GOVERNMENTS LOBBYING STATE GOVERNMENTprev.dailyherald.com/pdf/lgl2009-post.pdf · Governments...

GOVERNMENTS LOBBYING STATE GOVERNMENT

More than 110 Local Governments and Public AgenciesSpent over $6 Million on Lobbying Contracts

2009

A report byThe Illinois Campaign for Political Reform

325 West Huron, Suite 500Chicago, Illinois 60654

(312) 335-1767Fax (312) 335-1067

www.ilcampaign.org

Governments Lobbying State Government,

Table of Contents

Introduction……………………………………………………………...…..3

115 Units of Government Entered Into Over 150 Lobbying Contracts..........8

Top Spending Units of Government ………….………..10

72 Lobbying Firms Represent Governmental Bodies………………...…....10Firms With Highest Total Lobby Payments…………...11

Problems and Discrepancies with Lobbyist Reports………………….........12

Lobbying Without Registering………………...……….……......................13

Problems with Existing Registration Rules…………………………..…….15

Breaches of the Freedom of Information Act………………...……….........15

Conclusions and Recommendations……………………..…………………16

Units of Government with Contract Lobbyists: 7/1/07-6/30/08…………...19

Lobbyists Representing Units of Government: 7/1/07-6/30/08…………....24

Methodology…………………………………………………………….....31

Acknowledgements…………………………………………………...……34

Appendix: Text of ICPR FOIA Letter……………………………………...35

A Report by ICPR, www.ilcampaign.org

GOVERNMENTS LOBBYING STATE GOVERNMENT

More than 110 Local Governments and Public AgenciesSpent over $6 Million on Lobbying Contracts

Local governments and public agencies in Illinois spent more than $6 million in Fiscal

Year 2008 on contracts with lobbyists attempting to influence the governor, state

legislators and other state government officials.

The Illinois Campaign for Political Reform (ICPR) identified 115 units of government

with contract lobbyists between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008 and collected the

contracts and billing information from most of those public bodies. ICPR's queries were

executed under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).

This is the second year ICPR has conducted the research. The previous report, describing

lobbying activities in Fiscal Year 2007, found 110 units of government that had spent $5

million for contract lobbyists.

Key findings in the Fiscal Year 2008 research include:

• Approximately one third of governmental units and agencies boosted theirspending on lobbyists over 2007 levels, with several doubling or tripling theirexpenditures. The list of governmental units that more than doubled theirexpenditures on lobbying includes the Village of Bridgeview, the College of LakeCounty, the Village of Glendale Heights, the Village of Northbrook, NorthernIllinois University, the Rock Island County Metro Mass Transit District, theRockford Metropolitan Exposition Authority, and the Will County Board.

• The four mass transit agencies operating in the Chicago metropolitan area spentnearly $1 million on lobbying activities. That figure represents a 31 percentincrease over lobbying expenditures for Fiscal Year 2007.

• Ten percent of the units of government queried during the ICPR investigationfailed to comply in a timely fashion under FOIA. The most egregious breacheswere committed by the City of Chicago and Cook County. While FOIA generallyrequires public bodies seven business days to deliver requested public records,Chicago and Cook County provided their lobbying records five months afterICPR's initial requests were made. As of this publication, the City of Bellwoodhas not provided data in line with ICPR's FOIA request.


While the research offers important insights into the use of taxpayer funds to influence

state government, the $6.1 million spent by cities, counties and public agencies is a small

portion of the overall total being spent on lobbying activities in Illinois. Remaining

hidden from public view are the tens of millions of dollars devoted to lobbying by

hundreds of corporations, labor unions and associations advocating causes that span the

political spectrum.

Public disclosure requirements under the Illinois Lobbyist Registration Act are minimal

compared with the regulation of lobbyists at the federal level and in many other states.

Even some of the local governments in Illinois impose more strict disclosure

requirements on lobbyists working to influence decisions of local officials.

Unlike lobbyists in Washington, D.C., the professional lobbying firms and organizations

employing lobbyists in Illinois are not required to disclose how much they spend to

influence the legislative and executive branches of government.

The federal level disclosure includes quarterly reporting of income earned by lobbying

firms. In addition, organizations employing in-house lobbyists must report lobbying-

related expenses, including the salaries of in-house lobbyists. The federal law also

requires semiannual reporting by lobbyists of their contributions to political campaign

committees, to inaugural parties, and to presidential libraries. Nothing similar is required

of lobbyists at the state level in Illinois.

While it is unclear how much money is actually being spent each year on lobbying in

Illinois, comparisons with states that have embraced more vigorous public disclosure

requirements suggests that the $6 million figure would have to be multiplied by a factor

of at least five before a true picture emerges.


History of Illinois Law

Illinois enacted its first lobbyist registration law in 1957. The most recent substantial

update to the disclosure component of the law was enacted in 2003, when lobbyists were

required to disclose the branches of government and agencies they contacted in the

course of their work. The law specifically requires a list of lobbying targets, but lobbyists

do not have to detail on behalf of which clients they are working when making those

contacts. The scope and frequency of lobbyist registration and disclosure has not changed

since 2003.

There have been numerous government corruption scandals in Illinois sending a former

governor and many other elected and appointed officials to prison. Operation Safe Road,

which culminated with the conviction of former Gov. George Ryan in 2006, was replete

with criminal pay-offs disguised as lobbyist contracts. Contractors and other state

vendors were directed to hire specific lobbyists in exchange for state business. The recent

criminal complaint against former Gov. Rod Blagojevich identified several lobbyists as

key participants in his alleged misconduct.

Despite these scandals, the General Assembly has done nothing to enhance oversight of

lobbying activities. While some lawmakers have called for more "sunshine" to illuminate

the role of lobbying in state government, the current legal requirements leave the public

in the dark about the interactions between lobbyists, their clients, and government

officials.

Lobbying Requirements in Other States

An analysis of other states' laws suggests that Illinois' largely unregulated and secretive

lobbying environment is the exception rather than the rule. Thorough disclosure statutes,

regular reporting requirements and meaningful enforcement authorities in many states

ensure that a complete picture of lobbying in state government emerges each year.


By way of example, Wisconsin administers one of the most aggressive lobbying statutes

in the country. The law features comprehensive disclosure requirements, as well as bans

on certain practices common in Illinois. Key features of the Wisconsin statute include:

• All lobbyists and entities contracting for lobbying services must register withWisconsin's Government Accountability Board.

• Lobbyists must report biannually all expenditures on lobbying activitiesincluding: payments and obligations to contract lobbyists; compensation andfringe benefits paid to in-house lobbyists; compensation to officers, directors andnon-clerical employees who assist the organization's lobbying efforts; overhead;travel and living expenses; purchases of research, printing, advertising and otheritems and services; payments or reimbursements to state officials; and the namesof non-clerical employees who communicate with state officials on behalf of theregistered entity.

• Lobbyists must disclose the branches of state government and agencies contactedfor the purposes of lobbying.

• Lobbyists must disclose lists of legislative bills and issues targeted as part of theirlobbying activities.

• Lobbyists must disclose lists of clients.

• Lobbyists are barred from providing meals, drinks, lodging, transportation, giftsand other items or services to state officials.

• And, the Government Accountability Board has full authority to audit disclosurestatements and take enforcement actions when violations are determined.

Wisconsin's thorough lobbying disclosure requirements enabled the state to determine

$58.1 million was spent on lobbying activities during the 2005-06 legislative session --

approximately $29 million per year. The average lobbying expenditure per legislator

during the session was $440,000. Wisconsin's 755 registered lobbyists devoted 472,000

hours to lobbying activities during the period.

Spending on lobbying activities, however, can vary widely among states. In December

2007, the Center for Public Integrity released a report describing aggregate spending


totals for lobbying in all states. In states with strong lobby disclosure rules, such as

Alaska, Connecticut, Washington and Minnesota, the totals for 2006 were $26.2 million,

$38.4 million, $38.7 million and $53.2 million respectively.

Availability of Public Information

Although the Illinois Lobbyist Registration Act requires very little disclosure of what

special interests spend lobbying state government, there is some limited information

available about what public bodies are spending to lobby state government. Because

local government contracts are public documents, ICPR was able to use the Freedom of

Information Act (FOIA) to shed light on some of the spending on lobbying activities in

Illinois.

