For those of you waiting for this years version of Twas the night before rhyme I have to disappoint you. I've just been too busy servicing my clients, what with all the growth I have experienced and all the issues JJOKE has created.
But that's not to say it has not been a merry holiday season as I just received written notification from JJOKE Director of Lobbying Andrew Bechard that he has withdrawn 36 separate late fee billing notices that JJOKE had wrongfully imposed on my clients. In response to my written objections pointing out how JJOKE was wrong in imposing the late fees in the first place Mr. Bechard (whom I have never met) admitted that the late fees never should have been imposed by JJOKE staff to begin with and stated that they had reviewed my arguments citing the proper application of the Lobby Act and "arguing against the late fees . . . and find them to be persuasive".
Now ordinarily I would share with the regulated community the basis for my arguments since I am sure JJOKE has imposed late fees on many other lobbyists under the same legal theory I just successfully challenged, but that wouldn't be fair to the clients that pay me for that advice and protection. Suffice to say if JJOKE has imposed a late fee you don't think was fair call me for a consultation.
Twas the night before Christmas and all thru the regulated community
Lobbyists have realized its cost effective and safer to just hire ME
can you tell the difference between Rob Cohen and Cosmo Kramer?
monkeeys
Friday, December 22, 2017
Monday, December 18, 2017
Commission Meeting Quiz
Following up on the last post discussing the jackasses at JJOKE trying to discuss proposed regulations that they lack the authority to issue or the knowledge and intelligence to discuss I thought I would pose a simple question and see if any of the Jgeniuses could answer it at tomorrows JJOKE meeting also known as the gathering of the clowns.
The proposed regulations state that a coalition is :
"Coalition means a group of otherwise-unaffiliated entities or members who pool funds for the primary purpose of engaging in Lobbying Activities on behalf of the members of the Coalition."
The proposed regulations then state:
"A Coalition that expends or incurs more than $5,000 in annual Compensation and Expenses related to Lobbying Activity shall either:
(a) File a Lobbying report with the Commission identifying itself as a Lobbyist and/or a Client, provided the Coalition identifies a Responsible Party and it maintains an up-to-date written instrument with the Commission disclosing all Coalition members who exceed $5,000 in cumulative annual Lobbying compensation and expenses; or
(b) If the Coalition does not file its own Lobbying report, then each member who is required to file a Lobbying report (either through the Coalition activity and/or other Lobbying Activity engaged in by the member) must disclose in such report their own contribution to such Coalition, including the contribution amount and name of the Coalition to which it contributed."
With that definition in play here is the question
How does a coalition spend or receive funds?
Simple question lets see how McAuliffe and the rest of the mensa types answer it.
Here's a hint go to your local bank and try to open an account in the name of a coalition as it is defined above.
Good luck.
Unless JJOKE expects coalitions to use cash or bitcoin they will be unable to spend or receive funds.
And before you say you are just following the old lobby commission opinion allowing this activity I wrote that opinion BEFORE source of funding was required.
All a coalition is, is a fancy way to allow an alias to be used.
If you can spend or receive funds you actually exist and should register and report under your actual corporate or individual existence.
Maybe McAuliffe was on to something with his unincorporated 501c3 nonsense.
Try to contribute a campaign donation in the name of a coalition and see what happens.
I look forward to tomorrows JCOPE meeting and a lively discussion about coalitions.
The proposed regulations state that a coalition is :
The proposed regulations then state:
"A Coalition that expends or incurs more than $5,000 in annual Compensation and Expenses related to Lobbying Activity shall either:
(a) File a Lobbying report with the Commission identifying itself as a Lobbyist and/or a Client, provided the Coalition identifies a Responsible Party and it maintains an up-to-date written instrument with the Commission disclosing all Coalition members who exceed $5,000 in cumulative annual Lobbying compensation and expenses; or
(b) If the Coalition does not file its own Lobbying report, then each member who is required to file a Lobbying report (either through the Coalition activity and/or other Lobbying Activity engaged in by the member) must disclose in such report their own contribution to such Coalition, including the contribution amount and name of the Coalition to which it contributed."
With that definition in play here is the question
How does a coalition spend or receive funds?
Simple question lets see how McAuliffe and the rest of the mensa types answer it.
Here's a hint go to your local bank and try to open an account in the name of a coalition as it is defined above.
Good luck.
Unless JJOKE expects coalitions to use cash or bitcoin they will be unable to spend or receive funds.
And before you say you are just following the old lobby commission opinion allowing this activity I wrote that opinion BEFORE source of funding was required.
