Lobbying and Large Local Government Contracts

One of the biggest problems with local government lobbyists is that
they invariably have close contacts with those who run the city or
county. So whenever they are involved in a matter, especially the
bidding of large contracts, there is a strong appearance of impropriety,
and people don't trust the bidding process.<br>
<br>
This is why some local governments place a ban on the lobbying of
government officials with respect to large contracts and developments.
Phoenix is one local government that has done this, according to <a href="http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/06/10/20090610skytrain0610…; target="”_blank”">an
article</a> this week in the Arizona <span>Republic.</span><br>
<br>

But this hasn't stopped bidders for large Phoenix contracts from hiring
lobbyists closely associated with the mayor and the council. This was
the case with a $260 million contract for a train system at the
airport, which was awarded last week. One bidder hired the mayor's
sister's firm, as well as a lobbying firm led by the chair of campaigns
for the mayor and a council member. The other bidder hired a firm led
by the city's former firefighters union president, who is a close
friend of and fundraiser for the mayor.<br>
<br>
The mayor insists that he and the council were not lobbied. The stated
purposes for hiring the lobbying firms were to guide the companies
through the bidding process and to introduce the companies to airport
officials, local contractors, chambers of commerce, etc.<br>
<br>
But why lobbying firms? And why the mayor's sister, why a former local
government union president? The appearance is that, at the very least,
the companies were trying to make people who mattered think they had the support of
the city's power centers. At the most, the appearance is that they were
trying to get around the language of the lobbying laws, doing all the
arguably legal lobbying they could.<br>
<br>
Everyone emphasizes that the contract winner had the lowest bid. But
everyone knows that the other most important thing about a bidding
process is the specifications. He who most affects the specs can make
himself the lowest bidder or keep out other possible bidders. Any
lobbying that affects the writing of specs can do more damage than
direct lobbying of elected officials. After all, the mayor and council
don't select the winning bidder, they just confirm the choice of the
city manager. But people who are close to the mayor and council can
sometimes get special treatment when it comes to writing the specs.<br>
<br>
Who knows what happened with the airport train system specs in Phoenix.
But this is an issue that arises again and again in local governments,
and it is usually dealt with by preventing any communication with those
involved in the bidding process, including those who write the specs.
But without any input from possible bidders, it can be difficult to
write specs for a project such as this. So often, the best that can be
done is to prevent bidders and their representatives from initating
communication and to make as much as possible of the communication
public.<br>
<br>
This is a difficult but important area of local government ethics, but
it is rarely discussed in the popular media, and even more rarely
discussed openly and honestly by government officials. What can you do
when a reformist mayor such as Phoenix's says things like:<br>
<ul>
<div>I have had family members I've opposed
on votes and
family members that I've supported, and I just have to do the right
thing for the city.<br>
</ul>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---</p>