Another Proof That Spending Transparency is Usually Less Costly Than Anticipated

Friday, May 29, 2009 7:38 AM

We've pointed out before that efforts to create comprehensive online searchable databases for government expenditures don't have to be all too expensive, and that in most cases the actual cost is lower than the fiscal note attached to a bill mandating the creation of such a site.  Our friends at the Mercatus Center actually did a study that came to the same conclusion.

Now we have the latest proof from Utah, where our friends at the Sutherland Institute have just learned that it looks like Utah's Public Finance Website, which launched earlier this year, is also less costly than anticipated.

The projected cost for the website for the current fiscal year was $480,400.

To date, accrding to the Division of Finance, the website has cost $283,250.67, of which $192,000 was spent on a fixed-price contract for the web developer (including hardware), and $91,250.67 for internal staff costs.

Derek Monson, Policy Analyst at the Sutherland Institute, estimates that if the Division of Finance continues to spend at the rate they have thus far, the cost will be $300,309.75 by the end of the current fiscal year - 37.5 percent less than was projected.

As Monson tells us:

The Division of Finance said the savings came from cheaper-than-expected hardware and because they re-allocated current staff time away from other projects, rather than hiring new staff as they originally planned.  Such commitment to making transparency work should be commended.

It also goes to show that the cost of transparency is driven mainly by how committed public officials are to it.  If transparency is prioritized over other government activities, as it should be, than it doesn't cost as much as people think it will.

We couldn't agree more.

Tags: Transparency UT | Comments (0)