Illinois requires lobbyists to register and report their clients in public records maintained

by the Office of the Secretary of State. ICPR identified dozens of public bodies listed in

those records and asked them to provide contract and payment data for those lobbyists for

Fiscal Year 2008 (the period beginning July 1, 2007 and ending June 30, 2008). The

requests were made pursuant FOIA. ICPR also sent FOIA requests to the largest

governmental units that were not explicitly named in lobbyist registration reports.

Although the vast majority of local governments in Illinois do not hire lobbyists, the

roster of governments contracting for help includes cities, villages, school districts,

counties, community colleges, transit agencies, state universities, and local convention

centers.

This survey looks only at units of governments that have contracted with lobbyists to

represent them before the state legislature, executive branch agencies and state boards or

commissions. It does not include state departments and constitutional officers that

employ in-house lobbyists or liaisons, and it does not include the occasional lobbying

work done by in-house staff at cities, villages, school districts and other local


governments. It also does not include work accomplished through, or payments made to,

trade associations like the Illinois Municipal League and many others that receive public

funds through membership fees paid by government bodies.

Units of government hired lobbyists for a wide variety of reasons. Most were hired to

monitor the state legislature, but many engaged in active lobbying of the legislative or

executive branches. In response to the FOIA request, more than 100 respondents

provided copies of their contracts with lobbyists; some included a summary of the work

completed, sometimes but rarely including bill numbers or subject matters. A few

included the resolution adopted by the unit of government that authorized the hiring of

lobbyists. Some contract language included duties other than state lobbying, such as

lobbying federal agencies, coordinating projects among several local governments or

legal services. However, the bulk of the work in those contracts could be attributed to

state government lobbying. This survey looks only at expenses for activities covered by

Illinois' Lobbyist Registration Act.

Fees paid by governments to lobbyists were wide ranging. Monthly fees ran from a low

of $750 to a high of $12,500. Typical were payments of between $1,500 to $3,000 per

month.

Most contracts called for payment of a monthly stipend or retainer, requiring no

accounting of hours worked, officials contacted or subject matters addressed. A few set

forth a straight hourly rate. The hourly rate charges most often were found in contracts

with law firms.

115 Units of Government Entered Into More Than 150 Lobbying Contracts

The survey identified 115 units of government that have hired contract lobbyists. These

include municipalities, counties, colleges and universities, school districts, and other units

of government.


The charts beginning on page 19 alphabetically list local governments with lobbyists and

the amount spent by each of those entities. The research reveals:

• The four mass transit agencies in the Chicago region -- the RegionalTransportation Authority ($252,752), the Chicago Transit Authority ($314,022),Metra ($187,004), and PACE ($162,000) -- spent $915,778 collectively onlobbying services and hired a total of 14 different lobbying firms. That comparesto $699,577 spent and 14 firms hired during FY 2007. In total, the RTA and itsservice boards accounted for nearly 15 percent of total lobbying expenditures.

• The top five users of lobbying services -- the Chicago Transit Authority, the RTA,the City Colleges of Chicago, Metra and Will County -- spent a combined $1.1million on lobbyist contracts. That figure represents almost one fifth of the total.

• Municipalities accounted for over half of the units of government identified in theresearch. Municipalities spending the most on contract lobbyists included: theVillage of Crestwood ($120,000); the Village of University Park ($87,500); theCity of Chicago ($84,000); the City of Des Plaines ($75,000); and the City ofAurora ($71,024).

• County and county agencies accounted for 15 lobbying units. The biggestspenders among these included: Will County ($164,581); DuPage County($91,785); the DuPage County Board of Health ($80,000); Kane County($77,667); and Madison County ($71,000).

• Of the 96 units of government in this report and the FY2007 report, 42 increasedspending on lobbying, while 24 were unchanged and 29 declined. Total spendingon lobbying grew 15% across all 96 units.

• Some instances of increased spending by governmental units are attributable tocontractual terms commencing in the middle of Fiscal Year 2007 and continuingthroughout Fiscal Year 2008. Entities boosting their spending on this basisinclude: the Village of Elmwood Park (250%); the Village of Glendale Heights(140%); the Village of Northbrook (267%); Northern Illinois University (120%);and the Rock Island County Metro Mass Transit District (255%).

• In some instances governmental units increased the monthly retainers paid to theirlobbying organizations over the previous year. The College of Lake Countyboosted its spending 159% over 2007 levels due in part to a decision to raise themonthly professional services fees paid to Dixon and Co. from $5,000 to $9,000on January 1, 2008.

• A few governmental units took a more aggressive approach to lobbying for 2008.Will County paid William F. Mahar Inc. $60,000 for lobbying in 2007 and thenbumped its commitment to $70,000 in 2008. Lobbying expenses were enhanced


further with payments of $88,803 to Mack Communications Inc. and $5,778 tothe law firm Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP. The county's overall spending onlobbying jumped 174 percent from 2007 levels.

• There were 15 public colleges and universities with lobbying contracts. Thelargest users of lobbying services included: the City Colleges of Chicago($224,271); Harper College ($126,000); Northern Illinois University ($85,000);Southern Illinois University ($90,000); Northeastern Illinois University($75,000); and Joliet Junior College ($56,000).

The survey examined spending in one fiscal year and may not be indicative of lobbying

expenditures in other years.

Units of Government with the Most Spending on Lobbying

Unit of Government Number of

Lobbying Firms

Spending on

Lobbying in FY 08

Chicago Transit Authority 3 $314,022

Regional Transportation Authority 5 $252,753

City Colleges of Chicago 3 $224,272

Metra 3 $187,004

Will County 3 $164,581

72 Lobbying Firms Represent Government Bodies in Springfield

There are more than 1,800 lobbying entities registered with the Secretary of State's office

and more than 2,300 individual lobbyists. Most of these lobbyists represent private

clients. The ICPR survey identified 72 lobbying firms, collectively employing with over

100 exclusive lobbyists, who represented units of government during the year. Some of

the firms appear to specialize in representation of government bodies, but most represent

both private and public clients.


Firms with the greatest billings to units of government

Firm Governmental clients Governmentalbillings

Illinois Governmental Consulting Group

Frank Cortese, Theodore J. Brunsvold and ElgieSims, Jr. were the exclusive lobbyists. The firmalso listed Advanced Practical Solutions as aclient.

Chicago Metropolitan Agency forPlanning,Forest Preserve District ofDuPage County,Illinois Housing DevelopmentAuthority,Joliet Arsenal DevelopmentAuthority,Kane County Board,Lyons Twp Highway Department,PACE,Village of Bridgeview,Village of Homer Glen,Village of Norridge $353,050

Luking & Assoc.

William H. Luking is the exclusive lobbyist, andthe firm reported contractual arrangements withVincent R. Williams and four other lobbyingentities.

Chicago Park District,Chicago Public Schools,Chicago Transit Authority,City Colleges of Chicago,Elgin School District U-46

$350,898Government Navigation Group/PAR Solutions

The exclusive lobbyists for GNG were DanaPopish, Paul Rosenfeld, and Anthony Rossi. Thefirm also reported contractual relationships withAdvanced Practical Solutions and Leinenweber &Baroni Consulting. GNG listed AdvancedPractical Solutions as a client. GNG was formedin 2006 when Anthony Rossi joined with DanaPopish and Paul Rosenfield, who had been theexclusive lobbyists with PAR Solutions, whichhad reported the same contractual relationships.Some clients continue to report contracts withPAR Solutions.

Forest Preserve District ofDuPage County,Illinois Community CollegeBoardIllinois Housing DevelopmentAuthorityRock Island County MetroDistrict/"MetroLink"Rockford Metropolitan ExhibitionAuthority,City of Wheaton,Wheaton Park District

$264,250Fletcher, Topol, O'Brien & Kasper, PC

James L. Fletcher, Clive M. Topol, Timothy J.O'Brien, Michael J. Kasper and Courtney C.Nottage were the exclusive lobbyists.

Northeastern Illinois University,Northern Illinois University,Southern Illinois University

$250,000Governmental Consulting Solutions

Jim Riemer Jr. and Christopher S. Stone were theexclusive lobbyists. The firm reportedcontractual relationships with GII of Illinois andtwo other firms, and listed Becker, Paulson,Hoerner & Thompson, PC as a client.

