City Councilors Jay Harney, Emily Norton and Jim Cote are proposing new rules requiring lobbyists to register with the city before communicating with any elected or appointed officials, The TAB’s Jonathan Dame reports.
The proposed draft ordinance allows for all sorts of exemptions, including local, state and federal officials, residents, non-profits, etc. Anybody not on that list would pay a $100 fee and have to report on the items they’re lobbying for.
My question for Councilors Harney, Norton, Cote and anyone else with experience or knowledge about this is: Why? Are there specific examples where you felt paid lobbyists sought to buy your votes? Are there outside groups out there showering you, the mayor or department heads with gifts, donations or lunches? Or are we mostly adding another task and process to of City Clerks office? And if it is a problem, why all the exemptions?
And to be clear, I’m not saying this is or is not a problem. I honestly don’t know the answer. Specific examples from past encounters will be helpful.
“Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.” –Groucho Marx
I’m convinced that the wealthiest person in America is the guy who sells red tape to the government.
Mike Striar, that is a great line! I am so stealing it.
Steve Jobs once said ” perception IS reality.” People are sayin it’s hard to imagine how developers are just getting a green light on all these projects without some sort of payback. Just stuff I hear on the Internet….
@Rick: are you implying that our city councilors are being bribed or somehow bought? That’s a pretty outrageous accusation.
Time and time again, the easy solution is for government officials to create hurdles for non-government officials. If there is a problem, why not have government officials report lobbying?
Agree with all of the above. I have no clever retort. Ted and Mike win hands down.
@Jane: you agree with Rick?
OMG, no! Missed that one. Thank you.
My understanding is that there is an informal practice that city councillors won’t even take campaign donations from developers. I would be very curious which lobbyists we are concerned about and in which ways they are able to exert influence.
I say this as someone who strongly supports lobbying disclosure and registration laws at the state and federal level and would strongly support them at the local level if there is evidence it is needed.
While you’re at it – how about updating the business registrations in the City Clerk’s office. More than half of the DBA’s don’t even exist anymore..
Do other municipalities in Massachusetts require lobbyists to register at the local level? Sounds awfully redundant to me.
Hi all,
Reviewing and potentially implementing a policy on lobbysist activity in the City of Newton reflects the ongoing efforts of your City Council to keep the government open and transparent. This action wasn’t taken as lightly as reading the Tab article may seem, and has been ongoing since the election cycle closed in 2015. Delving into this prior to the election may have been distracting and polarizing so by waiting until mid-term the hope is that we are able to have a great debate and review the need. Municipal lobbying was discussed with the members of the legal department, researched by one of the city attorney’s, and after an extensive amount of back office work, there appeared to be a need, with legal then putting together a draft that is “Lobby Registering Light.”
Reading some of the comments on this string reflects a great amount of curiousity and concern among the contributors. These comments will provide useful direction in the discussion, but in the summer when it’s challenging to put together new docket items we were able get this ready for the fall. Docketing this item on lobbying you find one of the most liberal city councilors, teaming up with one of the more conservative city councilors, joined by a long time city councilor noted for his staunch advocacy for his consitutenets, and you can see the range of concern and support.
To address a few comments:
*Redundant: there are no rules governing lobbyists in municipal affairs. Some cities like Boston are weighing this as an option (Marty probably wishes it were in place last year!), and a state rep has started the process of putting together a municipal lobbying bill. Both Legal and the Clerk’s office commented that we need not opt in to the state proposal if we have this in place, potentially avoiding the usual excessive load of state requirements.
*City Council agreements to not accept funds from developers (not the only concern in such a busy city): Really? (urban legend)
*Red Tape: The only red tape will be on the lobbysist.
*Residential concerns: This item will provide a tool to show fairness to residents by showing them who’s in the game. There may have never been an issue and this will be the “check and balance.”
The only objective for promoting this program is to do what is right by both the residents, and those seeking to do business (of any kind) in the City of Newton.
Thanks Councilor Cote but I’m wondering if you can answer my original question/request which is to provide specific examples of the problem you are looking to solve?
I had conversations with three of your colleagues today (not the docketers) and none could site an example of a paid lobbyist seeking to win their support in any the ways we worry about happening at the state and federal level. And campaign donations are already reported, so why do we need another place to report that?