All a coalition is, is a fancy way to allow an alias to be used.
If you can spend or receive funds you actually exist and should register and report under your actual corporate or individual existence.
Maybe McAuliffe was on to something with his unincorporated 501c3 nonsense.
Try to contribute a campaign donation in the name of a coalition and see what happens.
I look forward to tomorrows JCOPE meeting and a lively discussion about coalitions.
Friday, December 1, 2017
A camel is a horse designed by a committee and JJOKE regulations are laws designed by jackasses
Anyone that watched the latest JJOKE meeting was treated to the glaring reality that JJOKE commissioners have no clue what the Lobby Act they are supposed to be enforcing actually says.
And no I'm not talking about the most recent flip flop where they publicly emasculated their executive director and said that the proposed lobby regulations now do have the force and effect of law even though Agata was very clear last time that they were merely guidance. The fact that Mike Rozen was so clear that the proposed regs are actually regulations is a good thing. There can be no doubt now about the issue for my Article 78. I say JJOKE doesn't have the authority to issue lobby regulations JJOKE says they do, we will let a court decide.
No I'm talking about how foolish the JJOKE commissioners that commented on the proposed regulations sounded. They proved the adage that it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than speak and remove all doubt.
Case in point Commissioner McAuliffe. I had heard from some friends that knew him from out west that he is a blowhard that loves to hear himself speak. His performance at the meeting validated the assessment. Here are a couple of his better moments:
At approximately the 30 minute mark during a conversation about coalitions (we will discuss coalitions shortly) McAuliffe chimes in with this beauty "this will include unincorporated 501c3 organizations correct?" WTF????? There is no such thing as an unincorporated 501c3 organization. Does McAuliffe know what a 501c3 is? does he know what the term unincorporated means. How is it even possible for the two terms to be combined? It's like saying a pregnant gelding. Gelding . . . get it like Agata after Rozen issued his statement on regulations.
McAuliffe had preceded that beauty with his discussion of applications by commissioned sales people for exemptions from being lobbyists. Does he understand anything about procurement lobbying? Does he know why commissioned salespeople are exempt? Why there is no process to apply for an exemption? Clearly not, he just wanted to hear himself bloviate. And he topped it by referencing the "quarterly reporting obligations" Quarterly? Who reports quarterly? Lobbyists report on a bimonthly basis. Bimonthly you know every other month. And nobody, not the staff nor the other commissioners correct him.
Then McAuliffe asks if reportable business relationships covered under 943.14 are effected by 943.4a2 that exempts lawyers providing legal services from the definition of lobbyist but requires registration after they are retained to lobby. Staff look at each other in utter confusion as the two sections have nothing to do with one another but no one says what the fuck are you talking about. Clueless clowns
Lastly a lively argument breaks out about who has to be included in coalitions for expense reporting purposes but no one seems to realize that coalitions can not report expenses as they do not exist and have no legal standing They can not have bank accounts, they can't deposit funds or expend them. They are merely aliases for groups each spending their own funds. Chew on this one guys and gals If I register a coalition how can that coalition report source of funding when they can not legally receive donations and or contributions? All you are doing with regulations allowing coalitions to register is promoting a mechanism to hide lobbying expenditures. And before you bring up the old lobby commission opinion allowing coalitions to register I wrote that opinion so I actually understand it. And I know it was written before source of funding disclosure was required. I would never have written that same opinion today. I'd follow New York City's lead and only allow actual legal entities to register as lobbyists or be reported as clients. But thanks for creating even more ways for my clients to follow your rules and shelter disclosure DOPES
And no I'm not talking about the most recent flip flop where they publicly emasculated their executive director and said that the proposed lobby regulations now do have the force and effect of law even though Agata was very clear last time that they were merely guidance. The fact that Mike Rozen was so clear that the proposed regs are actually regulations is a good thing. There can be no doubt now about the issue for my Article 78. I say JJOKE doesn't have the authority to issue lobby regulations JJOKE says they do, we will let a court decide.
No I'm talking about how foolish the JJOKE commissioners that commented on the proposed regulations sounded. They proved the adage that it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than speak and remove all doubt.
Case in point Commissioner McAuliffe. I had heard from some friends that knew him from out west that he is a blowhard that loves to hear himself speak. His performance at the meeting validated the assessment. Here are a couple of his better moments:
At approximately the 30 minute mark during a conversation about coalitions (we will discuss coalitions shortly) McAuliffe chimes in with this beauty "this will include unincorporated 501c3 organizations correct?" WTF????? There is no such thing as an unincorporated 501c3 organization. Does McAuliffe know what a 501c3 is? does he know what the term unincorporated means. How is it even possible for the two terms to be combined? It's like saying a pregnant gelding. Gelding . . . get it like Agata after Rozen issued his statement on regulations.
