Lobbyists for Local Governments

Over the last few decades, governments have privatized many of their functions. One function that governments have begun privatizing in recent years is lobbying higher-level governments. Since every government is at a higher level than a local government (think not just regional, state, and federal, but numerous agencies at each of these levels), local government has the most lobbying to do.

Most local government lobbyists are in-house (or officials do the lobbying themselves), but many are professional lobbyists or former officials with the connections local governments are looking to employ (and time on their hands, since they are out of office). Contracting with a professional lobbyist may be a good choice for a local government that can't afford to hire one full-time, but there may be problems when the same individual, or members of the individual's firm, lobby the local government: the contracted lobbyist is wearing two hats when he talks with a high-level local offiical.

Contracting with a former official or others with special connections can raise other issues. Hiring or entering into a contract with such a person may be seen as a payback or a sweetheart deal, giving someone who helped you get elected, or just a good friend and political colleague, a nice income for doing what might have been done better by a professional lobbyist or could have been done in-house. It is an unusual example of the revolving door, which usually involves a former official lobbying his former colleagues and subordinates. Here it involves having the colleague employ the former official.

Some of these issues arose this week in Morrow, GA according to an article in the Clayton News Daily. A council member proposed contracting with the local chair of one of the political parties to be the city's lobbyist to the state government (it had never hired one before). The principal issue was a perceived payback for help in getting elected. At a council working session, there had been so much opposition to the contract, no one even even seconded the motion when it was made at a council meeting.

Some people believe that local governments should not have lobbyists at all, that it is a misuse of taxpayer dollars. In a world where state tax dollars were distributed fairly, this would be true. But that isn't the way the world works. Those communities that don't lobby for state and federal resources will get less than their share. And local officials can only do so much. They are not present at the capital, they don't have the time to attend informal and formal meetings, they do not know the ins and outs of different committees, agencies, and offices, and they lack the necessary relationships.

As public officials, local government lobbyists should be transparent as possible. They should be required to set an example for all lobbyists. Their calendars and expenditures should be placed online. They should not be permitted to make any gifts and they should be required to seek advice from the ethics commission relating to any possible conflicts they have. They should be required to tell the truth, even to the point of admitting facts about their community that may make them less likely to get a grant or a larger apportionment of funds. They should never be allowed to lose sight of the fact that they are acting as public officials. This should also be true of those who lobby for associations of public officials, who are representing the association board not as a group of individuals, but as a group of public officials acting solely in their role as public officials.

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics

---