City of Effingham,Madison County Transit,City of Marion,Village of Millstadt,Metra,City of O'Fallon,State Universities RetirementSystem,Village of Swansea $246,500


Many of these firms and lobbyists are themselves former government officials or staffers.

Many had longstanding official duties with the same public officials they now seek to

lobby. Principals at Cullen & Associates, Dorgan-McPike, Mayer Brown, Taylor Uhe,

Thomas J. Walsh, and Fletcher, Topol, O'Brien, and Kasper, among others, are former

legislators or aides to legislative leaders, while lobbyists for Advanced Practical

Solutions, John Wyma and Associates, Scofield Communications, and others, are former

campaign, congressional, and/or gubernatorial staffers for Gov. Blagojevich.

Problems and Discrepancies With Lobbyist Reports

A comparison of lobbyist reports on file with the Office of the Secretary of State and the

information provided by local governments showed several inconsistencies, as well as

incomplete and misleading reporting in lobbyist reports. These kinds of problems may

pervade lobbying by private entities as well.

• The survey identified two lobbying units of government solely on the basis of theirsize. No lobbyists acknowledged these units of government as clients, despitehaving contracts and billing for lobbying work.

• Surprisingly, some lobbyists registered as lobbying for specific local governments,but those governments denied any relationship with the lobbyist. In response toICPR’s FOIA request, a few governments stated that the lobbyist did not representthe unit of government as a lobbyist and that the government did not contract withthe lobbyist for any non-lobbying services.

• At least two firms with contracts to lobby for a local government were notregistered with the Secretary of State as lobbyists at any time during the year understudy, for any clients at all. At least four other firms did not report clients untilweeks or months after their contracts and billings suggested they began to lobby onbehalf of those clients.

• Several lobbying firms contract with other lobbying firms to assist with lobbying.State disclosure records show which firms have these arrangements, but the recordsdo not indicate which of the primary firm’s clients also are represented by thesecondary firm. In some cases, the secondary firm contracts with additional firms.These side contracts cloud transparency of the lobbyist registration requirements.


• Some lobbying entities did not disclose they had arrangements to work with othercontractual lobbying firms, even though information provided by the units ofgovernment indicated that the lobbying firms were working in concert.

While Illinois law requires almost every organization and individual hiring a lobbyist for

state government to register as lobbying entities with the Secretary of State, units of

government are largely excused. The law sets out 10 exemptions to the registration

requirement. Although state law does not specifically exempt units of government, the

Office of the Secretary of State has excused units of government by a regulatory rule. As

a result, there is no public record to indicate definitively which units of government have

hired lobbyists, which lobbyists they have hired, or how to contact these units of

government.

Lobbying Without Registering

Some lobbyists apparently failed to register as representing some clients as required by

law. The Lobbyist Registration Act requires lobbyists to register clients within two

business days after entering into an agreement and before performing any lobbying work.

The Secretary of State does not require local governments to register as lobbying entities

when hiring lobbyists, but state law requires lobbyists to register all of their clients,

including units of government. When a lobbyist represents a unit of government but fails

to list that unit of government among its clients, there is no readily accessible public

record of the relationship. Here are a few examples:

• The College of Lake County responded to ICPR's FOIA request for lobbyingcontracts with a contract with an apparent consortium that includes the LawOffices of Paul Williams. The College also included direct invoicing of $4,000per month for June, July and August of 2007 from The Law Offices of PaulWilliams. Despite billing the College of Lake County for three months' work in2007, the Law Offices of Paul Williams did not report the College of LakeCounty as a client for 2007; not until January 31, 2008 did the firm report theCollege of Lake County as a client. The College reports no direct billing for workby Williams after August, 2007; Dixon and Company, another firm in theapparent consortium with Williams and Dan Shomon Inc, billed for $9,000 eachmonth in the first half of 2008, which is the full contract amount for all threefirms. The Law Offices of Paul Williams did not report any contractual


relationship with either Dixon and Company or Dan Shomon Inc. in either 2007or 2008.

• The Chicago Park District responded to the FOIA request with a contract withAdo Rugai. The contract appears to be for lobbying and includes payments of$5,000 each month for the 12 months beginning July 1, 2007. Despite having alobbying contract with the Chicago Park District, Ado Rugai did not report theChicago Park District as a client until April 25, 2008. He registered the ParkDistrict as a client shortly after ICPR identified his lapse in its 2008 lobbyingreport.

• Chicago State University responded to the FOIA request with a contract withEugene Barnes. The contract appears to be for lobbying and includes payments of$50,000 in the 12 months ending June 30, 2008. Despite having a lobbyingcontract with Chicago State University, Eugene Barnes did not report ChicagoState University as a client for either 2007 or 2008. Indeed, Eugene Barnesreported no clients at all in either calendar year.

• Metra responded to the FOIA request with a contract with GovernmentConsulting, Inc. The contract appears to be for lobbying and includes payments of$5,000 per month, totaling $60,000 in the 12 months ending June 30, 2008.Despite having a lobbying contract with Metra, Government Consulting, Inc. didnot report Metra as a client or register itself as a lobbying entity during either2007 or 2008. The contract is signed by Dallas Ingemunson, a sole practitionerlobbyist, but Ingemunson did not list Metra as a client in either 2007 or 2008. Areceptionist at the phone number on Government Consulting Inc.'s invoice gavedirections to contact Shea, Paige & Rogal, a lobbying firm that did report Metraas a client in both 2007 and 2008. Dallas Ingemunson reported Shea, Paige &Rogal as a client in 2007 and 2008. Invoices from "Government Consulting, Inc."listed its address in LaGrange, Illinois, while the Metra Purchase Order listed anaddress in Yorkville; in either event, it appears to be different from the firmIllinois Government Consultants Incorporated, which lists its address in Chicago.

• Illinois Sports Facilities Authority responded to the FOIA request with a contractwith Melvin Caldwell DBA Stratum. The contract appears to be for lobbying andwas signed on February 20, 2008. Melvin Caldwell DBA Stratum billed twoinvoices totaling $7,000.00 in February and March of 2008. Despite having alobbying contract with Illinois Sports Facilities Authority, Melvin Caldwell DBAStratum did not register itself as a lobbyist with the Illinois Secretary of State andconsequently did not report Illinois Sports Facilities Authority as a client foreither 2007 or 2008. It should be noted, however, that Melvin Caldwell is aregistered lobbyist with the firm Illinois Government Consultants, Inc., which wasregistered as a lobbying entity and which reported ISFA as a client on March 7,2008, 15 days calendar days after Melvin Caldwell DBA Stratum signed acontract with ISFA and 9 calendar days after Melvin Caldwell DBA Stratumbilled the ISFA for work in February. Illinois Government Consultants, Inc.,


billed ISFA separately from Melvin Caldwell DBA Stratum on March 11, 2008for $600, and also submitted additional billing through June of 2008 to bring theirtotal to $17,824, not including the $7,000 paid to Melvin Caldwell DBA Stratum.Illinois Government Consultants, Inc. signed its own agreement with ISFA onMay 1, 2008.

Problems With Existing Lobbyist Registration Rules

Lobbying firms sometimes contract with other lobbying firms. When clients of the first

firm are not included on the second firm’s registration information, it is difficult to know

who is lobbying for whom. Whether intentional or not, this web of connections among

lobbyists is a barrier to public knowledge of lobbying of state officials.

Of the 72 lobbying firms lobbying for local governments in FY 2008, 38 reported using

other lobbying firms to assist clients.

Breaches of the Freedom of Information Act

Relying on the Freedom of Information Act to get government lobbying contract

information was time-consuming and too often produced partial records or none at all. If

units of government were required by the Illinois Lobbyist Registration Act to report the

same information to the Secretary of State, it would be available in a searchable form on

the Internet and without any cost to the public.

FOIA responses from government bodies took many weeks longer than downloads from

the Secretary of State's website. In the ICPR survey, more than 10 percent of the units of

governments responded later than the maximum 14 working days to respond. Twenty

units did not respond for a month or more. Even some of the larger government bodies

with experience handling FOIA requests, including the City of Bellwood, the City of

Chicago, Cook County and Proviso Township, took more than two months to respond.

