The District Weekly - Latest Comments in LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Randy Cannon, MPA — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 02:10:53 -0000

I, for one, believe registration of lobbyists to be a God send. The county, state, and federal government all keep track of lobbyists, their clients, the person or agency being lobbied, and most importantly, how much lobbyists have been paid by their clients. It makes it so much easier for someone breaking into the business to find clients and know how much to competitively charge for services.

Fees for registration/renewal and ethics courses are not much. So as long as there are no additional taxes on top of what I already pay, I'm all for it.

Sincerely,
Randy Cannon, MPA
A Public Policy Advocate

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

wswaim — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 12:44:10 -0000

This conversation continues with the updated story here:

http://thedistrictweekly.co...

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Elizabeth — Fri, 15 Aug 2008 11:42:02 -0000

Hmmm ... Let's get this straight; on Tuesday, LA Councilman Huizar was fined for taking illegal contributions. And you want a tough LOBBYIST ordinance??? If I ask you to jump off a bridge …

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Lobbythis — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:55:00 -0000

OK so this town is dirty veeerry dirty. All I see at events are lobbyist. They are former city employees with fist full of dollars.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Mike Ruehle — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:46:44 -0000

On Tuesday, LA Councilman Huizar was fined $15,000 for taking illegal contributions from lobbyists. Long Beach voters deserve to know how common similar acts occur that influence our city staff and elected officials. Without a tough lobbyist ordinance, Long Beach's reputatation will continue to suffer.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Mr. "Sloppy" Suspicious — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 15:09:33 -0000

dancing Queen (and RH),
After putting Thank You For Smoking on my list of films to see (thanks to you) I failed to catch the Austin Powers reference (along with the films) and am mortified to have thought you to be so thick as to have missed my point when it is I who is the dull one. Maybe I'm wrong about everything else too. Horrors.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

RH — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:06:06 -0000

#31 (To Dr. Evil)

Hey Dude---dancing queen was just messing with you. I though her little satire
on your letter was pretty cool. Guess you were hurt cuz you replied with all your numerical statements--hate that. To clue you in. Mini-Me was Dr. Evil's clone--who always wanted to express himself through written notes. He was really short.
Since you're bumed about Dr. Evil, I'll call you what you wanted--Dr.Suspicious.
Hey, register non-profits-- remember no one has to register unless they earn
$1000 a month lobbying.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

90277rulezon — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:51:35 -0000

I believe non-profits that operate taxpayer controlled assets should be required to register with the city. Furthermore, they should be subjected to biannual financial audits so that there are no questionable discrepancies. Based on what occurred over at the Queen Mary, Long Beach has already experienced what can happen when a non-profit entity becomes a cash-cow for someone's personal inurement and wealth.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

What's_in_a _name? — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 09:36:27 -0000

The city could require non-profits to register as lobbyists, but waive the fees for them-- especially in cases where the group is legitimate.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Mr. Suspicious — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 03:25:37 -0000

dancing Queen,
#1 Please note my moniker is Mr. Suspicious and not Dr. Evil.
#2 I have no new company.
#3 You do not know me.
#4 Forming a phoney non-profit IS diabolical and has been and is being done. (See the saga of Jack Abramoff for a primer)
#5 It does work. The successful ones don't get caught and become famous.
#6 You won't find ME out, much less someone who is bent on illegal activity.
#7 I have no idea who Mini Me is.
#8 You should not be such a sloppy reader. We are actually on the same side.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

dancing Queen — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 23:33:06 -0000

Dear Dr. Evil,

I can only presume that you are naming your new company after yourself, and I am completely blown away when I realize you are STILL one of the cleverest, most devious men I know.
To suggest forming a phony non-profit, (for profit) and then comparing it to true non-profits like the Salvation Army, Goodwill or the American Red Cross is truly diabolical...and so like you! But dear Dr. Evil--it wouldn't work. The people in my neighorhood are completely incorruptible, especially when it comes to Home Depot!! And you,always the villian-- would be found out. Fines? Jail? One can hope.....My very best regards to Mini Me.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Mr. Suspicious — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:19:43 -0000

So if I'm Evil, Inc. and want to push my project through I will form a locally run non-profit "Citizens For Home Depots In Your Neighborhood" and pump it full of payola exempt from scrutiny? Isn't this going to be a loophole? Why shouldn't Everyone lobbying have to report? Shell organizations or non-profits with ulterior agendas would become the norm. Just a thought.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

dancing Queen — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 19:52:28 -0000