McAuliffe had preceded that beauty with his discussion of applications by commissioned sales people for exemptions from being lobbyists. Does he understand anything about procurement lobbying? Does he know why commissioned salespeople are exempt? Why there is no process to apply for an exemption? Clearly not, he just wanted to hear himself bloviate. And he topped it by referencing the "quarterly reporting obligations" Quarterly? Who reports quarterly? Lobbyists report on a bimonthly basis. Bimonthly you know every other month. And nobody, not the staff nor the other commissioners correct him.
Then McAuliffe asks if reportable business relationships covered under 943.14 are effected by 943.4a2 that exempts lawyers providing legal services from the definition of lobbyist but requires registration after they are retained to lobby. Staff look at each other in utter confusion as the two sections have nothing to do with one another but no one says what the fuck are you talking about. Clueless clowns
Lastly a lively argument breaks out about who has to be included in coalitions for expense reporting purposes but no one seems to realize that coalitions can not report expenses as they do not exist and have no legal standing They can not have bank accounts, they can't deposit funds or expend them. They are merely aliases for groups each spending their own funds. Chew on this one guys and gals If I register a coalition how can that coalition report source of funding when they can not legally receive donations and or contributions? All you are doing with regulations allowing coalitions to register is promoting a mechanism to hide lobbying expenditures. And before you bring up the old lobby commission opinion allowing coalitions to register I wrote that opinion so I actually understand it. And I know it was written before source of funding disclosure was required. I would never have written that same opinion today. I'd follow New York City's lead and only allow actual legal entities to register as lobbyists or be reported as clients. But thanks for creating even more ways for my clients to follow your rules and shelter disclosure DOPES
Tuesday, November 7, 2017
How will Agata get out of this mess?
The mess I'm referring to is the year long waste of time and resources otherwise known as the proposed comprehensive lobby regulations aka the we never bothered to check to see if we had the authority to issue lobby regulations so lets call them guidance now that Grandeau made us look foolish again.
Various JJOKE commissioners who have extensive experience with the legislature and regulations have been asking some difficult questions since Monday. Questions like which staff member (Martin or Monica) will take the blame for this glaring legal mistake? Or what can we do to salvage this PR disaster? Or when will Agata get back from vacation and fall on his sword and resign? Some are even trying to follow the Agata company spin and are telling people and the media it's all just a big communications mistake these were never meant as real regulations only "guidance regulations".
Will the commissioners with reputations in government service go along with Agata's big lie? Yates, Weismann, Levine and Dearing know you need legislative authority as an agency to issue formal regulations. How foolish are they willing to look saying these were never really regulations? Just take a look at all the material JJOKE has published calling them regulations . . . for Gods sake you published them in the state register under title 19 as
"Title 19 NYCRR Part 943 is added to read as follows:
OFFICIAL COMPILATION OF CODES, RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
TITLE 19. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
CHAPTER XX. JOINT COMMISSION ON PUBLIC ETHICS
PART 943: LOBBYING"
And yes I've printed all the proof to use in my Article 78 proceeding.
Here is a suggestion that JJOKE staff can do the exact opposite of since we all know if I say black they will say white.
Next meeting put out amended regulations oops guidance for further comment. Title the document "guidance" and hope everyone forgets you spent a year doing regulations you were never authorized to issue. Pass the source of funding regulations and when asked act like those were the only regulations you were working on. Hold a vote on the guidance next year and I will not have standing to bring an Article 78.
Given enough time you can use the strategy of calling them best in the nation guidance.
Except those of us that know about these things will always know Agata stepped on his dick but so did all the experts that submitted comments that failed to note the lack of authority to issue lobby regulations.
Is it any wonder why I keep adding clients? JJOKE making Grandeau richer every time they screw up.
Various JJOKE commissioners who have extensive experience with the legislature and regulations have been asking some difficult questions since Monday. Questions like which staff member (Martin or Monica) will take the blame for this glaring legal mistake? Or what can we do to salvage this PR disaster? Or when will Agata get back from vacation and fall on his sword and resign? Some are even trying to follow the Agata company spin and are telling people and the media it's all just a big communications mistake these were never meant as real regulations only "guidance regulations".