Despite various excuses, FOIA is clear: units of government have seven business days in

which to respond, and they can take no more than a single seven-day extension.

Examples of FOIA breaches include:


• ICPR mailed its request to the City of Chicago on Aug, 20, 2008. In a phone callICPR initiated on Nov, 11, 2008 Chicago acknowledged receipt of ICPR'S requestbut claimed officials were still working on ICPR's question. Follow up callsthrough the end of the month and into December failed to generate an answer.Another phone call and site visit on Jan, 20, 2009 produced the requesteddocuments, five months to the day after ICPR mailed its request.

• ICPR mailed its request to Cook County on Aug, 20, 2008. In a phone callinitiated by ICPR on Nov, 11, 2008 an attorney for the Cook County Boardacknowledged receipt of the letter and said that staff was working on a reply.Follow-up calls through December and January resulted in the same reply. Theirultimately delivered the documents more than 5 months after ICPR mailed itsrequest.

• ICPR mailed its request to the City of Bellwood on Aug, 20, 2008. In a follow-upsite visit in mid-November, officials acknowledged receipt of the letter but hadyet to collect the requested documents. Follow-up phone calls again failed to prodan answer. As of this publication, the city has not responded to our request.

Copying costs for documents varied wildly between units of government. Most agreed to

our request to waive copying costs, but of those that charged copying costs, fees typically

ranged from 10 cents per page up to 25 cents per page. Many allowed a fixed number of

pages free and then assessed costs on all additional pages. The DuPage Election

Authority charged the most per page, requiring $1 beginning with the first page.

Southern Illinois University charged $5.00 for copies but insisted that payment be made

by money order rather than by cash or check, which greatly delayed receipt of SIU's

response.

Conclusions and Recommendations

This study identified several serious failings in current lobbyist registration practices and

weaknesses in the laws regulating lobbying. Records filed with the Office of the

Secretary of State, as required by the Lobbyist Registration Act, do not capture all that

state law says the public has a right to know. Current practices provide Illinois residents

with less information than residents of Wisconsin and other states. Even the rules in place


in the City of Chicago and Cook County provide greater transparency than is available

under state law.

ICPR advocates strengthened enforcement of the state’s lobbying laws and expansion of

the lobbying information required to be made public.

In the public sector, some lobbyists have failed to report relationships with clients,

obscured their activities by hiring each other in lieu of working directly for a client, and

in some instances, failed even to register at all. ICPR’s concerns do not lie primarily with

particular lobbyists or lobbying firms, nor with particular units of government. ICPR’s

interest is in improving the enforcement and expanding the scope of the Illinois Lobbyist

Registration Act.

Some or all of the same problems may exist with lobbying by non-governmental entities,

which could not be examined because they are not covered by FOIA and are not required

to disclose spending on all lobbying activities.

The Illinois Lobbyist Registration Act should be strengthened with the following changes

in law:

• All lobbyists, whether representing a government or private entity, should berequired to disclose the terms of lobbying contracts, including financialarrangements. Similar requirements are in place in other states and at the federallevel, as well as within some Illinois units of local government. Cook County, forinstance, requires lobbyists seeking to influence county departments to disclosepayments from clients.

• All organizations lobbying state governments should disclose expenses related tolobbying, including salaries of in-house lobbyists and other administrativeexpenses.

• Lobbyists hiring other lobbyists as subcontractors should disclose whether thesubcontractors are lobbying for all or only some of the main lobbyist’s clients.The entity hiring the primary lobbying firm also should report representation byany subcontractor.


• Units of government, now excused from registration by a regulation promulgatedby the Secretary of State's office, should be required to acknowledge that theyhave hired a lobbyist.

• There should be a "cooling-off period" between the time a government employeeor official leaves public service and his or her engagement as a lobbyist targetingformer colleagues.

• Instead of acting primarily as the keeper of lobbyist records, the Secretary ofState's office should be given the responsibility to enforce lobbyist disclosurelaws. The Secretary of State should have the clear authority to audit lobbyistdisclosure reports and punish violators.

Instituting these reforms would minimize opportunities for conflicts of interest.

Moreover, these changes would help ensure that the business of public bodies,

commissions, boards and agencies is transacted in the public interest, and not as the result

of insider deals, cronyism, or favor trading.


Units of Governments with Contract Lobbyists: July 1, 2007-June 30, 2008

Unit of Government Lobbyists ContractValue

2007-2008Total UnitSpending

2006-2007Total UnitSpending

Zack Stamp Ltd. $1,500Aurora Civic CenterAuthority John Holub $1,500

$3,000 $3,000

Aurora, City of Dan Shomon, Inc. $71,024.31 $71,024.31 $97,101Bartlett, Village of Cullen & Assoc $52,500 $52,500 $67,936Bedford Park, Village of William O. Lipinski $60,361 $60,361 N/ABellwood, Village of Did not respond to 2008 FOIA request $57,750

Bolingbrook, Village of Illinois Strategies LLC $36,000 $36,000 $36,000Bridgeview, Village of Illinois Governmental

Consulting Group$46,550 $46,550 $11,365

Broadview WestchesterJoint Water Commission

Thomas J. Walsh $17,500 $17,500 $30,000

Calumet City, City of B-P Consulting $30,000 $30,000 $36,000Carpentersville CommunityUnit School District No.300,

Hinshaw & Culbertson $28,347

Champaign, City of Thomas J. Walsh $36,000 $36,000 $18,000Champaign-Urbana MassTransit

Michael Hoffman $31,276 $31,276 $29,791

Chatham, Village of Denied lobbying in the time frame surveyed $24,000Chicago Board of Elections Denied lobbying in the time frame surveyed $19,999

Chicago MetropolitanAgency for Planning

Illinois GovernmentalConsulting Group

$15,000 $15,000 $21,000

Richard J. Guidice $20,000Luking & Assoc. $60,000

Chicago Park District

Ado Rugai $30,000

$110,000 $110,000

J. Alexander Hunt $54,996Richard J. Guidice $36,000Luking & Assoc. $60,450

Chicago Public Schools

Vincent R. Williams &Assoc.

$60,000

$211,446 $120,000

Chicago State University Eugene Barnes $50,000 $50,000 N/AFreeborn & Peters $101, 824Luking & Assoc. $154,948

Chicago Transit Authority

Thomas J. Walsh $57,250

$314,002 $220,173

Chicago, City of; Mayor'sOffice

William Filan $84,000 $84,000 $127,257

Gabriel Lopez & Assoc. $16,500Mayer Brown Rowe &Maw

$42,179

Vincent R. Williams &Assoc.

$81,091

Luking & Assoc. $39,500

City Colleges of Chicago

Taylor Uhe $45,000

$224,272 $213,200

Clarendon Hills, Village of Alfred G. Ronan Ltd $17,000 $17,000College of DuPage V.A. Persico Consulting $24,960 $47,840 $48,960


Paula Johnson Perdue $22,880Jeffrey A. Dixon $84,360College of Lake CountyPaul Williams $12,000

$96,360 $37,191

Zack Stamp Ltd $1,500Collinsville MetropolitanExposition Authority John Holub $1,500

$3,000 $3,000

Cook County Board ofCommissioners

Morrill & Assoc. $65,000 $65,000 $40,082

Cook County State’sAttorney

Gerardo Dejesus Reyes $45,833 $45,833 $41,666

Cordova, Village of Denied lobbying in the time frame surveyed $7,500Crestwood, Village of All-Circo, Inc $120,000 $120,000 $120,000Decatur, City of Illinois Strategies $30,000 $30,000 $15,000Des Plaines, City of All-Circo, Inc $75,000 $75,000 $73,333

Hadfield Consulting $49,167DuPage County BoardVA Persico Consulting $42,618

$91,785 $115,830

DuPage County Board ofHealth

John Wyma & Assoc. $80,000 $80,000 $88,000

DuPage County ElectionCommissioners

Sorling, Northrup, Hanna,Cullen, & Cochran

$36,000 $36,000 $33,000

DuPage County Recorder'sOffice

Did not respond to 2008 FOIA request $18,000

DuPage, Forest PreserveDistrict of

Government NavigationGroup/ PAR Solutions

$52,000 $52,000 $75,333

DuPage State's Attorney Roger C. Marquart & Co. $36,000 $36,000 $36,000Eastern Illinois University Government Affairs

