for special education staff. I can understand that APS may have different guidelines for calculating teacher training and experience than the state does. I would assume APS was giving this $13 million to teachers with more training and experience. But, if the faulty computer program was doubling the numbers of special education staff, what was APS spending our $7 million on?

Lone star Commissioner saves Santa Fe County residents from possible double taxation

csdavis — Wed, 07 May 2008 16:18:43 +0000

Santa Fe County Commissioner Jack Sullivan was fighting the majority, according to The New Mexican (Official fights planned tax hike, Apr. 29, 2008), when he proposed that Santa Fe County drop out of the Transit District, which includes Santa Fe, Taos, Los Alamos, and Rio Arriba counties. The Transit District is trying to impose a tax increase on residents to expand bus services in these counties.
The only problem is that the state legislature, through the Department of Transportation, is considering imposing its own tax for Rail Runner services. The Transit District doesn’t know where Rail Runner routes are going to connect yet. They have no clue where bus service might be needed most. A week ago the Transit District, even though it didn’t have the details of Rail Runner service, wanted to impose a tax increase anyway. Thankfully Jack Sullivan was able to persuade Santa Fe County Commissioners to hold off until they were able to talk to the state about plans for the train. Sullivan said, “Details about how Santa Fe’s approximately $4.5 million portion in tax revenue would be spent are vague.” It’s possible that the state would impose a tax for some of the same services the Transit District wanted to tax for.
Some officials didn’t think double taxation was a big deal. Transit Board director Josette Lucero said, “We’ve already gone back to the drawing board twice.” Santa Fe City Councilor Miguel Chavez said, “We’ve already reconsidered…it seems a little redundant.” County Commissioner Mike Anaya said, ‘Sullivan needs to take a longer view of the issue and not get bogged down worrying about which county pays for what.’ (The New Mexican, 4/29). Details are so messy when you are trying to pick peoples’ pockets!
Then, after the Commission’s April 29th meeting, at which Sullivan was able to convince commissioners to wait for more details from the state’s Department of Transportation before agreeing to the Transit District’s tax, Board director Lucero said, “I can totally understand their position…I agree that the parties needed to come together months ago.” Santa Fe Mayor David Cross said, “We’re just not ready. We don’t have a plan for public transit that includes the Rail Runner…I would like to see that addressed as part of the equation…” (The New Mexican, County agrees to put hold on tax increase, Apr. 30, 2008) The Transit Board director is only going to participate in a task force if they can come to a resolution within 30 days, after which Sullivan will reintroduce the idea of Santa Fe County dropping out of the Transit District.
Why isn’t possible double taxation a big deal for the Transit District? Why haven’t the counties and state been collaborating on transit? Why is the Transit Board director putting a timeline on researching the impacts of the tax? It’s obvious that some of these people aren’t concerned with wasting our money. Other than Sullivan, many of these officials seem to have no problem flushing our money down the toilet.

APS Has Problems Educating Students

csdavis — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:46:29 +0000

According to Zsombor Peter of the Albuquerque Journal ($1M Spent on Truancy, With Little To Show for It, Apr. 22, 2008), the state government has recently released a report documenting that 67% of APS high school students are classified as habitually truant from class. The state high school average is 33%.
In his 2003 “state of the state” address, Governor Richardson “propos[ed] a $1 million appropriation for truancy prevention.” Through the Governor’s Statewide Truancy Prevention Program, the APS district was awarded the most out of any district in 2005, $40,000. It now appears that almost 7 out of 10 high school students miss more than 10 days of instruction out of the school year.
The state’s truancy prevention money is not being invested wisely in the Albuquerque Public Schools. There are obviously circumstances that contribute to a student’s absenteeism that the district is either overlooking or not effectively addressing.
We were all 16 at one time or another and most of us have skipped a class or two at some point in our lives, but the fact is that our public schools are not producing a product — even when it is offered for free and officers of the law attempt to force attendance — that most “consumers” deem worthy of their time. This truancy problem persists despite the abundant documentation of the importance of a high school diploma.
There may not be a silver bullet solution to the truancy problem, but we could start by tailoring our educational system to the needs of students rather than attempting to force students into a regimented and very institutional public school setting. Charter schools are a step forward, but this is yet another sign pointing to the need for school choice.

