“Back room” strategists that never talk to a policy maker are not considered lobbyists!

Secretary William Galvin has issued a new opinion on the lobbying law which adds clarity to certain key issues that have concerned many non-profits in the past few months.  In a January 21, 2010 opinion rendered to attorney Roger Donoghue, Lobbyist Section Director Alan Cote stated unequivocally that a communication with a covered executive or legislative official IS required in order to meet the statutory provisions for registering as a lobbyist.  In other words, back-room staff, who never talk with legislators, are not lobbyists.

To those of you who have been following this issue, Cote, in an October letter to attorney Carl Valvo, failed to answer this same question.  In this new letter to Attorney Donoghue, he references the previous letter and states that the office, "now finds that absent a direct, personal communication with a covered legislative or executive official by an individual, the participation of that individual in strategizing, planning and research activities does not trigger registration.” (emphasis in the original)

This new interpretation is consistent with Common Cause's view of the statute and that of Governor Patrick’s former chief legal counsel Ben Clements, who chaired the Governor's task force on Public Integrity and wrote the original legislation along with other members of the task force.  Attorney Clements is mentioned in the letter.

The opinion also clarifies the issue of whether non-profit board members who lobby on behalf of their non-profit have to register as lobbyists.  It states that when a Board member is not compensated by the non-profit, despite being a salaried employee of another corporation, he or she does not have to register.

Cote writes:

… “a board member, who is a salaried employee of a corporation separate from the board, lobbies on the board’s behalf but is not compensated by the board for his efforts.  Whereas the above-referenced individual is not compensated for his efforts and has no ownership interest in the non-profit board, he does not fall within the definition of legislative or executive agent.”

Cote’s January 21st letter provides direct answers to the questions posed, and therefore represents a step forward for the office.  Common Cause is hopeful that future opinions will be similarly responsive.