Will the commissioners with reputations in government service go along with Agata's big lie? Yates, Weismann, Levine and Dearing know you need legislative authority as an agency to issue formal regulations. How foolish are they willing to look saying these were never really regulations? Just take a look at all the material JJOKE has published calling them regulations . . . for Gods sake you published them in the state register under title 19 as
"Title 19 NYCRR Part 943 is added to read as follows:
OFFICIAL COMPILATION OF CODES, RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
TITLE 19. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
CHAPTER XX. JOINT COMMISSION ON PUBLIC ETHICS
PART 943: LOBBYING"
And yes I've printed all the proof to use in my Article 78 proceeding.
Here is a suggestion that JJOKE staff can do the exact opposite of since we all know if I say black they will say white.
Next meeting put out amended regulations oops guidance for further comment. Title the document "guidance" and hope everyone forgets you spent a year doing regulations you were never authorized to issue. Pass the source of funding regulations and when asked act like those were the only regulations you were working on. Hold a vote on the guidance next year and I will not have standing to bring an Article 78.
Given enough time you can use the strategy of calling them best in the nation guidance.
Except those of us that know about these things will always know Agata stepped on his dick but so did all the experts that submitted comments that failed to note the lack of authority to issue lobby regulations.
Is it any wonder why I keep adding clients? JJOKE making Grandeau richer every time they screw up.
Friday, November 3, 2017
How many JJOKE lawyers does it take to screw up regulations?
ALL OF THEM
Read todays story by Chriss Bragg in the Times Union http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Long-discussed-lobbying-rules-now-only-advisory-12327130.php
JJOKE has been touting all the work they have put in on these "regulations" for well over a year and they just now decide that they really aren't enforceable regulations they are just guidance regulations. TOO FUNNY what exactly is a guidance regulation?
It's the best Seth Agata could come up with after I again alerted them that JCOPE did not have statutory authority to issue regulations.
How is it possible with all those genius lawyers at JJOKE that none of them bothered to check if they had statutory authority to issue lobby regulations?
INCOMPETANCE plain and simple. Think about all the lawyers that now look like incompetent fools:
Seth Agata
Martin Levine
Monica Stamm
another dozen or so JCOPE staff lawyers whose names I don't remember but I'm sure all wrote chapters for Agata's book Lobbying Compliance for Dummies or was that Lobbying Compliance by Dummies?
Well over a million dollars a year in staff salaries wasted on proposed comprehensive lobby regulations that they now can't issue as regulations but will have to call guidance.
And JJOKE was not alone think of all the lawyers and groups that submitted comments and never bothered to verify that JJOKE had the authority to issue these lobby regulations. Lobby compliance firms and good government groups alike missed this basic legal point - should they really be the ones anyone relies on for compliance advice?
But they are welcome to join me in the Article 78 if Agata and JJOKE insist on issuing regulations.
And right now Agata and the JJOKE commissioners are pulling their hair out they know I am legally correct that they lack authority to issue lobby regulations but they would rather slam their collective dicks in a car door than publicly admit that. They need to buy time, delay postpone and hope they can convince the legislature to pass yet another best in the nation lobby reform that grants them the authority to issue these regulations.
Now if I was a lobbyist, and I'm not or if I was a PR firm I would do all I could to insure that doesn't happen. wait a minute did I just engage in grassroots lobbying under the new regulations? Do I have to register? Or because they are not enforceable regulations but merely guidance am I in the clear.
Lets make it easy for JJOKE I make way more that $5000 for advocating against your regulations, I'm not registered as a lobbyist please please please bring an enforcement action against me for failure to register as a lobbyist and lets let a court decide.
And one last thing what did Agata do after creating this cluster fuck?
Even Nero hung around while Rome burned.
Read todays story by Chriss Bragg in the Times Union http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Long-discussed-lobbying-rules-now-only-advisory-12327130.php
JJOKE has been touting all the work they have put in on these "regulations" for well over a year and they just now decide that they really aren't enforceable regulations they are just guidance regulations. TOO FUNNY what exactly is a guidance regulation?
It's the best Seth Agata could come up with after I again alerted them that JCOPE did not have statutory authority to issue regulations.
How is it possible with all those genius lawyers at JJOKE that none of them bothered to check if they had statutory authority to issue lobby regulations?
INCOMPETANCE plain and simple. Think about all the lawyers that now look like incompetent fools:
Seth Agata
Martin Levine
Monica Stamm
another dozen or so JCOPE staff lawyers whose names I don't remember but I'm sure all wrote chapters for Agata's book Lobbying Compliance for Dummies or was that Lobbying Compliance by Dummies?
