Assemblyman Brian Jones, R-Santee, went to the Fairmont Kea Lani resort in Maui for a week. The $2,415 junket was courtesy of the California Independent Voter Project, a San Diego nonprofit with funding from oil companies, utilities, pharmaceutical companies and a cigarette maker, according to the newspaper.
...Assemblyman Marty Block, D-San Diego, took a $10,735 Italy trip paid for by the California Foundation on the Environment and Economy, a San Francisco-based nonprofit made up of oil companies, utilities and environmental groups. The trip included plant tours and meetings on energy issues, from solar power to smart meters.
Block also went on a $3,883 trip to Israel sponsored by Faith2Green, a Los Angeles-based nonprofit made up of faith-based organizations interested in environmental issues.
...Not all the trips had big budgets. Sen. Juan Vargas, D-San Diego, reported accepting a $219 gift of lodging and meals from the California Independent Petroleum Association as part of a symposium.
Report: SD lawmakers received overseas trips
Associated Press
March 11, 2012
Several San Diego County legislators received all-expenses-paid trips last year to Hawaii, Mexico, Israel and Italy _ renewing calls from critics that state gift-giving rules should be tightened.
Disclosure reports show the treks, bundled with meetings and plant tours, were sponsored by nonprofits that receive contributions from influence peddlers with a stake in legislation and the budget, according to an investigation by UT San Diego (http://bit.ly/ApmvwP) published Sunday.
Representatives from the corporations, utilities, labor unions and environmental groups often joined the excursions, giving them access to lawmakers, the newspaper said.
State law limits the value of gifts. But travel, if funded by a nonprofit, can be accepted as long as lawmakers participate in a meaningful way _ by giving a speech or sitting on a panel, for example.
California Common Cause, a government accountability group, says it's a loophole that should be closed. The group has lobbied for tightening gift-giving rules and providing full disclosure of who is contributing how much to the nonprofit group listed as the trip's sponsor.
"This is another way to get money into politics," Phillip Ung, policy director of California Common Cause, told UT San Diego.
The newspaper cited 10 lawmakers who reported accepting trips in 2011. Among them was Assemblywoman Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, who took a $5,866 trek to Israel to discuss homeland security and Iran. It was sponsored by the Jewish Federation of Los Angeles...
Showing posts with label lobbyists and lawmakers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lobbyists and lawmakers. Show all posts
Sunday, March 11, 2012
Thursday, October 13, 2011
San Diego Ethics Commission refuses to release information about its attorney-lobbyists or attorney who works for SEDC
“You have an excellent reputation in the community; you are an extremely careful person, and I don’t see why your answer should not be sufficient,” Commissioner and retired Judge William Howatt Jr. told Fulhorst.
The ethics of the Ethics Commission
By Dave Maass
San Diego City Beat
Oct 12, 2011
At a September meeting of the San Diego Ethics Commission, the agency’s executive director, Stacey Fulhorst, presented the mother of all catch-22s.
While inspecting lobbyist-activity records, CityBeat had learned that private attorneys retained by the Ethics Commission are also working as counsel for the Southeastern Economic Development Corporation (SEDC), a city redevelopment agency, and as lobbyists for private companies. The relationships seem to present a potential conflict of interest on multiple levels, since the commission both regulates lobbyists and enforces ethics in city government, including SEDC. Asked about this, Fulhorst said the law firm—Stutz, Artiano, Shinoff and Holtz—and the commission have put several firewalls in place.
However, since attorney-client confidentiality covers legal agreements, Fulhorst couldn’t offer proof of these safeguards without first asking the commission’s seven members to release the information.
“I would personally recommend that you do approve a waiver, a very limited waiver of just, literally, a handful of paragraphs, because I do think it’s important to demonstrate to the public that we recognize it would not be appropriate for us to receive legal services from the same law firm that was providing general counsel to SEDC on SEDC matters,” Fulhorst told commissioners on Sept. 23.
Paradoxically, Fulhorst couldn’t show the commissioners the relevant paragraphs because they’d then become public record. Nor could the commission turn to its legal counsel for advice, since the lawyers were the subject of the discussion.
