Last week, I wrote about the resolution of a State Ethics Commission investigation into lobbying by the Land Use Research Foundation (“Ethics violations by developers’ group adds to questions facing DLNR nominee“).

The commission found that Arakawa had lobbied on behalf of LURF from 2008 through 2014, and for most of that time was not registered as a lobbyist. During three years falling within the applicable statute of limitations, Arakawa and LURF each failed to file nine expenditure reports disclosing what was spent, if anything, on lobbying.

Arakawa and LURF were each fined $2,000 for their violations.

I returned to the topic in today’s Hawaii Monitor column, published by Civil Beat (“Hawaii Monitor: The Case of a Wayward Land Use Lobbyist“).

Read the column if you have access to CB.

The point of the column is that the State Ethics Commission action has raised additional questions.

For a starter, those who lobby the Honolulu City Council or administration are also required to register and lobbyists and file an annual report, although reporting requirements are minimal.

You can check the list of registered lobbyists by clicking this link and scrolling to the bottom of the page.

I’ll save you some work. Arakawa has not registered and doesn’t appear on these lists. Under the city’s lobbyist ordinance, LURF is not required to register or disclose. That responsibility rests with Arakawa, their lobbyist.

I don’t know that the Honolulu Ethics Commission is looking at the issue. The commission’s executive director, Chuck Totto, said he couldn’t comment on any ongoing investigation. But I suspect they would have been quite quite interested in the state commission’s findings, and would be using those to guide their own inquiry

But back to LURF. Under scrutiny from the State Ethics Commission, the organization filed a series of reports which are supposed to detail their lobbying-related expenditures.

Keep in mind that LURF describes itself as an advocacy group representing and lobbying for the interests of the big landowners and developers that are chief among its members.

So here’s a bit of what I found when I examined those reports more closely. I took the calendar year 2013, which was the latest full year covered by the disclosures. Remember that these numbers are for their lobbying at the legislature, any efforts they make to urge others to contact legislators for or against specific legislation, and also to any lobbying on administrative rule making by state departments or agencies.

…LURF’s total reported lobbying expenditures during 2013 further seem equally unbelievable. The total for all reported lobbying costs, including Arakawa’s salary, came to just $1,897.19, which was just one-half of 1 percent of the group’s $342,715 in total expenses during the year, according to its tax filing.

Les Kondo, executive director of the State Ethics Commission, said his office does not have the resources to audit lobbyist disclosure reports. It receives lobbyist reports, checks for essential information, and then files them without evaluation.

“We look to make sure that the basic information requested is provided, such as contact information, and who you are lobbying for,” Kondo said in a telephone interview Tuesday. “But in terms of doing an audit, to make sure the numbers are accurate? No.”

I don’t find LURF’s reported lobbying expenses credible.

If you’re around the legislative scene at all, we would be interested in your comments.