Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Lobbying Ordinance: Complacency At The Bat
by Keith Higginbotham | City Beat | 02.15.10 | 
| Text Size:
+



6:00am | Long Beach has certainly had it share of winter weather lately and your intrepid writer is certain that many of you are longing for the warmth of summer. So for this week's look at City Hall, where the council moved forward with a lobbying ordinance, here is a
ADVERTISEMENT
summary version of what happened--set to the timeless poem of those warmer months, "Casey At The Bat," with all due apologies to author Ernest Thayer.

Lobby reform was the talk of the Long Beach Nine that day;
New rules were in the making, so the newspapers did say,
All thanks to Mr. Beckster, of recent Napa-trip fame,
And friend King Murchison, of the local lobbying game.

As the item was called up, Mr. Shannon gave it a read;
"Here are the rules that I propose, the rules that we all need,
We must register the lobbyists--list them all by name,
So we know each of the players, and how they play the game."

But who is a lobbyist? asked more than one of the Nine;
A lobbyist, said the Attorney, is just as we define:
One who lobbies each three months, for 50 hours or more,
Or makes thirty-two hundred, from those they lobby for.

O'Donnell took the mike and in the most quizzical way,
Asked, this doesn't exempt anyone who does want to play,
What it does, O'Donnell said, to make it clear as it were,
Is set a threshold for those that don't need to register.

Correct, agreed Assistant Attorney Heather Mahood,
Hours and/or payments are the things that decide who would,
Register with the city unless an exemption they do get,
Such as city unions or 501(c) non-profits.

But Mahood made it clear, this does not fit you or I,
Only those getting paid to lobby, influence and ply,
The citizens, said O'Donnell, were his real main concern,
And keeping Council offices a place where they can turn.

So the Nine talked on, and then gave the public a turn,
And the public made it clear that the lobbyist must learn,
That City Hall is not for sale and not even for rent,
So these new rules must be tough so none can be bent.

But like rules in the past, rules today, and those yet to come,
The devilish details always leave small loopholes for some,
Worse yet for you and I, and what these rules will never do,
Is make accountable the lapses of a City Hall few.

See, these rules rely on honor as the principle way,
To keep lobbyists honest in what they do every day,
Yes, honor, from the lobbyists, whose career is to ply,
To gift, to cajole, to pressure and to buy.

The rules require lobbyists to report all their time,
To report with due diligence every penny and dime,
But there is no real enforcement, to give just a hint,
That the lobbyists are truthful, and no rules have been bent.

But worst of all these new rules, in their wishy-washy state,
Require not one lobbyist to report any contacts they make,
Not a call, not a letter, not an email nor fine meal,
These rules still keep dark how a lobbied deal becomes a deal.

Now this is no game, played on a grass field with bat and ball,
But a real test of ethics as they work in City Hall,
So any rules that ignore where City Hall's ethics are at,
Just assure the public that Complacency is at bat.

Yes, Complacency, that brute, who does nothing nor tries,
To really tackle the problems or even find out why,
And so when voting this April tell the Nine with a shout,
That perhaps it is time that this Complacency strikes out.

Click here to read our policy on covering the Long Beach City Council. 


Comments
Click Here to Join the Discussion on this Story

12 Comments so far.
Diane
Your article/s are a form of lobbying

Mike
When our City is run by Unions and the City Council is elected by strong Union influence, why should they be exempt from disclosure like "Lobbyists"? Are Unions not Lobbying both City and City Council daily????? Wake Up Long Beach, the Unions are bigger offenders than any Lobbyist and yet we continue to be led around by the nose by Councilmembers that want transparancy in Government.

watching
wrong, worng, wrong. Unions arent exempt - only the city employee when addressing a contract or working condition. DO you think city employees have a right to communicate with their EMPLOYER about those issues? It's not lobbying - it's employee-employer communicaiton,a a very different animals. This ordinance absolutely gives the city enforcement powers over professional lobyyists - people who a make a profit by influencing city council. It's a business, and it was up to now essentially unregulated - so now it is regulated. Throwing in labor negotiations, 501c3's etc would not have been inclusive or democratic - it would have been SILLY because those people arent professional lobbyists. Instead of kneejerk reactions, how about educating yourselves people/