Well over a million dollars a year in staff salaries wasted on proposed comprehensive lobby regulations that they now can't issue as regulations but will have to call guidance.
And JJOKE was not alone think of all the lawyers and groups that submitted comments and never bothered to verify that JJOKE had the authority to issue these lobby regulations. Lobby compliance firms and good government groups alike missed this basic legal point - should they really be the ones anyone relies on for compliance advice?
But they are welcome to join me in the Article 78 if Agata and JJOKE insist on issuing regulations.
And right now Agata and the JJOKE commissioners are pulling their hair out they know I am legally correct that they lack authority to issue lobby regulations but they would rather slam their collective dicks in a car door than publicly admit that. They need to buy time, delay postpone and hope they can convince the legislature to pass yet another best in the nation lobby reform that grants them the authority to issue these regulations.
Now if I was a lobbyist, and I'm not or if I was a PR firm I would do all I could to insure that doesn't happen. wait a minute did I just engage in grassroots lobbying under the new regulations? Do I have to register? Or because they are not enforceable regulations but merely guidance am I in the clear.
Lets make it easy for JJOKE I make way more that $5000 for advocating against your regulations, I'm not registered as a lobbyist please please please bring an enforcement action against me for failure to register as a lobbyist and lets let a court decide.
And one last thing what did Agata do after creating this cluster fuck?
To: "Grandeau@ix.netcom.com"
Subject: Automatic reply: JJOKE regulations .... excuse me
"guidance"
Date: Nov 3, 2017 10:08 AM
I will be out of
the office beginning Thrusday, November 2d and returning to work on Monday,
November 13th.
|
Even Nero hung around while Rome burned.
Monday, March 20, 2017
Dick Dadey ridden hard and put away wet
I can't believe I actually agree with Rich Assonfire or Azzopardi.
Dick Dadey and his fragile ego are hypocrites. Truer words were never spoken.
That Dadey is upset that the governor's people have not spoken to him about ethics reform is priceless.
Dick they've been giving you, Blair and the rest of the goo goos a mercy reach around for years and now you are upset that you have to jerk yourself off? Too funny. Look at the bright side at least this year when it comes to the goo goos and ethics reform the pleasure given will equal the pleasure received.
It's not like you were ever relevant when it came to changing ethics in NY government
I've ridiculed Dick for years here are some of my favorites:
http://davidgrandeau.blogspot.com/search?q=Dadey
But I don't remember seeing Dick at JJOKE meetings. Too busy covering for the Gov in the old days when Steve Cohen was on his board.
Dick Dadey and his fragile ego are hypocrites. Truer words were never spoken.
That Dadey is upset that the governor's people have not spoken to him about ethics reform is priceless.
Dick they've been giving you, Blair and the rest of the goo goos a mercy reach around for years and now you are upset that you have to jerk yourself off? Too funny. Look at the bright side at least this year when it comes to the goo goos and ethics reform the pleasure given will equal the pleasure received.
It's not like you were ever relevant when it came to changing ethics in NY government
I've ridiculed Dick for years here are some of my favorites:
http://davidgrandeau.blogspot.com/search?q=Dadey
But I don't remember seeing Dick at JJOKE meetings. Too busy covering for the Gov in the old days when Steve Cohen was on his board.
Wednesday, March 15, 2017
JJOKE back in the slow lane
March 2, 2017 - 3993 registrations had been filed for 2017 and 3587 were still being processed which means 406 had been approved. 406 in over 2 months. That's about 10 a day.
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
March 6 - 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved. That's 40 registrations approved March 6.
March 7, 2017 - 4017 registrations had been filed and 3532 were still being processed which means 485 had been approved. That's 21 registrations approved March 7.
March 8, 2017 - 4021 registrations had been filed and 3512 were still being processed which means 509 had been approved. That's 24 registrations approved March 8.
March 9, 2017 - 4030 registrations had been filed and 3476 were still being processed which means 554 had been approved. That's 45 registrations approved March 9.
March 10, 2017 - 4041 registrations had been filed and 3458 were still being processed which means 583 had been approved. That's 29 registrations approved March 10.
March 13, 2017 - 4051 registrations had been filed and 3429 were still being processed which means 622 had been approved. That's 39 registrations approved March 13.
March 14, 2017 - 4053 registrations had been filed and 3431 were still being processed which means 622 had been approved. That's 0 registrations approved March 14.
Today 4075 registrations had been filed and 3431 were still being processed which means 644 had been approved. That's 22 registrations approved March 15.
