Ethics’ Gag Order: Keep Quiet Or Pay Up

A word to the wise: if you file a complaint with the Office of State Ethics, don’t tell anyone.

A formal advisory opinion from the Citizen’s Ethics Advisory Board recently concluded that individuals who file a complaint with the board should not tell anyone about their complaint, or about the information that the ethics agency solicited from them for its investigation.

Otherwise, pay up.

The penalty? A civil fine of up to $10,000 for each violation.

Complainants are permitted to disclose the facts that form the basis of their complaint, but must stay mum that they have actually filed an ethics complaint, akin to a gag order.

According to state law, the ethics board may shine sunlight on the complaint following its finding ‘‘upon the respondent’s request.”

Old Question

The opinion clarifies the confidentiality provision in the state law on the matter. “We received multiple questions about this very topic in the past year or so,” said Brian O’Dowd, assistant general counsel for the Office of State Ethics. “There wasn’t a formal opinion drafted on the topic, and we decided it was about time.”

While the topic hadn’t been investigated formally, O’Dowd said the decision rendered was no different than it would have been years ago.

“I don’t think anything has changed from the old state ethics commission,” he said. “It just hadn’t been addressed.”

With the advisory opinion complete and available for perusal, O’Dowd said it should answer frequently asked questions once and for all.

While an individual’s acknowledgement that he or she has filed a formal complaint would appear to be a minor detail, it’s a detail that could potentially cost someone thousands of dollars.

Big Impact

The opinion, at first, seemed “a little strange” to Marshall Collins of Marshall R. Collins & Associates, a lobbyist firm.

“That’s something I wasn’t aware of that I couldn’t disclose a complaint if I filed one,” he said. “It’s interesting, though.”

Notably, an ethics complaint about a lobbyist firm could prove to be damaging, especially when the firm tries to lure or secure major contracts. The bottom line: disclosure of a complaint could cost the firm cold, hard cash.

“If you know how cutthroat it is to get business, probably more cutthroat than the lobbying, maybe someone could manufacture a charge and tell the newspaper,” said Collins. “Perish the thought of defending the ethics board, but maybe they’re actually protecting lobbyists. Because once you lose a major contract, you don’t get it back.”

There rarely comes a time when a lobbyist will turn in another lobbyist to the Office of State Ethics, unless they did something “really evil,” asserted Collins. But it wouldn’t prevent clients from complaining about lobbyists or other odd behaviors.

“Certainly in years past, if there was a lobbyist going out to dinner with a certain legislator every week, it would be an issue,” Collins said. “At the Association of Connecticut Lobbyists, we talk about what’s going on and what people are doing.”

The reasons prompting the ethics board’s opinion are gleaned from the state’s general statutes and the Constitution. However, the message is clear.

Just don’t talk.

Ethics Agency Sets Different Standards For Self, Lobbyists

Data fuels the state’s initiative to monitor the legions of lobbyists who descend on Hartford. Whether it is how much lobbyists are being paid, who they are representing, or how the money is spent, the Office of State Ethics is there to track it.

But while lobbyists are forced to adhere to strict standards and fined when they fail to fall into line, there are no checks on the data the Office of State Ethics makes public on its Web site.

It is an interesting dichotomy – lobbyists and organizations are penalized for wrong information, while incorrect data can remain on a state Web site for all to see for months or even years.

Several lobbyists have expressed disappointment that data provided on the state ethics’ Web site was inaccurate, sometimes to extremes.

To the surprise of Marc DiBella, a lobbyist with Avallone, DiBella & Associates that represents Live Nation, the ethics Web site indicated that Live Nation, which operates the Chevrolet Theater in Wallingford, was among the businesses that spent the most on lobbying in the state. According to the financials posted on the ethics’ Web site this summer, the amount Live Nation spent on lobbying had skyrocketed.

Wrong.

“There was a pretty sizeable mistake that had us making hundreds of thousands of dollars,” DiBella said. “It was a big typo. It wasn’t even close.”

Usual Gripe

The inaccuracy of the lobbyist online data has been a common complaint from lobbyists since the agency updated its Web site this past summer. At that time, the agency posted three years’ worth of information in huge PDF files that were hundreds of pages long. It can be a difficult process.

Regardless, the lobbyists are perturbed.

“There are a lot of problems with the ethics’ data,” DiBella said. “They have company’s names wrong, they have the wrong people associated with different companies, and it’s all kind of screwed up.”

There is a simple message DiBella wants to get across: “Don’t believe everything you read on the Web site.”