ALERT...ALERT....Lobbyists on board this blog---And they aren't flying below the radar.
Mr. Dennis...if you had taken the effort to attend the Long Beach Elections Oversight meeting regarding the Lobbyist Ordinace you would know that non-profits are to be exempt in this ordinance.
HT (Dancing Queen)

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Dennis — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 18:22:07 -0000

JB (26): What about non-profits who have paid staff that lobby on behalf of their issue or organization? From catching up on post-vacation reading it appears that non-profits would be subject to this ordinance.

And again: what would change if the ordinance is passed? Would our city government change in any substantial form--other than more bureaucracy?

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Dennis — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 14:07:50 -0000

What defines "lobbyist?" Only those who contact government officials on behalf of private/public companies and put forth their interests, opinions and projects?

What about homeowners associations that wish to have an alley closed, or new trees planted, or parking meter money re-allocated? Are they lobbyists? Would they have to register?

What about business improvement associations like those found in Bixby Knolls, Belmont Shore or downtown who wish ordinances or laws that affect their business districts or streets? Are they lobbyists? Would they have to register?

What about the police and fire associations who request more funding, or new stations, or new equipment for their personnel; and who also door knock and mail campaign literature? Are they lobbyists? Would they have to register?

What about the contractor who specializes in a certain area of town and one of the expert skills he brings to the job is his knowledge of the building department and how to obtain variances? Is he/she a lobbyists? Would he/she have to register?

How about the writer/editorialist who presses on a specific issue, say reconfiguring the breakwater, or not tearing down a bookstore? Lobbying or not?

My issue with any lobbyist ordinance crafted by council members is how they define "lobbyist".

Just like with the "ethics commission" it appears an easy way to pass the buck of personal responsibility to an ordinance or other body so they do not have to worry about it. And at the end of the day what difference will it really make? Seriously will having Carl Kemp or Mike Murchison, or Randy Gordon or Steve James register as "lobbyist" really change anything? If you think so please tell me how.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Elizabeth — Sun, 10 Aug 2008 16:01:53 -0000

Mr. John B and others. I wholeheartedly agree, we do have the right to know what persons and organizations are attempting to influence our elected officials, and by what means they are employing to do so. And yes, this information should be reported to us as a routine part of government’s overall accountability to us.

Please allow me to repeat myself … reported to US as a routine part of GOVERNMENT’S ACCOUNTABILITY to us.

I strongly believe it is the responsibility of the public servant to report and to be held accountable to the public for their work and for their actions. To hold a private citizen accountable for a public official’s comings and goings is catastrophically wrong.

I happen to believe it’s a good boundary to have in place an ordinance requiring Lobbyists to register. Knowing who the Lobbyists are is fine. But why ask the Lobbyist to pay a fee and write reports? The fees proposed in the ordinance will not cover the costs of the new city employee and department. And the writing of reports that are to include personal financial information is just plain wrong. What a private citizen earns is nobody else’s business but the private citizen. Way too much government here. We are holding the wrong people accountable. A Lobbyist being held accountable to the public is plain silliness. Once again I strongly believe our elected public officials are the ones to be held answerable, seriously folks, we elected them -- don’t they work for us?

Come on people, stop whining, and wake up! It’s time to start holding our elected government officials accountable. Ask them to open and publish their calendars, viewable online, it’s easy to do and wouldn’t cost us- the City, a dime. FYI: Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Mayor Villaraigosa publish their calendars.

By demanding our public officials open their calendars, we can then hold them accountable and in-turn, it will provide us with the factual information we can use to:

1. Question our elected officials more intelligently

2. Provide better input and direction to our elected officials

3. More closely monitor our elected officials, the decisions they make and the actions they take on our behalf

4. Vote more intelligently during elections

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

90277rulezon — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 23:30:27 -0000

Diana: In the industry that is politics, money is the gun.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

835 — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 00:23:32 -0000

Food for thought: Sex offenders and political lobbyists are the only people legally mandated in California to register their names, addresses and activites with the state.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Diana Lejins — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 23:06:05 -0000

It is difficult for me to understand why the lobbyists are being villified here. I don't believe they were holding a gun to anyone's head.

