I got to wondering just how many lobbyists are serving on state boards and commissions after dissecting the debate over a recent State Ethics Commission advisory sent to members of the Mortgage Foreclosure Task Force. The presence of lobbyists raises potential issues where the issues they are paid to pursue as lobbyists overlap with the jurisdiction and subject matter of the board or commission they serve on.
Ethics director Les Kondo said he has been surprised by the amount of time and energy spent debated this issue, because “it really is just a small handful of people” who are affected.
And it looks like Kondo is correct. Not many lobbyists make it to boards and commissions, and not all are in areas related to their lobbying.
That’s what I found in a quick survey comparing the current list of registered lobbyists compiled by the State Ethics Commission to the current edition of the Legislative Reference Bureau’s State Directory of Officals. which lists members of most major boards and commissions.
On the other hand, some lobbyists are members of firms that represent a much broader array of special interests, but I don’t know if the Ethics Commission would say those once-removed interests would create conflicts. A member of a law partnership may have a conflict based on a client represented by another partner, but I don’t know if that extends to the conflict of interest provisions of the ethics law. So that’s an issue for another day.
The list of appointed lobbyists is only approximate. It doesn’t include all smaller boards and commissions, or temporary task forces, the lists may be out of date in some cases, and both appointments and lobbying clients are constantly changing, but it gives at least some idea of the magnitude of the problem.
And the answer is–not so much of an issue, at least right now.
Here’s what I found.
Paula Arcena, Board of Health
Lobbyist for AlohaCareMarvin Dang, Mortgage Foreclosure Task Force
Lobbyist for Hawaii Financial Services AssociationVladimir P. Devens, State Land Use Commission
Lobbyist for State of Hawaii Organization of Police Officers (SHOPO)Peter Hamasaki, Commission to Promote Uniform Legislation
Lobbyist for:
24 Hour Fitness, USA, Inc.
American Family Life Assurance Company of Columbus (AFLAC)
Hawaii Liquor Wholesalers AssociationKarin Holma, Honolulu Planning Commission
Lobbyist for Building Industry Association of HawaiiDonald Horner, Board of Education & Hawaii Visitors and Convention Bureau
Lobbyist for First Hawaiian BankJoelle Kane, Research Corporation of the UH
Lobbyist for Honolulu Marine LLCAlton Kuioka, Board of Trustees, Employees Retirement System
Lobbyist for Bank of HawaiiCeleste Nip, Board of Trustees, Employer-Union Health Benefits Trust Fund
Lobbyist for Altria Client Services Inc. and its Affiliates, Hawaii Fire Fighters Association, Lilly USA, LLC,
Verizon WirelessTracy H. Okubo, Honolulu Subarea Health Planning Council
Lobbyist for WellCare Health Insurance of Arizona, Inc., dba ‘Ohana Health PlanPaul Oshiro, Honolulu Salary Commission
Lobbyist for Alexander & BaldwinJames Pacopac, Honolulu Planning Commission
Lobbyist for Honolulu Board of Water Supply, Syngenta Crop ProtectionMax Sword, Honolulu Police Commission
Lobbyist for Outrigger Enterprises
There’s nothing like some data to temper an argument.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The list of board and commission memberships may be a little outdated. Vladimir Devens, for example, is no longer on the LUC.
By the way, his departure from that body was a loss. As its chairman, Devens was evenhanded, firm, punctilious about following rules — I don’t know of anyone who had a beef with the way he ran the show. I was really sorry that the administration did not offer him a second term.
It’s interesting how some cronies get re-appointed.
If I remember correctly, Devens was the only one who voted against the Koa Ridge development. The rest of the political cronies at LUC refused to consider the traffic impacts.
Karin Holma, member and former chair of the Honolulu Planning Commission, is a lobbyist for BIA? No wonder so many developments have been pushed through in the past 5 years! The fox is guarding the hen house!
Karin is now on the Board of the Building Industry Association (I believe her law firm, which does construction law litigation, no doubt represents many of the BIA’s members) and occasionally she testifies on its behalf at the legislature- I recall her testifying on a bill regarding the interpretation of insurance contracts for local general contractors.
Ian, I know you are focusing on registered lobbyists, and with good reason, but it should be kept in mind that the relevant section of the state ethics code here, section 84-14(d), restricts any board member from being paid by his or her employer to work on a matter the board member has worked on as a board member, assuming the statute applies in any particular situation. One need not meet the threshold requirements that would lead one to register as a lobbyist. Thus, the advice promulgated by the State Ethics Commission regarding the Mortgage Foreclosure Task Force would apply to any member of any state board whether the board member meets the requirements of being a registered lobbyist or not. Thus, for example, if a member of a board acts on a specific matter as a board member, and then is asked by his or her company, as part of his or her company’s job duties (for which he or she is paid) to lobby on the matter, then there would be an issue with section 84-14(d), presuming the statute is properly interpreted regarding any specific situation or board. In short, the law does not apply just to registered lobbyists who are also board members, but anyone paid by a third party to act on a matter they acted on as a board member. This would also be true of any state official or state employee that has outside or part-time employment, and the same situation arises. Section 84-14(d) applies to all state officials, state employees, and state board members who are subject to the jurisdiction of the State Ethics Commission. Thus, section 84-14(d) should be understood by all state board members, state officials, and state employees subject to the jurisdiction of the State Ethics Commission.
