Laserfiche WebLink
CHAIR: Well stated, and I think we all understand exactly where you're coming from, and <br />that you made a great point, a great education for all of us. Correct me if I'm <br />wrong, Board, but I don't think we're going to arrive at any opinion, or any <br />advisory opinion today. We have to do some homework for this—certainly I do, <br />if we get into the lobbying law. And I think it's instructive in that it's —the <br />lobbying law may need to be looked at, and the definition of who is a lobbyist. <br />We may need to look at the language of that. I'm inclined to go that way. I <br />certainly recognize the good work you do. It's an enigma for me right now, <br />, and we need to think this out better. David? <br />FRANKEL: I want to respond in two ways. First of all, Mr. Fuke is correct that this <br />registration requirement is similar, if not virtually identical, to the State <br />requirement, and before the State level they do register. All kinds of folks <br />whether they're lobbying at the legislature or administrative agencies. In fact, <br />when I was paid as a lobbyist for the Sierra Club at the State level, I registered as <br />a lobbyist, and one of the bills I supported was a bill to eliminate at the State level <br />the unjustified exemptions for attorneys. So, if Mr. FukeI'd be more than <br />happy to join Mr. Fuke in lobbying to eliminate this exemption that lawyers <br />benefit from. And I'm a lawyer <br />KK: Attorneys wrote the law. <br />FRANKEL: That's right, that's right, and it is not appropriate. But in any case, you can do <br />two things. One, you have to interpret the law as it is now, and two, you can <br />make suggestions of changes to the County Council. Well, soI will support you <br />if you guys propose a change. The last point I want to make isMr. Fuke seems <br />to draw a distinction between laws that have specificity to an individual and those <br />that are more generic, and I think it's fairly important to know that we know to <br />know information about both. Okay? When the trust of public land supported a <br />change in the law to allow for property tax revenues to the extent of land <br />acquisition, the lobbyist registered. He's one of the only people that has complied <br />with the law. When —and that's a law that has some generic, over board <br />implications. When proposed a massive and in Mayor <br />Kim's mind—inappropriate development at Ooma, it's a specific piece of <br />legislation, and it concerns a lot of people. And we deserve to know how much <br />money the applicant is spending lobbying to get this measure passed. This is <br />public information. It's in the law. And that's the kind of thing that needs to be <br />disclosed. So regardless of whether it's generic legislation or specific applicant <br />legislation, all the information needs to be disclosed. It's the law. <br />CHAIR: Well perhaps both of you could help us in a positive way to work out a win -win <br />change to the legislative language, because clearly he's an established, respectable <br />business man (TURNED TAPE OVER) of engineers, people who <br />are making the proposals for the new solid waste —you know, biogassification <br />process, an so on. Do they all become lobbyists, right? I think maybe we do need <br />to have some common sense accommodation here, and I thinkI'm going to ask <br />Bobby to be the focal point, or Pat O'Toole, as the case may be. The two of you <br />are Corp Counsel, and clearly we need an attorney for some help on this, and <br />9 <br />