Can the Government tell us what to do with our property?

csdavis — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 18:40:06 +0000

More than two years ago, Juan Dominguez of Rio Arriba County entered into a leasing agreement with T-Mobile, allowing them to place a cell tower on his property. The tower gives reception to many cell users in the Chimayo area.
Some citizens in the area have banded together to form the Chimayo Council on Wireless Technology. The Council feels that the appearance of the cell tower desecrates sacred sites within eyeshot, such as the Plaza del Cerro (an original colonial Spanish plaza) and a commonly used pilgrimage route to the Santuario de Chimayo. They also say that the tower defiles the hills around Chimayo, which are venerated by the Tewa people. In fact, the town is named after one of these hills, Tsi-Mayoh.
Unfortunately for the Council, Mr. Dominguez owns the property on which the tower is located, not the citizens of Chimayo, nor any body of religious people or historic preservationists. He has given his consent for placement of the tower. Nonetheless, the Council has correctly asserted, according to the State Historic Preservation Office, that T-Mobile had some errors in its application to the county government, including incorrect coordinates for its location.
SHPO is requiring T-Mobile to resubmit a corrected application, after which state officers will evaluate the tower’s level of historical malevolence. If they deem that the tower is violating the visual pleasance of historical sites, the state office will escalate the case to the Federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, which, under authority granted to it by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, may “make recommendations regarding historic preservation to the… heads of… federal agencies.” The federal agency involved in this case would be the Federal Communications Commission, which will make the final determination should the matter remain unresolved.
Sound like a bureaucratic nightmare? And all poor Mr. Dominguez wanted was to make some extra cash. T-Mobile has said that they cannot relocate the tower and keep their service effective. Not only are multiple levels of government involvement encroaching on Mr. Dominguez’ property rights, but they may also be hindering T-Mobile’s ability to run its company successfully in the area.
If the folks at the Chimayo Council on Wireless Technology have as much support from the community as they claim, they should consider buying Mr. Dominguez’s property or at least they could purchase the right not to have a tower built on the property.

Feds Propose Increased Financial Regulation

csdavis — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:22:51 +0000

On Monday, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson disclosed a plan to massively increase the powers of the Federal Reserve to regulate private financial institutions. The unveiling comes 11 days after House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank proposed a “Financial Services Risk Regulator” which would be managed by the Federal Reserve and would have the “capacity and power to assess risk across financial markets regardless of corporate form and to intervene when appropriate.” (Frank Calls for Increased Regulation, Wall Street Journal)
Paulson’s plan would “allow insurance companies to opt out of state regulation in favor of a newly created federal insurance regulator” (Treasury Proposes Financial Overhaul, McClatchy Newspapers), further outsourcing our capacity to self-govern to the federal government.
“The proposals would broadly expand the powers of the Federal Reserve, merge the regulation of stock and commodities markets, fold savings and loan institutions under the umbrella of bank regulation and allow insurance companies to opt out of state regulation in favor of a newly created federal insurance regulator.
For consumers, Mr. Paulson’s plan would create a new super-regulator whose powers would cut across financial services with overarching responsibility for protecting investors and consumers.
The plan also would create a new federal entity to oversee the mortgage origination process.”
What we need is less regulation, not more, and especially not at the federal level when it comes to financing.
The third Federal Reserve attempt was successfully enacted in 1913. America had dissolved the first one and, under vehement opposition from President Andrew Jackson, the federal charter for the second one expired. One of the supposed objectives of the Fed is to prevent financial panics like the one in 1907 that slashed the value of stocks in half.
Unfortunately, 16 years after the creation of the Fed, we entered into the most severe economic depression of our nation’s history. It would seem that giving even greater power to the Federal Reserve might create more problems in the long-term than it would solve.