22 registrations approved and 22 new registrations filed that's called being stuck in the mud. At this rate JJOKE will never be finished that's Agata's idea of job security.
How long can they continue at a snails pace before someone notices that Agata couldn't manage an ice cream stand in the Sahara. Agata couldn't manage a whorehouse in Spitzers neighborhood.
In a word Agata should be ashamed to take a paycheck.
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
March 6 - 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved. That's 40 registrations approved March 6.
March 7, 2017 - 4017 registrations had been filed and 3532 were still being processed which means 485 had been approved. That's 21 registrations approved March 7.
March 8, 2017 - 4021 registrations had been filed and 3512 were still being processed which means 509 had been approved. That's 24 registrations approved March 8.
March 9, 2017 - 4030 registrations had been filed and 3476 were still being processed which means 554 had been approved. That's 45 registrations approved March 9.
March 10, 2017 - 4041 registrations had been filed and 3458 were still being processed which means 583 had been approved. That's 29 registrations approved March 10.
March 13, 2017 - 4051 registrations had been filed and 3429 were still being processed which means 622 had been approved. That's 39 registrations approved March 13.
March 14, 2017 - 4053 registrations had been filed and 3431 were still being processed which means 622 had been approved. That's 0 registrations approved March 14.
Today 4075 registrations had been filed and 3431 were still being processed which means 644 had been approved. That's 22 registrations approved March 15.
22 registrations approved and 22 new registrations filed that's called being stuck in the mud. At this rate JJOKE will never be finished that's Agata's idea of job security.
How long can they continue at a snails pace before someone notices that Agata couldn't manage an ice cream stand in the Sahara. Agata couldn't manage a whorehouse in Spitzers neighborhood.
In a word Agata should be ashamed to take a paycheck.
Tuesday, March 14, 2017
Who is essential at JJOKE?
March 2, 2017 - 3993 registrations had been filed for 2017 and 3587 were still being processed which means 406 had been approved. 406 in over 2 months. That's about 10 a day.
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
March 6 - 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved. That's 40 registrations approved March 6.
March 7, 2017 - 4017 registrations had been filed and 3532 were still being processed which means 485 had been approved. That's 21 registrations approved March 7.
March 8, 2017 - 4021 registrations had been filed and 3512 were still being processed which means 509 had been approved. That's 24 registrations approved March 8.
March 9, 2017 - 4030 registrations had been filed and 3476 were still being processed which means 554 had been approved. That's 45 registrations approved March 9.
March 10, 2017 - 4041 registrations had been filed and 3458 were still being processed which means 583 had been approved. That's 29 registrations approved March 10.
March 13, 2017 - 4051 registrations had been filed and 3429 were still being processed which means 622 had been approved. That's 39 registrations approved March 13.
Today only essential state workers are working. I'm working so I called JJOKE to see who was in.
No Answer
Agata - not essential - NO SHIT
Levine - not essential - NO SHIT
Monica - not essential - NO SHIT
Pei Pei - not essential - NO SHIT
McClueless - not essential - NO SHIT
JJOKE lawyers - not essential - NO SHIT
JJOKE staff - not essential - NO SHIT
JJOKE - not essential - NO SHIT
Of course tomorrow is a filing deadline do you think JJOKE will extend the deadline as a result of their day off to stay home drink hot chocolate and congratulate themselves on how hard they work?
Me neither that's why I'm working today to get all my clients filings done on time.
I bet I do more filings today than JJOKE processes.
Hell that's no different than when all the not essential JJOKERS actual show up to work.
For the record Today - 4053 registrations had been filed and 3431 were still being processed which means 622 had been approved. That's 0 registrations approved March 14.
Agata this is exactly the kind of work that can be done remotely. Do you want me to knock out a couple hundred registrations for you today?
Just say the word and I'll use that access to the system I have and help you out so you don't have to interrupt your sleigh riding time.
And by the way the New York City Lobby Commission was processing registrations today No backlog in the city.
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
March 6 - 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved. That's 40 registrations approved March 6.
March 7, 2017 - 4017 registrations had been filed and 3532 were still being processed which means 485 had been approved. That's 21 registrations approved March 7.
March 8, 2017 - 4021 registrations had been filed and 3512 were still being processed which means 509 had been approved. That's 24 registrations approved March 8.
March 9, 2017 - 4030 registrations had been filed and 3476 were still being processed which means 554 had been approved. That's 45 registrations approved March 9.
March 10, 2017 - 4041 registrations had been filed and 3458 were still being processed which means 583 had been approved. That's 29 registrations approved March 10.
