Why would anyone dispute that when taxpayers's monies are spent, taxpayers have a right to know?
As far as I can tell, given the emergency nature of the Lobato trestle fire, the Commission virtually overnight got a structural engineering outfit in for a preliminary look at the damage to the structure. Then armed with that information the Commission issued an RFP to have a more rigorous assessment done of what to do about the damage and to also perform load analyses on both the Lobato and Cascade trestles. Now the Commission needs to pick an engineering firm from the respondents to the RFP (if any).
Obviously, the Commission paid for the initial examination and will be paying more money as the project progresses. As has been customary the Commission will discuss such matters and decisions in its public meetings which we taxpayers are welcome to attend and to question the actions of the Commissioners.
What is different is that most people aren't aware that the Commission is not subject to the procurement laws of either Colorado or New Mexico because it is an interstate compact authority. In fact the statutes of the two states specify that the Commission is not a state agency and not subject to the procurement codes of the states.
The Lobato trestle may be located in NM, but the trestle, like all the other assets of the C&TS, is owned jointly (50/50) by the two states (lawyers call this an undivided interest). This has been the case since 1970.
So what's a taxpayer to do? If the Commission is simply spending ticket revenues to cover operating costs, all it needs to do is disclose its books and supply audited financials to the two states that are the joint owners (as tenants in common). The Commission is spending its own money.
On the other hand, in order to obtain funding for capital projects or other contingencies from the two states, you can rest assured that the Commission provides full disclosure of its activities to the public and to the states in considerable detail. Although not required to, the Commission also follows the spirit and many of the procurement practices of the two states (RFP's, etc.) That's just common sense and has been the Commission's practice over the past twelve years for which I have personal knowledge.
So, at the end of the day, if we as taxpayers are dissatisfied with actions by the Commission our recourse is to our legislators in the two states to whom the C&TS is beholden for capital funding.