The commission deliberated for 15 minutes on whether an agency that investigates conflicts of interests should be transparent regarding its own potential conflicts. Some members wondered why CityBeat wouldn’t just take Fulhorst’s word.
“You have an excellent reputation in the community; you are an extremely careful person, and I don’t see why your answer should not be sufficient,” Commissioner and retired Judge William Howatt Jr. told Fulhorst.
Some worried about setting a precedent.
“I just think we should be careful with granting such a waiver,” Commissioner Larry Westfall, an accountant, said. “Once you do it, we start to open the door for every little, two-bit newspaper in town to come here and make requests for information, too.”
Some recognized the public interest in releasing the document, but Commissioner and attorney John O’Neill alone saw that as overriding other concerns.
“I think it puts to rest any suspicion there is any impropriety here,” O’Neill said. “I don’t think it helps us to not give the document.”
The commission voted 5-1 (one member was absent) against releasing the information, rejecting Fulhorst’s offer to conduct more research on an issue that wouldn’t have come up a year ago.
With Proposition E in 2004, San Diego voters authorized the Ethics Commission to hire its own legal counsel instead of relying on the advice of the City Attorney’s office. Proponents argued it was problematic for the city attorney to represent both the commission and the city officials subject to commission investigations. They also noted that City Attorney staff are also subject to commission enforcement actions.
For the first five years, the commission employed a staff attorney, but when the lawyer departed last year, the agency decided to contract with an outside firm to allow more flexibility. The Stutz firm submitted a bid and, Fulhorst said, was selected because of the “unique expertise and knowledge” of Christina Cameron, a longtime City Hall staffer specializing in ethics and campaign reform who’d recently earned a law degree. Under the terms of the bid, Cameron would serve as a general counsel, working under the supervision of “associate general counsel” Prescilla Dugard and Leslie Devaney. All three were serving as counsel to SEDC and lobbyists, but the firm agreed that Cameron would be severed from SEDC matters and no longer register as a lobbyist.
In the first half of 2011, the Ethics Commission paid the Stutz firm $48,000 in fees, and another $3,000 to a second firm that handles cases when a conflict arises. During the same period, the Stutz firm collected at least $203,000 from SEDC. As a lobbying organization, the firm represents EverFlow Resources, Staff Pro and Western Towing.
Fulhorst, Cameron and Devaney described to CityBeat many of the physical and procedural measures in place to protect against a conflict. The firm also amended its lobbyist reports following CityBeat’s inquiry to better reflect Devaney and Dugard’s involvement with the Ethics Commission: Each provided less than an hour of legal services in the first half of the year.
Tracy Westen, CEO of the Center for Governmental Studies, a Los Angeles-based watchdog organization, says he’s less concerned with the specific SEDC issue than he is alarmed to learn that registered lobbyists are providing legal advice to lobbyist regulators.
“Ideally, if you contract for ethics advice with outside counsel, you want that outside counsel to give you independent advice,” Westen says. “But if the outside counsel is also lobbying the city, its advice may tilt in favor of lobbyists in general. Simply recusing themselves from judgments involving a client they’re lobbying for is a good idea, but it does not purge them of pro-lobbyist sentiments.”
Of the 106 complaints processed by the commission in 2010, 38 percent—the largest portion—were alleged violations of the city’s lobbying ordinance, according to the commission’s annual report.
“If a matter were heavily related to lobbying and I felt it was inappropriate to talk to [Devaney or Dugard] because they are registered lobbyists, then I have other partners and other senior attorneys that I can work with if I need to,” Cameron says.
Westen says that’s not enough. “It’s very difficult for a law firm to purge itself of this appearance of a conflict if some partners are lobbying and others are not,” Westen says. “I think the city really needs to go to a law firm that is not doing lobbying.”
Fulhorst says that’s an impractical idea coming from someone “working in academia,” since the “vast majority of law firms” in San Diego are registered as lobbyists under the city ordinance...
The ethics of the Ethics Commission
By Dave Maass
San Diego City Beat
Oct 12, 2011
At a September meeting of the San Diego Ethics Commission, the agency’s executive director, Stacey Fulhorst, presented the mother of all catch-22s.