It is the City Officials who buy into this that are to blame and should be held accountable. It's easy to legislate what others must do.

If there is to be an ordinance, then the most important factor in this whole scenario should be governed--that of gifting. This is what needs to be prohibited. It should include campaign contributions in any form, including manpower.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Gunther — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 22:51:28 -0000

Follow the trail of greasy palms behind most major crap projects in the downtown and chances are you'll find a smiling lobbyist.

Most lobbyists are a step away from being the clipboard carrying individuals that you find in front of grocery stores trying to collect signatures for a cause they could probably care less about just to earn a buck.

Long Beach grow some balls and clamp down on lobbyists!

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Diana Lejins — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 22:14:36 -0000

I was at that same Ethics Committee meeting where the Chair (B. Lowenthal) specifically called this a "sunshine" law. Similarly, the Brown Act which protects public input is the "mother" of sunshine ordinances. Yet, after waiting through almost an hour of pro-legislation dribble, time ran out for public comment. Not only was the public cut short, but some were interrupted before their paltry one minute was up with counter remarks.

Additionally, there is no provision in this statute for the City Officials to make their contacts public. It's a great way for them to avoid accountability. It seems that transparency and public scrutiny is only for others, not for our electeds.

While I'm not necessarily fond of many of the projects that have been lobbied, I believe it is a very slippery slope to prohibit or discourage freedom of speech.

People forget that those rights denied to others may one day be denied to them.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Juan Pardell — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 15:12:14 -0000

This matter is rather simple. If the lobbyists don't like it, there has to be a reason. Why doesn't Mike Murchison, or Carl Kemp, provide a written piece as to why they oppose having to register with the city as a lobbyist?

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Dave Wielenga — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 10:42:31 -0000

Hey, Surfer Meg! Can you e-mail me at dave@thedistrictweekly.com? I need a little clarification. Thanks!

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

RH Naples — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 00:57:37 -0000

Surfer Meg....I love you!!
I have also come up with the same conclusions after spending 3 hours online.
Yes, these same committee members went through the same thing in 2007, even same remarks. To fool the public-what's new? ButI I, as you, am sorely disappointed in Gerri. I thought she was a straight shooter!! All pretense.
The LA Lobbyist ordinance is of course the best one...once you compare the others. Have learned alot about my city. And Mayor Bob, if you think this is a "no brainer" make it happen!l Why wait til 2009??.

Surfer Meg, I hope you score some big ones on the southside of Huntington.

Re: LOBBYISTS LOBBYING AGAINST ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REGISTER THEM

Surfer meg — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 23:44:11 -0000

I also surf the net!
If you want to be really disillasioned with Long Beach....get ready!
Did we really think that on Tuesday the Elections/Oversight Committee was trying for a Lobbying ordinance? Shame on us. This Committee met twice last month with same lobbyists. Please go into Legistar on site and also look at their 7/08/08 meeting and look at the Legislative file text where you will see the comparisions Heather Mahood, (Assistent city attorney) did on major city Lobbying ordinances. Amazingly. they are all from March 2007. Well....then go back to the same committee meeting on April 10, 2007. Same Committee members and the same lobbyists at the meeting.... AND almost the same wordage as in the meeting on 8/05/08....LA or Oakland...what shall we do? At that time (4/10/07) they had even drawn up a draft Lobbyist ordinance which you can download and be appalled at how anemic it is. Meanwhile on 7/08/08, the meeting had Heather Hart, Los Angles Ethics Commissioner there. There is no cost for the city on a Lobbying ordinance. If we did it L.A's way they charge $450.00 per year for a Lobbyist to register, (much less then my association dues for my business) and $75.00 a client. No gifts or campaign contributions from Lobbyists allowed.. no neighborhood Association Lobbying unless ID'd. LA' registry is electronic...pays for itself and then some, and penalties . Oakland (on the other hand is so weak..allows contributions and gifts etc) Why would Schipske , who makes you feel this is a new endeavor...even though they have been through it in 2007.... say they were leaning towards Oakland's Ordinance. Softer? We live in LA County. Most of the Lobbyists at the meeting on Tuesday raised their hands to say they were on another city's Lobbyist Register, (probably LA). LA's Municipal Lobbying ordinance is clean, and strict. Gerri.Bonnie and Val, I am so disappointed in your charade. Fumble some more.