Irvine Limits Lobbying by City Officials

Irvine on Tuesday became the first city in California to adopt a rule barring council members from holding day jobs in which they are paid to lobby other local government agencies.

The restriction is part of an ethics code that will go into effect Jan. 1, 2007.

“I think it will be a model for other cities in Orange County and across the state,” said Councilman Larry Agran, who promoted the idea, which has also drawn strong opposition.

Supporters contend that City Council members develop relationships with officials of other cities and, as a result, shouldn’t be allowed to then lobby them on behalf of business clients.

Opponents say state law already addresses conflicts between the work of public officials and their private employers. And they say the new code could keep out of office not just full-time lobbyists but also lawyers, builders, business officials and others who occasionally lobby local governments.

The ethics code, among other provisions, would declare that “because of their uniquely important, visible and elevated status and responsibilities as elected officials,” council members shall not be paid to lobby any government agency “on behalf of any private person or organization.”

“This is absolutely unprecedented,” said Robert Stern, president of the nonpartisan Center for Governmental Studies in Los Angeles.

He also noted that the code failed to address lobbying by other elected officials before the Irvine council itself. “If Irvine is worried about undue influence affecting them, you’d think they’d also say they’re not going to consider” the opinions of elected officials from other cities who come to lobby for projects in Irvine.

It is not uncommon for local elected officials who serve part time to also work as lobbyists or government affairs consultants. But Irvine is the first city to ban a specific type of employment for council members and their aides.

The city rule goes beyond state conflict-of-interest laws that already prohibit elected and appointed officials from being involved in decisions in which they have a financial stake.

Other state laws bar elected officials from lobbying their agencies for a year after leaving office.

Any council member found in violation will be admonished by the city attorney.

The provision was introduced by Agran after he criticized the work of his fellow council member and longtime council adversary, Christina Shea. She owns a real estate and government relations firm that occasionally lobbies other governments.

Agran called it unethical for elected officials to use their special access to other local officials to benefit paid clients at their day jobs.

Shea countered that the rule addressed a problem that didn’t exist because state law already regulated incompatible employment and conflicts of interest. She accused Agran of discriminating against people working in a valid profession.

“I will tell you, this is based not in good government but in bad politics,” she said.

The vote came after nearly eight hours of often tense debate in December and on Tuesday, with both sides making accusations of political motivation, devious intent and hypocrisy.

“For my part, I never regarded this as a hammer of justice to call into question the integrity of individual council members,” said Mayor Beth Krom, who proposed expanding the city’s ethics provisions a year ago. The lobbying ban was a late addition from Agran.

Agran and Krom were joined in support of the new code by Councilman Sukhee Kang. Opposing it were Shea and Councilman Steven Choi.