Specialists$50,079 $50,079 $48,000

Effingham, City of Government ConsultingSolutions

$48,000 $48,000 $33,000

Elgin Community College Advanced PracticalSolutions

$60,000 $60,000 $47,500

Elgin, City of Lawrence J. Suffredin $25,000 $25,000 $27,500Elgin School District U-46 Luking & Assoc. $36,000 $36,000 $24,000Elmwood Park, Village of Fidelity Consulting Group $35,000 $35,000 $10,000Franklin Park, Village of Dorgan-McPike & Assoc. $30,000 $30,000 $30,000Glendale Heights, Villageof

Fidelity Consulting Group $36,000 $36,000 $15,000

Glenview, Village of Cullen & Assoc. $44,000 $44,000 $40,000Hanover Park District Alfred G. Ronan $12,000 $12,000 N/A

Advanced PracticalSolutions

$60,000

Alfred G. Ronan Ltd $50,000Michelle Teresa Olson $6,000

Harper College/Community CollegeDistrict No. 512

Zack Stamp Ltd $10,000

$126,000 $84,000

Hoffman Estates, Village of Alfred G. Ronan Ltd $45,000 $45,000 N/AHuntley, Village of Morreale Public Affairs

Group$65,507 $65,507 $45,000

Illinois Community CollegeBoard

Government NavigationGroup

$26,250 $26,250 $45,000

Illinois Criminal JusticeInformation Authority

Thomas M. Nolan $30,000 $30,000 N/A

Government NavigationGroup/ PAR Solutions

$60,000Illinois HousingDevelopment Authority


$60,000

$120,000 $120,000


Illinois GovernmentalConsultants

$17,824

Melvin Caldwell dbaStratum

$7,000

Illinois Sports FacilitiesAuthority

Nicolay & Dart $48,000

$72,824 $37,985

Illinois State Toll HighwayAuthority

Cullen & Assoc. $80,000 $80,000 $76,249

iWireless Center/Mark ofthe Quad

Did not respond to 2008 FOIA request $3,000

Johnsburg, Village of Advanced PracticalSolutions

$35,000 $35,000 N/A

Joliet Arsenal DevelopmentAuthority


$60,000 $60,000 $60,000

Joliet Junior College William F Mahar $56,000 $56,000 N/ARaucci & SullivanStrategies

$41,666Kane County Board


$36,000

$77,667 $77,667

Kane County ForestPreserve

Karen M Ramey/BICOR $12,000 $12,000 N/A

La Grange Park, Vilage of Cagwood Consulting $27,000 $27,000 N/AAdvanced PracticalSolutions

$14,000Lake Barrington, Village of

Fidelity $8,000

$22,000 $24,000

Lake County Kolkmeier Consulting $42,734 $42,734 N/ALake County ForestPreserve District

Kolkmeier Consulting $22,000 $22,000 $21,000

Dorgan-McPike & Assoc. $22,500Leyden TownshipRaucci & SullivanStrategies

$14,062$36,562 $37,000

Lombard, Village of Roger C. Marquardt & Co. $32,000 $32,000 $46,000Lyons Township HighwayDepartment


$6,000 $6,000 $12,000

Madison County RegionalOffice of Education

Steve Davis Consulting $12,000 $12,000 $12,000

Steve Davis Consulting $11,000Madison County TransitGovernment ConsultingSolutions

$60,000$71,000 $76,000

Marion, City of Government ConsultingSolutions

$24,000 $24,000 $14,000

McLean County Anderson LegislativeConsulting

$7,500 $7,500 $7,500

Melrose Park, Village of Alfred G. Ronan Ltd $44,000 $44,000 $48,000Cullen & Assoc. $39,000Government ConsultingSolutions

$60,000Metra

Raucci & SullivanStrategies

$83,004

$187,004 $122,004

Metropolitan Pier andExposition Authority

Mayer Brown Rowe &Maw

$106,949 $106,949 $114,951

Kevin Fitzpatrick $92,525Miguel A Santiago $7,000Gerardo Dejesus Reyes $21,000

Metropolitan WaterReclamation District

Charles Vaughn $24,500

$162,525 $162,949


Law Offices of Paul L.Williams

$17,500

Millstadt, Village of Government ConsultingSolutions

$7,500 $7,500 $30,000

Naperville, City of Government AffairsSpecialists

$65,000 $65,000 $32,220

Niles, Village of Ralph Capparelli $18,000 $18,000 $18,000Norridge, Village of Illinois Governmental

Consulting Group$36,000 $36,000 $36,000

North Riverside, Village of Thomas J. Walsh $31,500 $31,500 $31,500Northbrook, Village of Fidelity Consulting Group $44,000 $44,000 $12,000Northeastern IllinoisUniversity

Fletcher Topol O'Brien &Kasper PC

$75,000 $75,000 $48,861

Northern Illinois University Fletcher Topol O'Brien &Kasper PC

$85,000 $85,000 $38,636

Northfield, Village of Pollak Law Firm $7,500 $7,500 $9,000Oak Brook, Village of William Filan $7,000 $7,000 N/AOakbrook Terrace, City of William Filan $31,500 $31,500 $31,500O'Fallon, City of Government Consulting

Solutions$36,000 $36,000 $29,000

Orland Park, Village of William Filan $36,000 $36,000 $36,000Illinois GovernmentalConsulting Group

$93,500

Illinois Strategies LLC $49,500

PACE

Miguel Santiago $19,000

$162,000 $133,800

John Holub $750Peoria Civic CenterZack Stamp LTD $750

$1,500 $3,000

Peoria County Anderson LegislativeConsulting

$14,000 $14,000 $14,000

Prairie Capital ConventionCenter

Zack Stamp LTD $12,467 $12,467 $12,361

Proviso Township Thomas J. Walsh $22,500 $22,500 $17,500Rantoul, Village of Denied lobbying in the time frame surveyed $8,000

Dorgan-McPike & Assoc. $26,250Leinenweber & BaroniConsulting

$43,850

Mayer Brown Rowe &Maw

$87,986

Scofield Communications $63,000

Regional TransportationAuthority

Taylor Uhe $31,667

$252,753 $223,660

Rend Lake CommunityCollege

George Fleischli $19,900 $19,900 $19,900

Richland Grade SchoolDistrict No. 88A, Crest Hill

Capitol Consulting GroupIllinois LLC

$8,250 $8,250 $6,000

River Grove, Village of Illinois Strategies $38,400 $38,400 $38,400Rock Island County MetroMass Transit District("MetroLINK")

Government ConsultingSolutions

$32,000 $32,000 $9,000

Rockford MetropolitanExposition Authority

John Holub $25,000 $25,000 $4,000

Rockford Park District John Holub $4,500 $4,500 $8,490Rockford, City of Denied lobbying in the time frame surveyed $5,000Rosemont, Village of Denied lobbying in the time frame surveyed $25,000Schaumburg, Village of Advanced Practical

Solutions$60,000 $60,000 $60,283


SolutionsSkokie, Village of Glauberman & Pollack $36,000 $36,000 N/ASouthern Illinois University Fletcher Topol O'Brien &

Kasper PC$90,000 $90,000 $115,000

Southwestern IllinoisCollege

Becker, Paulson, Hoerner &Thompson PC

$60,000 $60,000 $42,000

Springfield Mass Transit Sorling Northrup HannaCullen & Cochran

$40,000 $40,000 N/A

Springfield Metro SanitaryDistrict

Dorgan-McPike & Assoc. $24,700 $24,700 $24,361

Springfield, City of William S. Foster & Assoc. $15,000 $15,000 N/ASt. Charles, City of Karen Ramey/BICOR $23,498 $23,498 N/A

Governmental ConsultingSolutions

$36,000

GII of Illinois $16,500

State UniversitiesRetirement System ofIllinois

Morrill & Assoc. $48,000

$100,500 $99,583

Swansea, Village of Government ConsultingSolutions

$35,000 $35,000 $40,000

Teachers' RetirementSystem

Leinenweber & Baroni $24,000 $24,000 N/A

Triton College Dorgan-McPike & Assoc. $36,000 $36,000 $36,000University Park, Village of Barnes & Thornburg $87,500 $87,500 N/AUrbana, City of Thomas J. Walsh $12,000 $12,000 $12,000Waukegan School DistrictNo. 66