While inspecting lobbyist-activity records, CityBeat had learned that private attorneys retained by the Ethics Commission are also working as counsel for the Southeastern Economic Development Corporation (SEDC), a city redevelopment agency, and as lobbyists for private companies. The relationships seem to present a potential conflict of interest on multiple levels, since the commission both regulates lobbyists and enforces ethics in city government, including SEDC. Asked about this, Fulhorst said the law firm—Stutz, Artiano, Shinoff and Holtz—and the commission have put several firewalls in place.
However, since attorney-client confidentiality covers legal agreements, Fulhorst couldn’t offer proof of these safeguards without first asking the commission’s seven members to release the information.
“I would personally recommend that you do approve a waiver, a very limited waiver of just, literally, a handful of paragraphs, because I do think it’s important to demonstrate to the public that we recognize it would not be appropriate for us to receive legal services from the same law firm that was providing general counsel to SEDC on SEDC matters,” Fulhorst told commissioners on Sept. 23.
Paradoxically, Fulhorst couldn’t show the commissioners the relevant paragraphs because they’d then become public record. Nor could the commission turn to its legal counsel for advice, since the lawyers were the subject of the discussion.
The commission deliberated for 15 minutes on whether an agency that investigates conflicts of interests should be transparent regarding its own potential conflicts. Some members wondered why CityBeat wouldn’t just take Fulhorst’s word.
“You have an excellent reputation in the community; you are an extremely careful person, and I don’t see why your answer should not be sufficient,” Commissioner and retired Judge William Howatt Jr. told Fulhorst.
Some worried about setting a precedent.
“I just think we should be careful with granting such a waiver,” Commissioner Larry Westfall, an accountant, said. “Once you do it, we start to open the door for every little, two-bit newspaper in town to come here and make requests for information, too.”
Some recognized the public interest in releasing the document, but Commissioner and attorney John O’Neill alone saw that as overriding other concerns.
“I think it puts to rest any suspicion there is any impropriety here,” O’Neill said. “I don’t think it helps us to not give the document.”
The commission voted 5-1 (one member was absent) against releasing the information, rejecting Fulhorst’s offer to conduct more research on an issue that wouldn’t have come up a year ago.
With Proposition E in 2004, San Diego voters authorized the Ethics Commission to hire its own legal counsel instead of relying on the advice of the City Attorney’s office. Proponents argued it was problematic for the city attorney to represent both the commission and the city officials subject to commission investigations. They also noted that City Attorney staff are also subject to commission enforcement actions.
For the first five years, the commission employed a staff attorney, but when the lawyer departed last year, the agency decided to contract with an outside firm to allow more flexibility. The Stutz firm submitted a bid and, Fulhorst said, was selected because of the “unique expertise and knowledge” of Christina Cameron, a longtime City Hall staffer specializing in ethics and campaign reform who’d recently earned a law degree. Under the terms of the bid, Cameron would serve as a general counsel, working under the supervision of “associate general counsel” Prescilla Dugard and Leslie Devaney. All three were serving as counsel to SEDC and lobbyists, but the firm agreed that Cameron would be severed from SEDC matters and no longer register as a lobbyist.
In the first half of 2011, the Ethics Commission paid the Stutz firm $48,000 in fees, and another $3,000 to a second firm that handles cases when a conflict arises. During the same period, the Stutz firm collected at least $203,000 from SEDC. As a lobbying organization, the firm represents EverFlow Resources, Staff Pro and Western Towing.
Fulhorst, Cameron and Devaney described to CityBeat many of the physical and procedural measures in place to protect against a conflict. The firm also amended its lobbyist reports following CityBeat’s inquiry to better reflect Devaney and Dugard’s involvement with the Ethics Commission: Each provided less than an hour of legal services in the first half of the year.
Tracy Westen, CEO of the Center for Governmental Studies, a Los Angeles-based watchdog organization, says he’s less concerned with the specific SEDC issue than he is alarmed to learn that registered lobbyists are providing legal advice to lobbyist regulators.
“Ideally, if you contract for ethics advice with outside counsel, you want that outside counsel to give you independent advice,” Westen says. “But if the outside counsel is also lobbying the city, its advice may tilt in favor of lobbyists in general. Simply recusing themselves from judgments involving a client they’re lobbying for is a good idea, but it does not purge them of pro-lobbyist sentiments.”