March 13, 2017 - 4051 registrations had been filed and 3429 were still being processed which means 622 had been approved. That's 39 registrations approved March 13.
Today only essential state workers are working. I'm working so I called JJOKE to see who was in.
No Answer
Agata - not essential - NO SHIT
Levine - not essential - NO SHIT
Monica - not essential - NO SHIT
Pei Pei - not essential - NO SHIT
McClueless - not essential - NO SHIT
JJOKE lawyers - not essential - NO SHIT
JJOKE staff - not essential - NO SHIT
JJOKE - not essential - NO SHIT
Of course tomorrow is a filing deadline do you think JJOKE will extend the deadline as a result of their day off to stay home drink hot chocolate and congratulate themselves on how hard they work?
Me neither that's why I'm working today to get all my clients filings done on time.
I bet I do more filings today than JJOKE processes.
Hell that's no different than when all the not essential JJOKERS actual show up to work.
For the record Today - 4053 registrations had been filed and 3431 were still being processed which means 622 had been approved. That's 0 registrations approved March 14.
Agata this is exactly the kind of work that can be done remotely. Do you want me to knock out a couple hundred registrations for you today?
Just say the word and I'll use that access to the system I have and help you out so you don't have to interrupt your sleigh riding time.
And by the way the New York City Lobby Commission was processing registrations today No backlog in the city.
Monday, March 13, 2017
Who cares that JJOKE doesn't approve registrations?
Anyone that files reports.
You see a backlog (that's too small a term) a logjam (not big enough) a bottleneck (no that's not enough either) a complete failure of the JJOKE registration system effects other disclosure reports as well.
You can't amend registrations until they are approved and yet the statute requires amendments to be made within 10 days of their occurrence. Had a carryover contract that expired in January and you want to extend it? Too bad you can't amend to extend until they get around to approving your registration. Watch for the late fee they will impose. Register without that comma or ampersand that Amy Nicotera is demanding? Too bad you can't amend until they get around to approving your registration. Watch for the late fee they will impose.
How about bimonthly reports? They are due by Wednesday. You can file them without your registration being approved but they can't be approved until the registration is approved which results in another backlog (that's too small a term) a logjam (not big enough) a bottleneck (no that's not enough either) a complete failure of the JJOKE disclosure reporting system and you guessed it you can't amend to correct any typos or other errors in reporting. End result a disclosure system that should be available in real time to the public isn't even reliably accurate at any time much less in real time.
Hey Agata it's 2017 even a nut less monkey could do a better job of managing JJOKE.
Gagan? Gagan?
Tagliafierro? Tagliafierro?
Biben? Biben?
Bueller? Bueller?
You see a backlog (that's too small a term) a logjam (not big enough) a bottleneck (no that's not enough either) a complete failure of the JJOKE registration system effects other disclosure reports as well.
You can't amend registrations until they are approved and yet the statute requires amendments to be made within 10 days of their occurrence. Had a carryover contract that expired in January and you want to extend it? Too bad you can't amend to extend until they get around to approving your registration. Watch for the late fee they will impose. Register without that comma or ampersand that Amy Nicotera is demanding? Too bad you can't amend until they get around to approving your registration. Watch for the late fee they will impose.
How about bimonthly reports? They are due by Wednesday. You can file them without your registration being approved but they can't be approved until the registration is approved which results in another backlog (that's too small a term) a logjam (not big enough) a bottleneck (no that's not enough either) a complete failure of the JJOKE disclosure reporting system and you guessed it you can't amend to correct any typos or other errors in reporting. End result a disclosure system that should be available in real time to the public isn't even reliably accurate at any time much less in real time.
Hey Agata it's 2017 even a nut less monkey could do a better job of managing JJOKE.
Gagan? Gagan?
Tagliafierro? Tagliafierro?
Biben? Biben?
Bueller? Bueller?
Friday, March 10, 2017
JJOKE serving the regulated community . . . when it feels like it
March 2, 2017 - 3993 registrations had been filed for 2017 and 3587 were still being processed which means 406 had been approved. 406 in over 2 months. That's about 10 a day.
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
March 6 - 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved. That's 40 registrations approved March 6.
March 7, 2017 - 4017 registrations had been filed and 3532 were still being processed which means 485 had been approved. That's 21 registrations approved March 7.
March 8, 2017 - 4021 registrations had been filed and 3512 were still being processed which means 509 had been approved. That's 24 registrations approved March 8.
March 9, 2017 - 4030 registrations had been filed and 3476 were still being processed which means 554 had been approved. That's 45 registrations approved March 9.