Other lobbyists found errors that one would assume could be fixed in a manner of seconds.
“The one thing I’ve seen a lot happens is when a client relationship has been terminated,” said David McQuade with Murtha Cullina LLP. “You could have a termination, yet it sits on the site for two or three years.”

Part of the problem is the lack of checks and balances from lobbyists because they do not frequently search the site.

“To be honest, I haven’t really perused the information in a while,” McQuade said.
The extent of McQuade’s visits to the Web site is for updated advisory opinions that the ethics commission makes.

What makes the lobbyist complaints so interesting is how intently the Office of State Ethics goes after organizations and companies that do not provide timely, correct information.

Earlier this month, four organizations were fined for failing to submit their reports for the second quarter on time.

AFT Connecticut and the Connecticut Library Association were each fined $100, the Connecticut Propane Coalition was hit with a $610 fine, and ConnPIRG was forced to pay $640.

Clearly, those within the state ethics office have heard the complaints.

The response: We are trying to fix the problems.

“I know that if, for example, a lobbyist calls with a complaint, we do our best to troubleshoot,” said Barbara Housen, general counsel for the office. “We do have an IT consultant and we see if that issue can be resolved quickly.”

The solution may come in the form of a permanent executive director that could be in place by the end of the year.

“This is a topic that is very important and we know it needs to be addressed,” Housen said. “The statute now requires electronic filing so there will be a more comprehensive plan soon.”

Nelson Brown Called State Capitol ‘Home’ For Five Decades

There are arguably few people better qualified to discuss the evolution of the Connecticut General Assembly than Nelson Brown.

For 50 years, Brown has been a fixture at the state Capitol, starting with a stint as a legislator that included time as the speaker of the house. In the past decade, he was a lobbyist for the Connecticut Broadcasters Association and the Connecticut Council on Freedom of Information.

But when the 2008 session commences in February, Brown’s familiar face will not be present each morning.

“I kind of grew up there, but I’m 85 years old now, about to turn 86,” he said. “Those are some long, hard days’ and I think it’s time for me to relax a little bit.”

If anyone deserves some time to sit back and put their feet up, it is Brown. That doesn’t mean his thoughts won’t wander from his new home in Groton back to Hartford.

“I’m going to miss the people up there,” he said. “It’s almost like home for me up there. I also enjoyed the issues, and I’m going to miss that too.”

Brown is a member of the generation dubbed by many historians as its greatest. He served five years in World War II, got a start in broadcasting in 1947 with WNLC in New London and was initially elected to the state House of Representatives in 1952.

It was in 1956, following his third election, that he rose to speaker.

Same, But Different

The lobbying atmosphere of today, compared with 50 years ago, has completely changed, but is strikingly familiar, Nelson said. The most obvious change is the number of lobbyists who populate the Capitol, as the lobbying legions have grown by leaps and bounds.

“Lobbying in those times, in my opinion, was not a great big issue,” said Brown. “There were people there pushing issues, but it wasn’t the same number that there is now.”

As speaker, Brown asserted that the greatest push came from transportation lobbyists, specifically from the railroad and trucking industry, as well as construction companies that were looking to get into the building of highways.

“Most everybody that had a state problem with transportation would come and talk to me, whether they were pro or against,” he said. “Transportation was something that was talked about a whole lot.”

While the number of lobbyists has increased tremendously, the exact opposite is true for the number of legislators.

“When I was speaker, the chamber had 290 members,” said Brown. “Now, there are only 151 of them.”

In reflection, the larger chamber, combined with its lack of technology, resulted in one of Brown’s peeves of his days as speaker.

“Well, there was no automatic roll call like there is now,” he said. “It would take 45 to 50 minutes to call off every name.”

There also is the little matter of money. As speaker, Brown was paid a grand total of $600 for two years of public service. Suffice to say, the pay has jumped in 50 years.

“I don’t know exactly what their salaries are today, but it’s not necessary to work two jobs,” he said. “It was okay, though. We knew exactly what the pay was before we got elected. We knew what we were getting into.”

Money also figures into another change — some would say im-provement in the last half-century as the lobbyists in Hartford have become more formalized.

“In those days, lobbyists didn’t have to say what they made,” said Brown. “Now, you have to report every nickel made. I think it’s certainly a good thing for everyone to know, and it’s the way it should be.”

Though he won’t miss the night sessions that could last well into the next day, Brown will always have a soft spot for what he took part in.

“I always enjoyed the atmosphere and I have great respect for everyone,” he said. “You’ve always had to have that same intensity, today and back then, to be there and tackle the issues.”