Of the 106 complaints processed by the commission in 2010, 38 percent—the largest portion—were alleged violations of the city’s lobbying ordinance, according to the commission’s annual report.
“If a matter were heavily related to lobbying and I felt it was inappropriate to talk to [Devaney or Dugard] because they are registered lobbyists, then I have other partners and other senior attorneys that I can work with if I need to,” Cameron says.
Westen says that’s not enough. “It’s very difficult for a law firm to purge itself of this appearance of a conflict if some partners are lobbying and others are not,” Westen says. “I think the city really needs to go to a law firm that is not doing lobbying.”
Fulhorst says that’s an impractical idea coming from someone “working in academia,” since the “vast majority of law firms” in San Diego are registered as lobbyists under the city ordinance...
Friday, August 14, 2009
San Diego Ethics Commission will hold hearing on CCDC's Nancy Graham
No wonder Mayor Jerry Sanders refuses to reappoint Gil Cabrera to the Ethics Commission. Cabrera is actually investigating!
Case of CCDC's Graham set for ethics hearing
Commission also fines lobbyists
By Craig Gustafson
Union-Tribune Staff Writer
August 13, 2009
Nancy Graham:
Position: Former CCDC president
Tenure: Hired at CCDC in December 2005, resigned in July 2008
Salary: Was paid $248,000
Background: Lawyer; former partner in N-K Ventures LLC, which was involved in the development of urban in-fill projects; former mayor of West Palm Beach, Fla. Faced conflict-of-interest charges due to her development ties.
The San Diego Ethics Commission on Thursday called for a special hearing against former Centre City Development Corp. president Nancy Graham over conflict-of-interest issues.
The commission generally reaches settlements with its investigation targets before reaching the hearing stage that Graham's case has now reached.
The investigation began a year ago, shortly after Graham resigned from the nonprofit city agency amid criticism over undisclosed business ties to developers Related Cos. and Lennar Corp. Both had business before the agency.
The probe focuses on her relationship with Lennar, which was one of several developers trying to build a 1,929-room Marriott hotel at Ballpark Village, just east of Petco Park. Lennar eventually pulled out of the project, but not before Graham became involved.
At issue is the Florida development business Graham owned with her former husband. Their company partnered with Related and Lennar on a Florida condo project, which netted the couple's company more than $7 million before expenses and taxes. Graham never reported income from the venture on her San Diego economic-interest forms.
Graham's lawyer, former District Attorney Paul Pfingst, said the dispute with the Ethics Commission is whether Graham should have participated in decisions about the hotel project when Lennar was still involved in it.
“We believe her connection to Lennar is very, very tenuous,” he said. “No one has ever claimed that Nancy Graham has profited in any way from the actions that she took.”
The commission does not discuss or release details of its investigations until they are completed.
A probable-cause hearing – which has only occurred twice in the panel's eight-year history – has been set Nov. 6 to examine the evidence in Graham's case. It is closed to the public unless Graham asks for it to be opened. After reviewing the evidence, the commission would decide whether to dismiss the case or move forward with a second hearing, after which a fine could be levied.
Graham pleaded no contest earlier this year to a separate misdemeanor charge of failing to disclose financial interests on a form that city officials fill out annually. That had to do with her connection to the Florida arm of Related, which won a $409 million urban-renewal project from CCDC in 2007.
In other action, the commission levied $5,200 in fines against 19 registered lobbyists who failed to disclose their activities in a timely fashion. New lobbying laws went into effect Jan. 1, 2008, and the fines show that some are struggling to adjust to broad disclosures of their activities and fundraising.
Among those fined were Ace Parking and Gerding Edlen, the Portland, Ore.-based firm heading up the proposal for a new City Hall complex. They received fines of $700 and $400, respectively.
Commissioner Gil Cabrera said those fined represent a fraction of the city's more than 500 registered lobbyists.
“Overall, though, I think that we should be happy with the number of disclosures that are coming out,” Cabrera said.