Hinshaw & Culbertson Deniedlobbying

$15,888 $15,888

West Chicago, City of Roger C. Marquardt $36,000 $36,000 $18,000West Cook County SolidWaste Agency

Fidelity Consulting $24,000 $24,000 N/A

Wheaton Park District Government NavigationGroup

$36,000 $36,000 N/A

Wheaton, City of Government NavigationGroup

$33,000 $33,000 $36,000

Hinshaw & Culbertson $5,778Gary Mack $88,803

Will County Board

William F, Mahar $70,000

$164,581 $60,000

John Holub $1,500Will County MetropolitanExposition Authority Zack Stamp LTD $1,500

$3,000 $3,450

Winnebago County Kolkmeier Consulting Deniedlobbying

$25,000 $25,000


Lobbyists who Represent Units of Government: July 1, 2007-June 30, 2008

Lobbyist Government Clients

TotalGovernmentBillings

Advanced Practical Solutions

Milan Petrovic, Shqipe "Sheri" Osmani, and MatthewR. Pickering were the exclusive lobbyists; the firm alsoreported contractual relationships with All-Circo,Government Navigation Group, Roger Marquardt, andtwo other firms. The firm also reported Dan Shomon,Fidelity Consulting Group, Illinois GovernmentalConsulting Group, and Roger Marquardt, as clients.

Elgin Community College,Harper College, Village ofJohnsburg, Village of LakeBarrington, Village ofSchaumburg

$229,000All-Circo, Inc

John J. Kelly Jr., and Thomas Murphy were theexclusive lobbyists. The firm also reported contractualrelationships with Advanced Practical Solutions, RogerMarquardt and three other firms, and reportedAdvanced Practical Solutions as a client.

Village of Crestwood,City of Des Plaines

$195,000Anderson Legislative Consulting

William J. Anderson was the exclusive lobbyist.

McLean County,Peoria County

$21,500Barnes & Thornburg

Richard Boykon, Lauren Breithaupt, Brian Burdick,and Craig Burkhardt were the exclusive lobbyists.

DuPage County, Village ofUniversity Park

$130,117Barnes, Eugene

Eugene Barnes was the sole exclusive lobbyist; the firmreported no contractual relationships or clients.

Chicago State University

$50,000Becker, Paulson, Hoerner & Thompson, PC

The firm reported no exclusive lobbyists but did reporta contractual relationship with GovernmentalConsulting Solutions.

Southwestern IllinoisCollege

$60,000B-P Consulting

Joseph Berrios was the exclusive lobbyist. The firmalso reported one contractual relationship and listedZack Stamp as a client.

City of Calumet

$30,000Capitol Consulting Group Illinois LLC

Jeffrey A. Glass, Richard J. Guidice and Jay A. Kellerwere the exclusive lobbyists; the firm also reportedcontractual relationships with J. Alexander Hunt.

Richland Grade SchoolDistrict No. 88A

$8,250Capparelli, Ralph

Ralph Caparrelli was the exclusive lobbyist.

Village of Niles

$18,000Cullen & Assoc.

Thomas J. Cullen was the exclusive lobbyist. The firmreported contractual arrangements with Michelle TeresaOlson and one other lobbying entity, and listed CoyPugh as a client.

Village of Bartlett,Village of GlenviewMetra, $220,500


reported contractual arrangements with Michelle TeresaOlson and one other lobbying entity, and listed CoyPugh as a client.

Illinois State Toll HighwayAuthority

Davis, Steve Consulting

Steven Wayne Davis was the exclusive lobbyist.

Madison County RegionalOffice of Education,Madison County Transit $23,000

Dixon, Jeffrey A.

Jeffrey A Dixon was the exclusive lobbyist.

College of Lake County

$84,359

Dorgan-McPike & Assoc.

John “Jack” Dorgan and Jim McPike were theexclusive lobbyists.

Village of Franklin ParkLeyden Township,Regional TransportationAuthority,Springfield Metro SanitaryDistrict,Triton College,

$139, 450

Fidelity Consulting Group

Brian Anthony Daly and Donald Storino were theexclusive lobbyists. The firm reported a contractualrelationship with Advanced Practical Solutions.

Village of Elmwood Park,Village of GlendaleHeights,Village of LakeBarrington,Village of NorthbrookWest Cook County SolidWaste Agency $147,000

Filan, William

William Filan was the exclusive lobbyist at the firm.

City of Chicago,Village of Oak BrookCity of Oakbrook Terrace,Village of Orland Park $158,500

Fitzpatrick, Kevin J.

Kevin J. Fitzpatrick was the exclusive lobbyist.


$92,525Fleischli, George

George Fleischli was the exclusive lobbyist.

Rend Lake CommunityCollege

$19,900Fletcher, Topol, O'Brien & Kasper, PC

James L. Fletcher, Clive M. Topol, Timothy J. O'Brien,Michael J. Kasper and Courtney C. Nottage were theexclusive lobbyists.

Northeastern IllinoisUniversity,Northern IllinoisUniversity,Southern IllinoisUniversity $250,000

Foster, William S., and Assoc.

William S. Foster was the exclusive lobbyist.

City of Springfield

$15,000Freeborn & Peters

Douglas Albritton, Robert M. Baratta Jr., Roger H.Bickel, Gerald P. Callaghan, Joel T. Cooper, Eric M.Madiar, Joseph P. Roddy, and John E. Stevens werethe exclusive lobbyists.

Chicago Transit Authority

$101,824


GII of Illinois

Linda Renee Baker was the exclusive lobbyist. Thefirm also reported one contractual relationship.

State UniversitiesRetirement System

$16,500Glauberman & Pollak

Zale Glaubermann and Michael E. Pollak were theexclusive lobbyists.

Village of Skokie

$36,000Government Affairs Specialists

Loretta Durbin and Alice E. Phillips were the exclusivelobbyists. The firm reported a contractual relationshipwith Paula Purdue Johnson.

City of Naperville,Eastern Illinois University

$96,000Governmental Consulting Solutions

Jim Riemer Jr. and Christopher S. Stone were theexclusive lobbyists. The firm reported contractualrelationships with GII of Illinois and two other firms,and listed Becker, Paulson, Hoerner & Thompson, PCas a client.

City of Effingham,Madison County Transit,City of Marion,Village of Millstadt,Metra,City of O'Fallon,State UniversitiesRetirement System,Village of Swansea

$246,500Government Navigation Group/PAR Solutions

The exclusive lobbyists for GNG were Dana Popish,Paul Rosenfeld, and Anthony Rossi. The firm alsoreported contractual relationships with AdvancedPractical Solutions and Leinenweber & BaroniConsulting. GNG listed Advanced Practical Solutionsas a client. GNG was formed in 2006 when AnthonyRossi joined with Dana Popish and Paul Rosenfield,who had been the as exclusive lobbyists with PARSolutions, which had reported the same contractualrelationships. Some clients continue to report contractswith PAR Solutions.

Forest Preserve District ofDuPage County,Illinois CommunityCollege BoardIllinois HousingDevelopment AuthorityRock Island County MetroDistrict/"MetroLink"Rockford MetropolitanExhibition Authority,City of Wheaton,Wheaton Park District

$264,250Guidice, Richard J.

Richard J. Guidice is the exclusive lobbyist. The firmalso lists a contractual relationship with CapitolConsulting Group Illinois LLC, which also listsRichard J. Guidice as an exclusive lobbyist.

Chicago Park DistrictChicago Public Schools

$56,000Hadfield Consulting

Marybeth Hadfield was the exclusive lobbyist. Thefirm also reported contractual relationships with twoother firms.

DuPage County Board

$49,167Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

Edward R. Gower, Scott E. Nemanich, and J. WilliamRoberts were the exclusive lobbyists.

Will County

$5,778Hoffman, Michael Champaign-Urbana Mass

Transit District $31,276


Michael Hoffman was the exclusive lobbyist. The firmalso reports Jeffrey Dixon as a client.

