A few years ago I attended a meeting in Lindsay, Oklahoma to advocate for improvement of Highway 76 north of Lindsay to Dibble. The 16 mile stretch of roadway is among the most neglected in the state, as no improvements had been made since the early 1950's. It's filled with curves, had no shoulders to speak of - and several people had been killed in accidents due to its neglect. Concerned citizens who used the stretch daily were in attendance, as well as an Oklahoma Department of Transportation (ODOT) official and the local State Representative.
The ODOT official answered several questions from those who live along the highway or travel it on a regular basis. His answers centered on the impending improvements scheduled for the dangerous stretch. (Eventually, improvements were made to the first four miles north of Lindsay - but the most dangerous stretch, where most of the accidents occurred, is still neglected.) The local Representative was seemingly concerned about the safety of citizens who use the road, but lamented that there is very little she could do about it - as it is illegal to direct ODOT to repair a state highway or direct public funding to a private road construction company. Everyone in attendance recognized her predicament for providing assistance, as it is both illegal and unethical for a lawmaker to direct public funding to private vendors. By state statute, it is also not lawful for public agencies to "gift" public funds or property to individuals or private vendors. An example of gifting public resources would be if ODOT paved someone's private driveway, or a county road crew provided gravel for a private driveway.
Many citizens live near the road or travel it on a regular basis and pay taxes to keep the highway repaired and maintained. If the taxes paid by all citizens who use the road could get their tax dollars back from ODOT (probably several hundred thousand dollars), and use it to repair the most neglected stretch of highway - the problem could be solved. There is a big problem associated with this way of thinking: Once tax dollars are paid to the state, it becomes public funding which lawmakers appropriate to state agencies such as ODOT. The tax dollars no longer belong to private citizens, but to the public in general. It becomes illegal and unethical for the Oklahoma Legislature to direct public funding to private citizens or spend public funding for private purposes.
An analogy to the State Department of Transportation is another agency, the Oklahoma State Department of Education (OSDE), which must comply with all the same gifting laws as ODOT. In addition to the OSDE, the more than 500 public schools statewide must also comply with all gifting provisions - as they are state subdivisions of the OSDE.
A few (one or two) public schools are evidently above the law... or lawmakers have recently changed the gifting laws, for the direct benefit of their big donors. A case in point would be Epic Virtual Charter School, a public school somewhere in Oklahoma. Epic advertises the fact that enrolled students will receive + or - $1,000 in state appropriated funding, which can be spent for "education" equipment or education activities such as private sports lessons. In addition, students are provided additional state appropriated dollars for "referring" other potential students. Some people believe "referring" is in reality - recruiting. Many Oklahoma taxpayers believe this practice represents illegal state agency gifting, but only a prosecuting attorney would really know.
In addition to the potential illegal gifting of public funds, more illegal gifting evidence has been uncovered... All state agencies are required by law to properly inventory state and federally owned equipment. For a public school, it means that an inventory of textbooks, computers, buses, and all "public owned" equipment should be accounted... and the state agency is accountable. An Oklahoma taxpayer, through an "open records" request - obtained the equipment inventories for all Oklahoma virtual charter schools. Almost all the inventoried equipment consisted of laptop computers. One virtual charter school replied that no equipment inventory is required, since all computers, etc.. are provided by a private vendor (not the state). Another virtual charter school (Epic) provided over 500 pages of laptop computer inventory, for which it is accountable. The inventoried laptops were listed as "active" (currently in use); "dead"; "repairing"; "returned to Epic" (less than ten); or "unrecoverable". A count of "unrecoverable" laptops revealed over 8,000 (cost unknown) were not recovered by the state. It is unknown if the "unrecovered" state-owned laptops were gifted to staff and students or simply not returned, in effect stolen. Many taxpayers believe the recipients of the state-owned laptops believe they own the Epic issued equipment. Only an attorney can answer the question - Were the inventoried "unrecoverable" laptops illegally gifted, or simply stolen?
No comments:
Post a Comment