Denver politicians have a long history of leaving office to lobby, and critics say the current rules are too weak.
For example, Wellington Webb championed big tobacco and other causes. And Michael Hancock describes himself as a “C-Suite Consultant” who has also registered to lobby for various companies.
Critics say this gives the public a sense that elected officials can easily be bought and sold — whether or not that’s true.
Now, Denver City Council is discussing a reform to the city’s lobbying rules, which the Denver Clerk and Recorder’s Office calls “dated, confusing, and ineffective” and says fail “to provide meaningful transparency for the media and the public.”
The new rules could increase transparency in how the local government makes decisions, provide informative disclosures to the public and create fair and consistent enforcement. The changes would also bring Denver’s policies into line with those of other cities.
A look at the new disclosure rules
New disclosure requirements could include:
- Mandatory reports detailing how much clients pay lobbyists, who is being lobbied and who the lobbyists represent.
- Disclosures of spending on grassroots campaigns that urge people to contact their councilmembers. The disclosure threshold would be $5,000.
The new rules could clarify that both elected and appointed officials can be lobbied, but career service employees cannot.
Officials would not be required to report lobbying activity. That responsibility would fall to the lobbyist.
The rules could also clarify who is technically a lobbyist.
The proposed rule: Only people who receive compensation for lobbying need to register. Lobbying, in this case, is defined as “meetings, direct contact, and emailed communications” related to official actions.
Volunteer lobbyists, public officials acting in their official capacities and people representing themselves or their properties would not be required to register.
A ‘cooling-off period’
The law would also create a “cooling-off period” that would prohibit both elected officials and the mayor’s cabinet members from lobbying for 18 months after leaving office — though that timeframe is up for debate.
The goal of the cooling-off period is to prevent the “revolving door” influence and the appearance that people are using public office for private gain.
City officials are also questioning whether city council aides should be considered covered officials.
“As it relates to aides, I’m very concerned,” said Councilmember Amanda Sawyer, who noted aides are poorly paid.
The benefit of the job, she said, is the opportunity to secure future employment in public advocacy.
The new policy would include more specifics about how these rules are enforced.
What’s next?
The reforms are in the early stages of discussion with the city council, and a final policy has not yet been drafted.
The proposal’s sponsors will present a draft to the Community Planning and Housing Committee on May 19 and will likely wrap it up by June.