The panel also cited the International Association of Firefighters for failing to timely report $25,000 in radio advertising it paid for on behalf of Jan Goldsmith in his successful bid to unseat City Attorney Michael Aguirre. The group was required to report the expense within 24 hours because it was so close to the Nov. 4 election, but didn't disclose it until a week later. The fine was $1,500.
Case of CCDC's Graham set for ethics hearing
Commission also fines lobbyists
By Craig Gustafson
Union-Tribune Staff Writer
August 13, 2009
Nancy Graham:
Position: Former CCDC president
Tenure: Hired at CCDC in December 2005, resigned in July 2008
Salary: Was paid $248,000
Background: Lawyer; former partner in N-K Ventures LLC, which was involved in the development of urban in-fill projects; former mayor of West Palm Beach, Fla. Faced conflict-of-interest charges due to her development ties.
The San Diego Ethics Commission on Thursday called for a special hearing against former Centre City Development Corp. president Nancy Graham over conflict-of-interest issues.
The commission generally reaches settlements with its investigation targets before reaching the hearing stage that Graham's case has now reached.
The investigation began a year ago, shortly after Graham resigned from the nonprofit city agency amid criticism over undisclosed business ties to developers Related Cos. and Lennar Corp. Both had business before the agency.
The probe focuses on her relationship with Lennar, which was one of several developers trying to build a 1,929-room Marriott hotel at Ballpark Village, just east of Petco Park. Lennar eventually pulled out of the project, but not before Graham became involved.
At issue is the Florida development business Graham owned with her former husband. Their company partnered with Related and Lennar on a Florida condo project, which netted the couple's company more than $7 million before expenses and taxes. Graham never reported income from the venture on her San Diego economic-interest forms.
Graham's lawyer, former District Attorney Paul Pfingst, said the dispute with the Ethics Commission is whether Graham should have participated in decisions about the hotel project when Lennar was still involved in it.
“We believe her connection to Lennar is very, very tenuous,” he said. “No one has ever claimed that Nancy Graham has profited in any way from the actions that she took.”
The commission does not discuss or release details of its investigations until they are completed.
A probable-cause hearing – which has only occurred twice in the panel's eight-year history – has been set Nov. 6 to examine the evidence in Graham's case. It is closed to the public unless Graham asks for it to be opened. After reviewing the evidence, the commission would decide whether to dismiss the case or move forward with a second hearing, after which a fine could be levied.
Graham pleaded no contest earlier this year to a separate misdemeanor charge of failing to disclose financial interests on a form that city officials fill out annually. That had to do with her connection to the Florida arm of Related, which won a $409 million urban-renewal project from CCDC in 2007.
In other action, the commission levied $5,200 in fines against 19 registered lobbyists who failed to disclose their activities in a timely fashion. New lobbying laws went into effect Jan. 1, 2008, and the fines show that some are struggling to adjust to broad disclosures of their activities and fundraising.
Among those fined were Ace Parking and Gerding Edlen, the Portland, Ore.-based firm heading up the proposal for a new City Hall complex. They received fines of $700 and $400, respectively.
Commissioner Gil Cabrera said those fined represent a fraction of the city's more than 500 registered lobbyists.
“Overall, though, I think that we should be happy with the number of disclosures that are coming out,” Cabrera said.
The panel also cited the International Association of Firefighters for failing to timely report $25,000 in radio advertising it paid for on behalf of Jan Goldsmith in his successful bid to unseat City Attorney Michael Aguirre. The group was required to report the expense within 24 hours because it was so close to the Nov. 4 election, but didn't disclose it until a week later. The fine was $1,500.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Lobbyists and lawmakers party in D.C.
From The Times-Picayune
D.C. Mardi Gras puts a mask on ethics codes
Lawmakers, lobbyists celebrate Louisiana traditions together
January 24, 2008
By Bill Walsh
http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-2/1201155718191680.xml&coll=1
WASHINGTON -- New ethics rules were supposed to have "broken the link" between special interests and Congress, but the changes won't stop lobbyists and lawmakers from donning masks and celebrating together as they have for decades at the Washington Mardi Gras.
The parties, meals and receptions starting today are arguably the most intimate gatherings of businesspeople, politicians and lobbyists left in Washington, where a spate of influence-peddling scandals has put a damper on corporate-sponsored schmoozing.