Transit District

Holub, John

John Holub was the exclusive lobbyist. The firm alsoreported a contractual relationship with one other firm.

Aurora Civic CenterAuthority,Collinsville MetropolitanExhibition Authority,Peoria Civic Center,Rockford Park District,Will County MetropolitanExhibition Authority $9,750

Hunt, J. Alexander

Jay A. Keller is the exclusive lobbyist. The firmreported a contractual relationship with CapitolConsulting Group Illinois.

Chicago Board ofEducation

$54,996Illinois Governmental Consulting Group

Frank Cortese, Theodore J. Brunsvold and Elgie Sims,Jr. were the exclusive lobbyists. The firm also listedAdvanced Practical Solutions as a client.

Chicago MetropolitanAgency for Planning,Forest Preserve District ofDuPage County,Illinois HousingDevelopment Authority,Joliet ArsenalDevelopment Authority,Kane County Board,Lyons Twp HighwayDepartment,PACE,Village of Bridgeview,Village of Homer Glen,Village of Norridge $353,050

Illinois Strategies LLC

F. John Potts, Julie Curry, Molly Rockford and BriceA. Sheriff were the exclusive lobbyists. The firm alsoreported a contractual relationship with Thomas J.Walsh.

Village of Bolingbrook,City of Decatur,PACE,Village of River Grove

$153,900Kolkmeier Consulting

Kiplund R. Kolkmeier was the exclusive lobbyist.

Lake County ForestPreserve,Lake County $64,734

Leinenweber & Baroni Consulting LLC

Peter Baroni and Andrew David Bodewes were theexclusive lobbyists. The firm reported contractualrelationships with Government Navigation Group andThomas J. Walsh, along with one other; and listedGovernment Navigation Group and Thomas J. Walshas clients.

Regional TransportationAuthority,Teachers RetirementSystem

$67,850Lopez, Gabriel & Assoc.

Garbriel Lopez and Daniek Dalcerro were the exclusivelobbyists.

City Colleges of Chicago

$16,500Luking & Assoc. Chicago Park District,

Chicago Public Schools, $350,898


William H. Luking is the exclusive lobbyist, and thefirm reported contractual arrangements with Vincent RWilliams and four other lobbying entities.

Chicago Transit Authority,City Colleges of Chicago,Elgin School District U-46

Mack, Gary

Gary Mack was the exclusive lobbyist. The firm alsoreported a contractual relationship with Zack Stamp,Ltd.

Will County

$88,802Mahar, William F.

William F. Mahar was the exclusive lobbyist.

Joliet Junior CollegeWill County

$126,000Marquardt, Roger C. & Co.

Roger C. Marquardt, Tom Kuttenberg, Scott RogerMarquardt, and Carrie A. Vantilburg were the exclusivelobbyists. The firm also listed contractual relationshipswith Advanced Practical Solutions and All-Circo andone other, and listed All-Circo as a client.

City of West Chicago,DuPage State's Attorney,Village of Lombard

$104,000Mayer Brown LLP

Richard F. Bulger, Timothy P. Callahan, Julian C.Desposito, Tyrone Fahner, Robert Fitzsimmons, JohnGearen, Joanna Hornsail, John Janicik, , PatrickMcnerney, Thomas Skinner, and Paul Thess were theexclusive lobbyists. The firm reported a contractualrelationship with TaylorUhe, whose two principals leftMayer Brown during the period under study.

City Colleges of Chicago,Metropolitan Pier andExposition Authority,Regional TransportationAuthority

$237,115Morreale Public Affairs Group

Kim Morreale was the exclusive lobbyist.

Village of Huntley

$65,507Morrill & Assoc.

Stephen S. Morril, Curt A. Feidler, and Amanda R.McDonald were the exclusive lobbyists.

Cook County,State UniversitiesRetirement System

$113,000Nicolay & Dart

Timothy Dart and John Nicolay were the exclusivelobbyists. The firm also reported a contractualrelationship with itself.

Illinois Sports FacilitiesAuthority

$48,000Nolan, Thomas M., & Assoc.

Thomas M. Nolan and Patricia A. Riplinger were theexclusive lobbyists.

Illinois Criminal JusticeInformation Authority

$30,000Olson, Michelle Teresa

Michelle Teresa Olson is the exclusive lobbyist. Thefirm also listed Cullen & Assoc as a client.

Harper College/Community CollegeDistrict No. 512

$6,000Persico, VA Consulting

Vincent A. Persico was the exclusive lobbyist. Thefirm reported listed Mayer Brown LLP and Taylor Uheas clients.

College of DuPage,DuPage County Board

$67,578Pollak Law Firm Village of Northfield

$7,500


Michael E. Pollak was the exclusive lobbyist; he wasalso listed as an exclusive lobbyist with Glauberman &Pollak.Purdue, Paula Johnson

Paula Purdue Johnson was the exclusive lobbyist

College of DuPage

$22,880Ramey, Karen M.; BICOR

Karen M. Ramey was the exclusive lobbyist.

Kane County ForestPreserve,City of St. Charles $35,498

Raucci & Sullivan Strategies

The firm reported no exclusive lobbyists but listedcontractual relationships with Andrew M. Raucci,Thomas J. Walsh, and three others. The firm also listedAndrew M. Raucci as a client.

Kane County,Leyden Township,Metra

$138,733Reyes, Gerardo Dejesus

Gerardo Dejesus Reyes was the exclusive lobbyist.The firm also reported a contractual relationship withAdo Rugai.

Cook County State'sAttorney,Metropolitan WaterReclamation District

$66,833Ronan, Alfred G., Ltd.

Alfred G. Ronan and Cheryl Axley were the exclusivelobbyists. The firm listed Miguel Santiago andThomas J. Walsh as clients

Village of Clarendon Hills,Hanover Park District,Harper College,Village of HoffmanEstates,Village of Melrose Park $168,000

Rugai, Ado

Ado Rugai was the exclusive lobbyist . The firmreported a contractual relationship with Gerardo Reyes.

Chicago Park District

$30,000Santiago, Miguel A.

Miguel A. Santiago was the exclusive lobbyist. Thefirm also listed Alfred G. Ronan LTD and Thomas J.Walsh as clients.

Metropolitan WaterReclamation District,PACE,

$26,000Scofield Communications

Douglas Scofield was the exclusive lobbyist. InJanuary, 2008, the firm became Scofield Company.

Regional TransportationAuthority

$63,000Shomon, Dan, Inc

Dan Shomon, Julie Mirostaw and Wesley Ann Toppertwere the exclusive lobbyists. The firm reportedcontractual relationships with Advanced PracticalSolutions and two others.

City of Aurora

$71,024Sorling, Northrup, Hanna, Cullen & Cochran

Stephen J. Bochenek, William R. Enlow, James M.Morphew, Stephen A. Tagge, and Todd M. Turnerwere the exclusive lobbyists.

DuPage County ElectionCommission,Springfield Metro MassTransit District

$76,000Stamp, Zack LTD

Zack Stamp, Kevin McFadden and Steve W. Kinionwere the exclusive lobbyists. The firm also reportedcontractual relationships with B-P Consultants, Cullen& Assoc., Zack Stamp Consulting, and one other.

Aurora Civic CenterAuthority,Collinsville MetropolitanExhibition Authority,Harper College, $27,717


& Assoc., Zack Stamp Consulting, and one other. Peoria Civic Center,Prairie Capital ConventionCenter,Will County MetropolitanExhibition Authority

Suffredin, Lawrence J.

Lawrence J. Suffredin was the exclusive lobbyist; thefirm also reported contractual relationships with twoothers.

City of Elgin

$25,000Taylor Uhe

Mark Taylor and Robert Uhe were the exclusivelobbyists. The firm reported contractual relationshipswith John Wyma & Assoc., V.A. Persico Consulting,and two others, and listed Mayer Brown LLP as aclient.

City Colleges of ChicagoRegional TransportationAuthority

$77,000Vaughn, Charles

Charles R. Vaughn was the exclusive lobbyist


$24,500Walsh, Thomas J.

Thomas J. Walsh was the exclusive lobbyist. The firmreported contractual relationships with IllinoisStrategies, Leinenweber & Baroni Consulting, Raucci& Sullivan Strategies, Alfred G. Ronen LTD andMiguel A Santiago, along with two other firms; andlisted Leinenweber & Baroni Consulting and Raucci &Sullivan Strategies as clients.