Keith H
Thanks for your comments as always. 'Watching' is correct, the new rules only exempt city employee unions when it comes to contract negotiations or items contained within labor contracts with the city. And, 'Mike,' you may want to take a look at my Jan. 14 column titled "Of Pucks and Puppets." For the column I examined every campaign contribution ever made to each of the sitting Council members and found that developers/real estate people contribute more than 2.5 times more money than the various unions combined. In total, unions contributed a total of about 7 percent of all contributions to the sitting Council members' various campaigns. Some may consider this a large number, but it is very close to the amount also given by attorneys and the amount donated/loaned by the candidates to their own campaigns. I know it is easy to say the unions are running City Hall, but it would be nice to see some mention by folks of how exactly they are doing this. And simply saying that they have a good contract is not evidence of running anything--labor negotiations are governed by very strict federal rules. City Hall employee unions have succeeded in obtaining the terms they have for one simple reason: City Hall never brings their "A" game to the bargaining table. The unions do every single time.

Bixby Knoll Resident
Where is the line drawn between appropriate city employee contact and the affiliation of the union with access to the politician? The truth of the matter is that most politicians receive their funding from Unions...so, a slave to the master they will always be.

get a life
Keith - Unions may not contribute as much as developers, but no one can argue that the unions by far and away turn out walkers for the candidates that they support. Developers by their nature don't walk they right checks, but look at past Steve Neal and Val Lerch race - Neal almost won with lots of union walkers in last month of the election. In addition you are not factoring in independent expenditures done by the unions - Unite Here and others in support of a candidate. Any candidate is very nervous about going against POA and/or Fire and Unite Here if it means that those groups will walk against the candidate - usually the outcome favors that pro-union candidate unless you are running in the 3rd.

Pat
Thank you, I didn't even know there was a wall at City Hall, I just thought we as citizen/taxpayers we had access just as any other. The power brokers are the developers, major retail and the Chamber. The rest of us who are concerned have actually been turn down for a visit to some councilpersons who actually know how to play with lobbists. Alas, blame those damned unions...aha, blame the tree huggers, the CAVE people or the 8th district that just wants equity.

realist
@bibxy knolls residents: wrong again. Most councilors get most of their money from developers and owner types, not unions. As far as "where's the line" - that's not rocket science. Once again, people love to complain. The Council has taken a step for openness and accountability, and all anyone can do is whine. This is one of the strictest ordinances in california and in the whole country. What the heck do you want from the city? Lobbyit Gestapo?

Keith H
Thanks for the comments. Just wanted to let 'realist' know that the new LB ordinance is far from the strictest. You can look up the Council agenda item which includes a comparison of more than a dozen cities' lobbying ordinances and easily see how lacking this ordinance is. It does not even require lobbyists to report, ever, who they have met with in City Hall. How is that even a difference over the status quo? Oh, wait, lobbyists now have to pay for what amounts to an annual access license in order to meet with folks at City Hall.

Report
No matter what the grandstanders say, they leave loopholes to drive trucks through. The only answer is to require all contributions publicly, period. Let us decide when we see who donated and how much. Schipske et al are just trying to get publicity. Ask Schipske how much the teachers union gave her, without giving it directly to her. She and the others bankrupted TALB. Unions should not be the only ones buying elections. They are the reason our city, state and nation are all bankrupt. Vote against anyone endorsed by the unions.

Paul
They left out the non profits. Mental Health America, that takes in millons a year, is a, "non profit." Just ask how much their excs make with their perks? Also, through their lobby, they were able to convince the Council to bus into town from county wide locations, mentally ill homeless. The neighbors did not have a chance against this kind of lobby. Non profits need the same kind of rules, or the whole idea is another non enforceable joke on the Citizens by the Council. They all need to go. Bob too.

John Greet
Nice job, Mr. H. I don't think the current proposal goes nearly far enough toward better understanding and monitoring lobbyists in our city and I've expressed that to the Mayor and Council through other channels. Lobbying, as an activity, doesn't change just because a non-profit or PAC or neighborhood organization is doing the lobbying. If we're concerned about the fees required, those can be waived on a case-by-case basis but such organizations should still be required to register and report their lobbying activities.

City Beat
Keith Higginbotham takes you inside City Hall and reports weekly on the decisions being made.

Keith Higginbotham is a freelance journalist and writer who most recently served as the West Coast editor for the trade magazine American Shipper, covering the shipping and logistics industries. Prior to this, he served as the Advertising and Multimedia Manager for the Port of Long Beach. He began his journalism career more than a decade ago as the Trade and Transportation beat reporter at the Long Beach Press-Telegram.

Keith's Community

Leadership Long Beach
Friends of Colorado Lagoon
Keith's Archives

Show All Archives


About Us | Contact Us | Policies