Multimedia News

Holiday gift ideas: Toys, games and more
20 photos
A child holds a newly released mobile phone c...
Black Friday frenzy
20 photos
Early bird shoppers run into a Target store i...
Mumbai massacre
20 photos
A police officer watches the Taj Hotel, Mumba...
Healthy holiday recipes
20 photos
Just when you think there's nothing healthy a...
PETA protesters on the prowl
15 photos
Lisa Franzetta, right, of the US and Lauren B...

IDs nearer to lobbyists’ lapels

Aug 8, 2008 3:00 AM (115 days ago) by Joshua Sabatini, The Examiner
This story ranks Not ranked
Related Topics: SAN FRANCISCO
SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - Within three months, lobbyists paid to influence City Hall decision-making could be forced to wear highly visible identification badges under a proposed law up for a vote Tuesday.

Reported money spent on lobbying efforts is on the rise in San Francisco. In 1996, $2.7 million was spent on lobbying efforts by those required to report the funds; last year, $7.1 million was spent on lobbying efforts, according to reports by The City’s Ethics Commission. There are 43 lobbyists currently registered with The City. During the first six months of the year, lobbyists reported receiving $3.9 million from clients.

“This is not a ‘Scarlet Letter’ or some kind of marking that carries with it necessarily a negative identity,” said Supervisor Chris Daly, who proposed the legislation. “Lobbyists do represent entities that do have more influence than oftentimes a member of the general public.”

Supervisor Bevan Dufty, who voted against the bill, said he was “uncomfortable with requiring that people have to wear badges.”

This story continues below
Advertisement

“I think that there are individuals and organizations that are equally formidable as any legislative advocate is,” he said.

The Board of Supervisors Rules Committee voted 2-1 Thursday to send the bill to the full board for a vote Tuesday. If approved, lobbyists would have to begin wearing the badges within 60 days. The Ethics Commission would determine the look of the badges, which are required to display the word “Lobbyist” and the name of the lobbyist. The badge would have to be worn whenever the lobbyist is making contact with a city official.

Supervisor Tom Ammiano said the proposed law is “worthy” of passage and that “the public is intrigued by who the players are.”

Lobbyists who are required to register with the Ethics Commission would have to wear the badges. Those who earn $3,200 in any consecutive three months for lobbying services or who have at least 25 separate contacts with city officials during any two months must register.

Alex Clemens, owner of Barbary Coast Consulting, said the badge would be a minor inconvenience.

“San Francisco lobbyists already operate in a remarkably transparent fashion,” Clemens said.

jsabatini@sfexaminer.com

Add a Comment


Name: (required)
Comments:
characters left
Comments are regulated by the Terms of Use.

Comments from Examiner Readers

10:36 AM MST on Fri., Aug. 8, 2008 re: "IDs nearer to lobbyists’ lapels"

Examiner Reader said:
What the hell business does the Catholic Church have with San Francisco? OH YEAH - they've sold all their church land and buildings and gold chalices and candlesticks to give all the money to the poor. So sorry - I forgot how CHARITABLE they are.

1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

9:37 AM MST on Fri., Aug. 8, 2008 re: "IDs nearer to lobbyists’ lapels"

Examiner Reader said:
“This is not a ‘Scarlet Letter’ or some kind of marking that carries with it necessarily a negative identity,” said Supervisor Chris Daly, who proposed the legislation. “Lobbyists do represent entities that do have more influence than oftentimes a member of the general public.” Supervisor Daly, I have absolutely no problem with this PROVIDED this becomes a requirement for all the "other" lobbyists paid or otherwise who curry YOUR favors. Including all the poverty pimps you push City funds too through your legislation and actions.

13 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Advertisement