with all due respect...
I cannot see from your observations on the CPMs and the GASB standards how you could arrive at the conclusion that "the merger of CPMs with environmental GASB...seems an inevitable merger that could very possibly set a national precedent"
You suggest that most individuals you contacted in state government were either familiar with CPMs but not with GASB, or vice versa. You refer to a generally expressed "cluelessness" about the relationship between the two, then go on to say they are an inevitable pairing of standards -but you seem to be the only one who thinks so. You interviewed some very knowledgeable professionals in both the financial and environmental fields, but asked them to comment on two sets of "standards" (and I'll use that term loosley) which serve very different functions. I would challenge your presumptions and be very cautious about your implication that based on their infamilliarity with GASB, Steve Adams of Florida and his peers in Colorado, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Minnesota are the ones who are "clueless" regarding environmnental performance reporting.
For your reference, I've clipped the stated purposes of the two standards below:
"CPMs are a limited set of national measures, designed to help gauge progress towards protection of the environment and public health." (from CPM memo)
"These government-wide financial statements will help users:
Assess the finances of the government in its entirety,
including the year's operating results
Determine whether the government's overall financial position
improved or deteriorated
Evaluate whether the government's current-year revenues
were sufficient to pay for current-year services
See the cost of providing services to its citizenry
See how the government finances its programs—through
user fees and other program revenues versus general tax
Understand the extent to which the government has invested
in capital assets, including roads, bridges, and other
Make better comparisons between governments."
(from GASB statement 34 into)
Donald Sutherland wrote:Here is my latest report on codified state government environmental indicators and environmental financial accounting. "I presume we are using appropriate current GASB standards for our environmental performance reporting," says Steve Adams, an economists in the office of strategic projects & planning at the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, "but I am an economists and I don't deal with accounting standards." Environmental officials in Colorado, Wisconsin, Ohio, and Minnesota also expressed similar clueless responses.
No state ECOS official contacted could speculate on the merger of CPMS with environmental GASB, but it seems an inevitable merger that could very possibly set a national precedent for codified government enforced financial environmental performance reporting. (C)Donald Sutherland 1999
Green Mountain Institute for Environmental Democracy
104 East State Street
Montpelier, VT 05602