Colorado Energy Office Poster Child of Gov't Waste

As a member of the Business Leaders for Responsible Government of the South Metro Denver Chamber of Commerce, I pay close attention to how government spends our money. Maybe I should say how government wastes our money.

As I write this the national deficit is well north of $16 Trillion. If you still haven't figured out why we're in such a deep, dark and dangerous hole, look no further than the Colorado Energy Office.

In this story by 9News KUSA, we find out the folks at the energy office have been a bit lax in accounting for our money.

Some examples:

• The agency spent $1500.00 to send an employee for training. This after the employee had resigned a month earlier.
• Another line item listed $25,000.00 for "memberships." To what we don't know.
• All sorts of our money was spent on travel, conferences and the like with no expense reports filed by those who went.

It all adds up. Big-time.

The Colorado Energy Office can't account for $252 Million dollars in spending between 2009 and 2012. WTF? (I'm not referring to the last three days of the work week)

The Pueblo Chieftain reports that "Auditors found that between 2007 and 2012, the agency had no comprehensive annual budget for 34 programs and couldn’t determine the amount spent on any of them. Auditors reviewed eight of those programs in depth, finding that staff couldn’t identify goals or whether any of them had been achieved."

Most of the money came from "Federal Stimulus Funds." A better name would be OUR TAX DOLLARS. Where the heck do people, especially at agencies like the Colorado gang think this money comes from?

The bottom line here is this isn't by any measure an isolated incident. Not just in Colorado but the entire government from Federal to the most local of agencies.

Meanwhile Colorado Energy Office interim director, Kevin Patterson, told lawmakers that fixes have begun. Too late Kevin. We don't need fixes, we need to get the money back, we need those who blew it on a good time to be punished. It's called accountability.

But these days, government and accountability is an oxymoron. Thus, "We the People" lose. Every time.

Brian Olson
Owner/Consultant
Conversation Starters Public Relations
"We start the conversation about you" (We also love to blow the whistle when called for)

Amazing (Fall From) Grace

For years I believed him. For years I was angry at those attacked them. Boy did Lance Armstrong fool me!

Lance Armstrong cheated. He admitted it to Oprah Winfrey. But only after decades of denying it, blasting/attacking/suing his critics, making millions from his cycling wins and cheating his sport and his fans.

He's a liar and a cheater and in this case, there will be, there must be no redemption. Armstrong attacked those who dared challenge him. He sued news outlets who we now know reported the truth. He received millions from sponsors like Nike who believe he just didn't do it.

Liar, liar, peddle pants on fire.

There was a time, under the right circumstances when a mea culpa on Oprah could help someone out of a self-dug dark hole. But Oprah ain't what she used to be and Armstrong was never what he claimed to be.

He's also a disgrace to cancer patients of all types, everywhere. Much was said about his own fight with cancer. Big deal. Lots of people have and are fighting cancer. They're also honest.  Armstrong wasn't a cancer survivor, just a liar and cheater with cancer. Sure, he formed a foundation. Lots of people are helping in the fight against cancer. The huge majority, unlike Armstrong, are honest.

If Armstrong has the slightest belief in any sort of redemption, he's lying to himself. Just like he lied to us. He also lied to the media, especially sports media and that is the kiss of PR death. They will come after him with a vengeance followed closely by armies of lawyers. Reporters by nature are cynics. It's people like Lance Armstrong that make them that way.

Once synonymous with athletic achievement of the highest standard, he's now a fallen idol to kids who have to be saying, "Say it ain't so Lance." But it is so. He told Oprah so.

The distance from being on top of the world to a late night joke is a very short one.

Brian Olson
Owner/Consultant
Conversation Starters Public Relations
"We start the conversation about you"

Making the case, again, for cameras in courtrooms.

Preliminary hearings are underway this week in the case of James Holmes, the man accused of the horrific shootings last year at an Aurora Movie Theater.

National and local media are on the scene, ably reporting on what's going on inside the courtroom. Just one problem: There are no cameras or microphones inside the courtroom. Instead we get reporters telling us about testimony instead of hearing it ourselves. Instead of seeing the testimony, we get "Courtroom Sketches" which are akin to cartoons. Courtrooms aren't artist studios.

In this digital age, it's shameful that "We the people" aren't allowed to watch the legal process. It's OUR process yet our court has decided we're not worthy of watching it. One can assume the judge thinks we're not intelligent enough to observe. It's one of the reasons we as a society know so little about what goes on in courtrooms, instead basing our perception from watching shows like "The Good Wife." (A great drama by the way, but not the real deal)

As a former Board Member of the Radio-Digital-Television News Association, I spent a lot of time fighting for electronic access to our courts, including speaking twice before the National Judicial College. It's a tough sell. To RTDNA's credit, they keeping up the fight.

Think about it. We have cameras taking our picture at stoplights, yet they're banned in far too many courtrooms.

Some say we don't need to see/hear graphic testimony or evidence. Then don't watch. Judges have told me they worry about the trial turning into a circus. For the life of me I can't see how being able to observe the process creates a circus-like atmosphere. It's the judge's job to control the courtroom. Others say having cameras in the courtroom somehow glorifies people like James Holmes.  Glorifies how? Then there's the oldest and weakest of excuses, that lawyers will showboat in front of the camera. Part of a lawyer's job is to showboat. If it gets out of hand, then the judge has the power to step in.

But to essentially lock us out of what goes in in our court system? No excuse. None.

In this digital world, there is absolutely no reason video and audio, from cameras that do nothing to distract from the proceedings , could be streamed on the 'Net or on numerous digital channels available. Just one camera and mic, shared pool-style for all reporters but more importantly for us.

These types of stories are rough, I know first-hand from covering the Oklahoma City Bombing Trial. Some of the testimony was horrendous. It was a horrendous act. We're being accused as a society of being desensitized to these types of crimes. That may be, and if true, it's due in no small part to being so insulated from coverage of them.

Ultimately it's our justice system. Not allowing electronic access is in a word, shameful. I find the court out of order and in contempt of the society it supposedly serves.

Brian Olson
Owner/Consultant
Conversation Starters Public Relation
"We start the conversation about you"