Broadview WestchesterJoint Water Commission,Chicago Transit Authority,City of Champaign,City of Urbana,Proviso Township,Village of North Riverside

$176,750Williams, Law Offices of Paul L.

Paul Lawrence Williams was the exclusive lobbyist.The firm listed Lawrence J. Suffredin as a client.

Metropolitan WaterReclamation District,College of Lake County

$29,500Williams, Vincent R., and Assoc

Vincent R. Williams and Thomas Gary were theexclusive lobbyists.

Chicago Public Schools,City Colleges of Chicago

$141,092Wyma, John, and Assoc.

John Russel Wyma and Tammy Kwiatkowski were theexclusive lobbyists. The firm also reported contractualrelationships with Taylor Uhe.

DuPage County Board ofHealth

$80,000

Note: Descriptions of the firms are taken from the Calendar Year 2008 registrations.Contractual relationships are summarized. In cases where another firm listed in thisreport is named as a contractual firm in the registration, that firm is named in thedescription. Where other firms listed in this report are named as a client, that is alsonoted.


Methodology of the ICPR Study

of Lobbying of State Government by Other Government Bodies

State law requires almost everyone who hires a lobbyist for state government to report

their clients to the Secretary of State's office, and those records are open to the public.

"Lobbying" is broadly defined as "any communication with an official of the executive or

legislative branch of State government … for the ultimate purpose of influencing

executive, legislative, or administrative action." The law sets out 10 exemptions to the

registration requirement.

Although state statute does not specifically exempt units of government, the Secretary of

State's office has excused units by regulation. All lobbyists, however, are still required to

report their clients.

The Secretary of State’s website (www.cyberdriveillinois.com) does not facilitate

searches of lobbyist clients, but the office does publish an annual Lobbyist List, which

captures all registrations on a single day. Working from that list, ICPR reviewed all

client listings to identify entities that might be units of government subject to the

Freedom of Information Act.

Contact information was culled from websites, government databases and other sources.

A FOIA letter was mailed to all identified governments and requested any of the

following:

(1) Contracts entered into by [the recipient] between July 1, 2007and June 30, 2008 for lobbying Illinois state government.

(2) Billing statements submitted to [the recipient] between July 1,2007 and June 30, 2008 for lobbying Illinois state government.

(3) Financial statements showing payments made by [the recipient]between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008 for lobbying stategovernment.


Most responded with a contract or a copy of the resolution adopted by the unit

authorizing payment. A few acknowledged the lobbying relationship and provided

billing statements or financial records but offered no written contracts. Follow-up phone

calls to those not providing contracts revealed that some had contracts from outside of the

time frame and others had only an oral agreement with the lobbyist. Some provided a

copy of the resolution adopted by the managing board that approved hiring the lobbyist in

lieu of a contract.

The letters continued with a paragraph in this form: “Records on file with the Illinois

Secretary of State's Office indicate that, in the recent past, [the recipient] has hired

[names of identified lobbyists] to lobby before the legislative and executive branches of

Illinois government.” This was intended as a memory jog for recipients, to help clarify

why the request was being made and to suggest contracts and statements that would

qualify. It was not intended to limit the FOIA request, and indeed, many respondents

offered information about lobbying relationships not identified in the request.

The survey period is the same as the state’s fiscal year in which the Lobbyist List was

published. Several units of government followed different fiscal years, but the

discrepancy did not appear to present significant difficulties to units as they developed

their responses. A handful of units, in the interests of fuller disclosure, responded with

information outside of those date parameters. The survey findings do not include

contracts or spending that was not in the stated time frame in this analysis.

Most letters were mailed on August 20, 2008. In November, follow-up phone calls were

placed to entities not responding. In December, ICPR staff went in person to three

governments in Cook County that had not responded to letters and phone calls.

The survey totals are based primarily on actual invoices or financial records showing a

payment. ICPR obtained 110 billing statements and 108 financial statements showing

actual payments to lobbyists. Where the unit did not provide such detailed records but


did provide a contract, summary, or resolution authorizing payment, and that contract,

summary, or resolution included an annual or monthly payment, the unit’s total in the

survey is listed at the annual contract amount.

Because a few of the governments provided contracts calling for payment by an hourly

rate but did not provide information on hours billed, those payments could not be

included in the survey totals. Several government provided contracts, billing statements

and financial statements, but actual billings sometimes were different from amounts

stated in the contract. The actual billings often were lower, but occasionally higher,

particularly when the contract was signed long before the July 1, 2006, start of the

survey’s time frame.

In a handful of instances, the unit of government notified ICPR that the contract called

for a variety of services, including lobbying, but that the firm had not actually lobbied on

their behalf. Some of these appear to be long-range development projects where the

vendor provided technical expertise and consulting at the start of the project and was to

provide lobbying of state government at a later phase. In others, the firm offered a basket

of services, sometimes including general communications, grant writing, community

relations, and intergovernmental affairs at the local or federal level in addition to state

lobbying. Some of these firms appear to have registered as lobbyists on behalf of the unit

even though they were not asked to lobby for the unit during the survey’s time frame.

Where the unit attested that the firm did no lobbying on its behalf, the contractual

relationship and attendant payments were not included in survey totals.

Approximately 40 units of government did not provide a contract. Some said that they

did not enter into a contract during the time frame but were continuing an earlier contract;

with others, it was not clear if a written contract exists. These units generally supplied

copies of billing statements or financial records showing payments. Where statements

showed billings for lobbying and non-lobbying activities, non-lobbying work was

excluded from the numbers in the survey.


ABOUT THE ILLINOIS CAMPAIGN FOR POLITICAL REFORMICPR is a non-profit, non-partisan public interest organization conducting research and

advocating reforms to promote public participation in government, address the role of

money in politics and encourage integrity, accountability and transparency in

government. The late U.S. Sen. Paul Simon founded ICPR in 1997. For additional

information, please visit www.ilcampaign.org or call 312-335-1767.


Appendix: Text of ICPR FOIA Letter

NameOr FOIA Compliance OfficerUnit of GovernmentStreet AddressCity, Illinois Zip Code

August 20, 2008Dear Name,

This is a request for information pursuant to the terms of theFreedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 ILCS 140 et seq), We arewriting today to request a copy of any of the following:

(1) contracts entered into by Unit of Governmentfor lobbying Illinois state government between July 1, 2007and June 30, 2008.

(2) invoices or other billing statements summarizing the workperformed or requesting payment submitted to Unit of Governmentfor lobbying Illinois state government between July 1, 2007 andJune 30, 2008.

(3) receipts or other financial statements showing payments madeby Unit of Government for lobbying state government betweenJuly 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008.

Records on file with the Illinois Secretary of State's Office indicatethat, in the recent past, Unit of Government has hired Name ofLobbyist or Firm to lobby before the legislative and executivebranches of Illinois government.

Illinois' FOIA allows public bodies to charge a reasonable fee tocover the actual cost of making copies of this information. TheIllinois Campaign for Political Reform is a non-profit underSection 501(c)(3) of the federal tax code, our use of thisinformation will not serve any commercial interest and your replieswill form the basis for a follow up to our April, 2008 report, postedto our website and covered extensively in the media, therebycontributing to public understanding of the operations ofgovernment. For all these reasons, we ask for a waiver of copyingfees in accordance with Section 6 of the FOIA. Should you denyour request to waive the copying fee, we ask that you contact us byphone if the fee for these documents will exceed $15.00.


If any records or portion of records are withheld, please state the exemption on which yourely, the basis on which the exemption is invoked, and the address to which an appealshould be addressed.

Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Should you have any questions regardingthis request, we can be reached by phone at (312) 335-1767. We look forward to hearingfrom you within 7 business days.

Sincerely,

Cynthia Canary David MorrisonDirector Deputy Director

GOVERNMENTS LOBBYING STATE GOVERNMENTprev.dailyherald.com/pdf/lgl2009-post.pdf · Governments...

Documents

Transcript of GOVERNMENTS LOBBYING STATE GOVERNMENTprev.dailyherald.com/pdf/lgl2009-post.pdf · Governments...