As you know I spent 15 years as a journalist or managing journalists in this city. I think everyone would agree we were a very aggressive watchdog of city government in those 15 years. But this concern never came up then and I don’t recall any reports in the TAB or elsewhere of anything like is since.
So please, some examples would be enlightening.
As others have said, prove to me that this is a real problem or potential problem and I’ll enthusiastically support it.
@Greg Reibman: First a comment on this site: I just made a detailed response and then when I hit submit, forgetting to add my name, it blanked out the screen and my comments. (now you get the Reader’s Digest version)
My comment in reply is simply that my colleagues in municipal government at all levels may not recall speaking with a lobbyist for the very reason that it was not in that lobbyist’s best interest to identify themselves as such. They may also not be aware of what is considered acceptable lobbying and what is not?
Please stop looking for a “smoking gun” reason to implement prudent public risk management policies designed to protect the residents of the city. Federal and state lobbying regulations were implemented when “doing business as usual,” changed in the view of the public.
Taking action to establish a minimally invasive process that only burdens the lobbyist could save us from potential damage down the road.
The value of Newton property and the strength of our balance sheet, tied to being a residential locale for wealthy individuals, makes establishing policy such as this a priority. Issues such as zoning, selling goods/services to the city, using the lure of popular social issues to profit with city programs, etc leave an open area of concern.
Rather than challenge the need I would ask for supporters to agree that openness works for all parties, and that is no knock on anyone to implement a disclosure process.
I really do not believe that I both ran and was re-elected to maintain the status quo!
@Councilor Cote:
Your suggestion that your colleagues aren’t aware of what is considered acceptable lobbying is concerning. Isn’t there a guideline about what is acceptable for a municipal official to accept as a gift?
This statement of yours also concerned me:
I have no opinion yet on this issue, but I get nervous when elected officials start talking about protecting the public without being clear about the problem they wish to solve. Reminds me of politicians suggesting that Voter ID laws are needed.
Man, I just don’t get it. There are so many real problems to fix in Newton. This just seems like an incredible waste of time. I’m also concerned about the First Amendment implications, and adding any more bureaucracy to government. I want to know how we’re going to insure safe drinking water in our schools and parks. A real problem. Lets fix the real problems first.
@Gail Spector: Please note that I am only explaining the basics of why this is being considered, but its a reach for you to assume lobbying means gifts, etc,.
Lobbying is communicating with officials for a particular cause/reason, and I have not one concern, nor thought that anyone is violating current laws. When I mentioned a city official may not realize they are speaking with a lobbyist, I am citing this as an example only that a person may be promoting something and you could quite possibly not be aware of their status, or affiliation. That is all.
As to working on more important matters, which is an extremely valid point, I serve on the Committees of Land Use, and Public Safety & Transportation. This docket item is a result of my 3 years on Land Use, and my goal of keeping the public in the loop, and in a comfort zone. During the Land Use public hearings and meetings I see the anxiety and anguish on the faces of the public, and hear their questions as to whose listening to them, and who represents who. On Public Safety, given my experience in this field, I stay involved in Police and Fire matters to assist and ensure my colleagues are up on important topics, and that priorities match up with training and equipment.
Thank you to all for your valuable comments, which will help frame discussion
So Councilor Cote, is it proper to assume then that this concern stems from Land Use activities? It’s fine if that’s the case but, again, it’s important to know what’s broken before instituting a fix.
And if that’s the case, have there been times when someone approached you or your colleagues or city officials claiming to be, say, ordinary citizens but it turns out they’re being paid to support or oppose a Land Use matter? (And I assume you don’t mean an attorney hired to represent the applicant or opponent(s)?)
And if it hasn’t happened, is that still the concern you’re trying to address?
Great feedback! Off to my daughter’s wedding for the weekend. This will have to continue down the road.
Have a great day!
There’s an effort at the state level to create a standardized procedure for municipal lobbying disclosure, should cities and towns want to use it. Senate Bill 2169 embodies these procedures. If I find out anything more about the bill or specific examples of concerns, I’ll follow up.
Nothing’s wrong but rumors fly that councilors must be getting something if they choose to support a development project, so to set their rumoring minds to rest, we want to pass a new piece of legislation. It won’t stop the rumors.
@bryan barash: The bill proposed by State Senator Michael Brady-D, Brockton is referenced in the Tab article.