But Washington Mardi Gras, which is in many ways a throwback to the days when politicians and lobbyists socialized regularly outside the glare of the public spotlight, appears largely immune to the new ethics standards.
"I don't think there will be much difference at all," said Ted Jones, a recently retired lobbyist who, as a longtime organizer of the three-day celebration, bears the title of senior lieutenant in the Mystick Krewe of Louisianians.
Jones says the Mardi Gras has survived periodic attempts to clamp down on congressional ethics because it is less business than pleasure. Each year, about 2,000 Louisianians trek to the nation's capital and turn the Washington Hilton into a bustling party headquarters. The bar at the hotel is so thick with Louisiana politicos, especially in an election year, that it has been dubbed the state's 65th parish.
"For most of these people, it's their one trip to Washington a year," said former Louisiana Sen. John Breaux, a one-time captain of the Mystick Krewe. Breaux retired from the Senate in 2005 to become a lobbyist and now carries the title of senior lieutenant emeritus.
Jones puts it this way: "There is no big deal about this. It's just like you'd invite people to your house for a party and you bring your own bottle."
For the first night anyway, the bottles -- and food and music -- are free. They are paid for by the corporations, labor unions and lobbying firms sponsoring the "Louisiana Alive!" party that kicks off the Mardi Gras.
Be there or be square
The event is one of the most sought-after tickets in any season in Washington. Dixieland and zydeco bands are flown up from Louisiana along with a seemingly endless supply of fresh shrimp and gumbo. The bars are open. Contortionists in spandex outfits entertain on pedestals throughout the ballroom, and members of Louisiana's congressional delegation mix freely with the other guests. One year, Breaux was carried into the party in a coffin held aloft by revelers...
D.C. Mardi Gras puts a mask on ethics codes
Lawmakers, lobbyists celebrate Louisiana traditions together
January 24, 2008
By Bill Walsh
http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/frontpage/index.ssf?/base/news-2/1201155718191680.xml&coll=1
WASHINGTON -- New ethics rules were supposed to have "broken the link" between special interests and Congress, but the changes won't stop lobbyists and lawmakers from donning masks and celebrating together as they have for decades at the Washington Mardi Gras.
The parties, meals and receptions starting today are arguably the most intimate gatherings of businesspeople, politicians and lobbyists left in Washington, where a spate of influence-peddling scandals has put a damper on corporate-sponsored schmoozing.
But Washington Mardi Gras, which is in many ways a throwback to the days when politicians and lobbyists socialized regularly outside the glare of the public spotlight, appears largely immune to the new ethics standards.
"I don't think there will be much difference at all," said Ted Jones, a recently retired lobbyist who, as a longtime organizer of the three-day celebration, bears the title of senior lieutenant in the Mystick Krewe of Louisianians.
Jones says the Mardi Gras has survived periodic attempts to clamp down on congressional ethics because it is less business than pleasure. Each year, about 2,000 Louisianians trek to the nation's capital and turn the Washington Hilton into a bustling party headquarters. The bar at the hotel is so thick with Louisiana politicos, especially in an election year, that it has been dubbed the state's 65th parish.
"For most of these people, it's their one trip to Washington a year," said former Louisiana Sen. John Breaux, a one-time captain of the Mystick Krewe. Breaux retired from the Senate in 2005 to become a lobbyist and now carries the title of senior lieutenant emeritus.
Jones puts it this way: "There is no big deal about this. It's just like you'd invite people to your house for a party and you bring your own bottle."
For the first night anyway, the bottles -- and food and music -- are free. They are paid for by the corporations, labor unions and lobbying firms sponsoring the "Louisiana Alive!" party that kicks off the Mardi Gras.
Be there or be square
The event is one of the most sought-after tickets in any season in Washington. Dixieland and zydeco bands are flown up from Louisiana along with a seemingly endless supply of fresh shrimp and gumbo. The bars are open. Contortionists in spandex outfits entertain on pedestals throughout the ballroom, and members of Louisiana's congressional delegation mix freely with the other guests. One year, Breaux was carried into the party in a coffin held aloft by revelers...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)