Testimony: Watchdog Asks NYC Council for 3-Year Ban on Revolving Door Lobbying

Good morning Chair Restler and members of the Committee on Governmental Operations. My name is Rachael Fauss, and I am the Senior Policy Advisor for Reinvent Albany. Reinvent Albany advocates for transparent and accountable government in New York State and City. Thank you for holding this hearing today.

First, we support the intent of the three bills you are considering today to reduce the undue influence of deep-pocketed political interests and slow the “revolving door” of city government employees lobbying their former employer – the City of New York. 

However, we strongly urge the City Council to aim much higher. At a minimum, New York City should have a three-year lobbying revolving door ban. Florida has a six-year ban that was passed by public referendum in 2018. Six year ban. Surely, New York City can pass a ban half as long as Florida’s.

New York needs you to renew your oversight of lobbying activity, which is exploding. We urge you to please:

1. Ensure the City Clerk finally implements the 2013 change allowing smaller lobbying clients to file twice yearly, instead of six times. It has been 11 years since the Council adopted this modest change. By our count, there were about 140 small lobbyists active from 2018-2022 that did not hire outside lobbyists and spent less than $10,000 a year.
   
   
2. Ensure the City Clerk meets its pledge to publish lobbyists’ fundraising and political consulting reports as open data by the end of 2024.
   
   
3. Pass a bill requiring lobbyists to report whether they are supporting or opposing bills or NYC government actions, as is done in Montana, and which specific sections of budget bills are being targeted, as is done in Idaho (see the National Conference of State Legislatures’ analysis here). 

Now specifically on the legislation on today’s agenda, we have the following comments:

1. Intro 76-2024 (Restler), Post-employment activities of former elected officials. This bill would bar former elected officials from lobbying any city agency for two years after termination from city service. We note that the bill removes the current two-year restriction for certain high-ranking officials. Therefore, this legislation must be passed together with Intro 77 of 2024 (below), or be combined as an omnibus bill to ensure that all current restrictions continue, or are expanded.
   • Given the large amount of direct knowledge and connections former elected officials have that can directly benefit private interests, we support extending this prohibition to three years.

2. Intro 77-2024 (Restler), Post-employment activities of certain former public servants. Under this bill, former agency heads and high-level employees of the Mayor’s Office, the City Council, or the Law Department would be barred from lobbying any city agency for two years. High-level staffers, including policymakers at other agencies, boards, and commissions, as well as paid board members, would be prohibited from lobbying any city agency up to one year after they leave city service, and would be prohibited from lobbying their former agency for a total of two years. 
   • As with the first bill, we support a three-year ban for these individuals lobbying any city agencies – not just the agency where they left service.

3. Intro 742-2024 (Brewer), Lobbying prohibitions in connection with campaign-related fundraising or political consulting. This bill would prohibit a person or organization who has engaged in fundraising or political consulting for certain candidates for city office from lobbying the elected candidate for a period of one year, if the person was elected within two years after the occurrence of the fundraising or political consulting. The Campaign Finance Board would be required to develop notices to disseminate through print and electronic media that notify campaign-related fundraisers and political consultants of this lobbying prohibition. Any person that knowingly and willing violates the prohibition would be subject to civil penalties, and second and subsequent violations would constitute a Class A misdemeanor.
   • Again, we urge the Council to extend the prohibition period for political consultants and fundraisers to three years, rather than one year, and to also expand this prohibition beyond just the former candidate to at least executive staff, i.e. staff of the Mayor’s Office, or a City Councilmember’s staff, and department heads appointed by the Mayor. Former campaign staffers of mayoral candidates frequently serve as high-ranking officials in the administration, who have deep connections with former campaign consultants. For mayoral candidates, staff members or department heads could be lobbied instead, who would simply relay the request. 

Regarding NYC’s lobbying laws and their implementation, we have concerns in a number of areas, and encourage the Council to either monitor implementation, or introduce new legislation in the following areas:

1. Fix City Clerk’s failure to implement twice-yearly reporting for small lobby spenders. In 2013, the City Council passed legislation implementing the recommendations of the Lobbying Commission, which included that for organizations that do not hire outside lobbyists and only spend between $5,000 and $10,000, that they only need to file two reports a year, instead of six. It is astounding that more than a decade later, this provision has still not been implemented. 
   • We strongly urge the City Council to work with the City Clerk’s office to implement this provision of the law reducing the filing burden for smaller lobbyists. Even if it requires additional resources to update the eLobbyist filing system to accommodate this change, it could be a boon to all filers if additional improvements are made to the lobbying filing system.
   • According to our review of the City Clerk’s filing data, it appears that from 2018-2022, there were approximately 140 filers that spent an average of $10,000 or less, and did not pay outside lobbyists for any services. These include a number of well-known NYC nonprofits and institutions, a sampling of which is below (full list provided as an appendix to this testimony).
     • The Bronx Defenders
     • Community Service Society of New York
     • Habitat For Humanity New York City, Inc.
     • The New York Botanical Garden
     • Queens Borough Public Library
     • New York Civil Liberties Union
       
2. Fix City Clerk’s sadly lagging effort to publish open data. We appreciated seeing eLobbyist data published as open data by the City Clerk in 2019, which was the result of years of advocacy by watchdog groups. Unfortunately, this is the only City Clerk’s office dataset published on the city’s open data portal.
   • However, the Office of Technology and Innovation’s 2023 Open Data Plan lists the City Clerk’s Lobbyists’ Fundraising and Political Consulting data as scheduled for future publication by 12/31/2024. This dataset was put on this list because it has been FOILed by the public, thanks to the City Council’s Local Law 7 of 2016 that requires FOIL requests be used to determine new datasets for open data publication. We ask the Council to ensure that the Lobbyists’ Fundraising and Political Consultant dataset is published in 2024, as promised. 
     
3. Pass bill reporting of support or opposition to bills or other NYC determinations. New York State and City lobbying laws do not currently require lobbyists to report whether their activity is in support or opposition to a bill, budget, or other governmental action. Additionally, reporting on budget lobbying is not required to list specific sections or appropriations. This lack of information greatly lessens the usefulness of lobbying disclosures. We ask the Council to introduce legislation requiring reporting of whether lobbyists support or oppose specific bills, budgets, and other city government actions. Other jurisdictions require this reporting. The specific position taken is required in Montana, and Idaho requires the specific section be reported for appropriations bills (see the NCSL list of lobby reporting requirements.)

Click here to view the testimony as a PDF.