This just went out from the Chamber, so I see that “Working Groups” are back in action;
———————————————————
This past legislative session, Senator Donovan Dela Cruz and Senator Malama Solomon, Water Land and Housing chair and vice chair, respectively, presented a redevelopment of the urban core plan for mixed use, entitled, “Ku Kamaehu,” to the public. Their intent is to look at an economic stimulus plan that creates jobs and minimizes roadblocks to redevelopment.
They introduced SCR 178 and SR 59, which create a working a group that will oversee this redevelopment. SR 59 passed and has taken effect.
Yesterday, the first meeting was held. Senator Dela Cruz announced the formation of six sub-working groups with chairs:
1. TOD-Buzzy Hong
2. Design/Appearance (urban core boundaries)-Bill Bizzy (?)
3. Infrastructure and sewer capacity-John Katahira and Bob Sumitomo
4. Land use policies-Bob Sumitomo
5. Incentives and impact fees-David Tanoue and Kathy Sokugawa
6. Transferring density rights-David Arakawa and Jan Yokota
These groups will be meeting soon to come up with legislation for 2012.
———————————————————-
After seeing this, and with these blog entries fresh in my mind, I looked up names to see if there are any registered lobbyists amongst them who would be affected by the higher scrutiny. Since this is land use I thought there might be some “players” involved. Unless “Buzzy” Hong’s first name is Glen, or Lea, there are no registered lobbyists amongst them. I’ve met Jan Yokota, and know she is the local rep for the current owner of the Damon lease lands, and is no doubt paid a salary to represent them. Does Dan Mollways clarification
“section 84-14(d), restricts any board member from being paid by his or her employer to work on a matter the board member has worked on as a board member”
mean she is precluded from addressing any government body on a land use matter that is covered by the very broad interests of this Working Group?
Donovan Dela Cruz and his working groups. I already know what the outcome will be.
As to the comment by Hawaiino above and the reference to me, I was not giving my opinion on who would be able to do what. I was focusing on the notion that section 84-14(d) was of relevance to state board members, whether they were registered lobbyists or not. The extent that section 84-14(d) prohibits any board member from doing something will depend on the board member’s duties and the nature of the board member’s “board”–whether it is a typical state board, a task force, or working group created by a legislative resolution, etc. The State Ethics Commission will determine the reach of section 84-14(d). Whether a “working group” established by a legislative resolution subjects the members of the working group to the State Ethics Code is a matter the State Ethics Commission will have to determine in applying section 84-14(d), or other provisions of the State Ethics Code.
I took part in one of the groups yesterday and there were plenty of us in the room involved in a wide variety of land use, planning/Smart Growth, TOD issues coming up before the Legislature or the City Council.
However, based upon the group I was in, the knowledge & experience of the participants make it clear that experts like these folks are important when it comes to making choices & decisions.
I look forward to future meetings – and I expect that I will be treated the same as the land owner reps and the union guys even though I am just an lowly environaut.
My bad – the WLH briefing was on Tuesday afternoon – not yesterday. If you’re interested in getting involved, contact Senator Dela Cruz’s office to get on the e-mail list.
Another bad mix in your list is a lobbyist for Altria, a tobacco company yes?, deciding public workers health care benefits at EUTF. Seems incongruous for good policy, but not likely any mere coincidence. The tobacco industry has had someone in there from the start.
I decided to do an alphabetical of the above list from the Chamber email, David Arakawa is 1st.
WHOA!!! This guy is a lawyer, past corp counsel, E.D. of LURF, which, from it’s website his job is to …
” * Represent LURF and its members before legislative bodies, public agencies and other governmental entities
o Provides an “industry voice” for landowners and developers;
o Knows and is trusted by elected officials, those in the industry, and the public; and
o Strong and effective advocate and lobbyist. ”
Well, Arakawa (and/or) LURF may be “strong and effective”, but they are NOT registered! He’s been very busy testifying at the Leg, a quick Google search shows lots of activity. Looks like way more hours than the CFV guy who just got whacked for $500. In fact, it looks like this is his full time job. Since he’s a lawyer, and with a client list that looks like this;
L.U.R.F. Membership Directory
Alexander & Baldwin, Inc.
Castle & Cooke Hawaii, Inc.
CommonWealth REIT
The Gentry Companies
Grove Farm Properties, Inc.
Haseko Hawaii, Inc.
Hawaii Reserves, Inc.
Hawaiian Electric Company, Inc.
D.R. Horton Schuler Division
The Kamehameha Schools
Kapolei Property Development LLC
Ko Olina Community Association
Kyo-Ya Management Company, Ltd.
Loyalty Development Co., Ltd.
Maui Land & Pineapple Co., Inc.
Ohana Real Estate Investors
1250 Oceanside Properties (Hokulia)
PAHIO Development Inc.
Princeville at Hanalei
Queen Emma Land
W.H. Shipman, Ltd.
Robinson Trusts:
Caroline J. Robinson LLC
J.L.P. Robinson, Ltd.
Mark A. Robinson Trust
Stanford Carr Development LLC
whats his excuse?