As of today 4041 registrations had been filed and 3458 were still being processed which means 583 had been approved. That's 29 registrations approved today.
For the week . . . a whopping 159 registrations approved that's for the week not for the morning the whole week
If Agata ever stops chasing the second floor enemies list we may see all the registrations approved by . . . well at some time.
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
March 6 - 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved. That's 40 registrations approved March 6.
March 7, 2017 - 4017 registrations had been filed and 3532 were still being processed which means 485 had been approved. That's 21 registrations approved March 7.
March 8, 2017 - 4021 registrations had been filed and 3512 were still being processed which means 509 had been approved. That's 24 registrations approved March 8.
March 9, 2017 - 4030 registrations had been filed and 3476 were still being processed which means 554 had been approved. That's 45 registrations approved March 9.
As of today 4041 registrations had been filed and 3458 were still being processed which means 583 had been approved. That's 29 registrations approved today.
For the week . . . a whopping 159 registrations approved that's for the week not for the morning the whole week
If Agata ever stops chasing the second floor enemies list we may see all the registrations approved by . . . well at some time.
Thursday, March 9, 2017
Record setting day at JJOKE 45 registrations processed
March 2, 2017 - 3993 registrations had been filed for 2017 and 3587 were still being processed which means 406 had been approved. 406 in over 2 months. That's about 10 a day.
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
March 6 - 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved. That's 40 registrations approved March 6.
March 7, 2017 - 4017 registrations had been filed and 3532 were still being processed which means 485 had been approved. That's 21 registrations approved March 7.
March 8, 2017 - 4021 registrations had been filed and 3512 were still being processed which means 509 had been approved. That's 24 registrations approved March 8.
As of today 4030 registrations had been filed and 3476 were still being processed which means 554 had been approved. That's 45 registrations approved today. A RECORD DAY
Under the Governors press release edict JJOKE's press department should draft and release a press release proclaiming a record amount of working being performed.
If the regulated community worked at the JJOKE pace we would just be filing registrations for 2010.
Agata keep ignoring how bad a manager you are the backlog may just disappear. Or you could grand another round of amnesty for all of 2017 and focus on 2018.
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
March 6 - 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved. That's 40 registrations approved March 6.
March 7, 2017 - 4017 registrations had been filed and 3532 were still being processed which means 485 had been approved. That's 21 registrations approved March 7.
March 8, 2017 - 4021 registrations had been filed and 3512 were still being processed which means 509 had been approved. That's 24 registrations approved March 8.
As of today 4030 registrations had been filed and 3476 were still being processed which means 554 had been approved. That's 45 registrations approved today. A RECORD DAY
Under the Governors press release edict JJOKE's press department should draft and release a press release proclaiming a record amount of working being performed.
If the regulated community worked at the JJOKE pace we would just be filing registrations for 2010.
Agata keep ignoring how bad a manager you are the backlog may just disappear. Or you could grand another round of amnesty for all of 2017 and focus on 2018.
Wednesday, March 8, 2017
JJOKE barely 500 lobbyists served This isn't McDonalds
March 2, 2017 - 3993 registrations had been filed for 2017 and 3587 were still being processed which means 406 had been approved. 406 in over 2 months. That's about 10 a day.
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
March 6 - 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved. That's 40 registrations approved March 6.
March 7, 2017 - 4017 registrations had been filed and 3532 were still being processed which means 485 had been approved. That's 21 registrations approved March 7.
As of today 4021 registrations had been filed and 3512 were still being processed which means 509 had been approved. That's 24 registrations approved today.
Seems like we are settling into a routine 20 to 25 registrations a day. That's about 8 a day or one an hour for each of the 3 ladies processing registrations. Just think how many they could do if the queen of typo's and ampersands, Amy Nicotera, stopped nitpicking and pitched in to lend a hand.
I'm sure if Martin and Seth started processing registrations we could up the number to close to 30 a day.
Meanwhile you can't file an amendment until the registration is approved. What a nightmare Agata has created thru bad, bad management.
But don't worry these are the same people that will be rolling out a new computer filing system . . . someday and are writing new regulations for lobbying. Anyone want to bet how badly they will screw that up?
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
March 6 - 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved. That's 40 registrations approved March 6.
March 7, 2017 - 4017 registrations had been filed and 3532 were still being processed which means 485 had been approved. That's 21 registrations approved March 7.
As of today 4021 registrations had been filed and 3512 were still being processed which means 509 had been approved. That's 24 registrations approved today.
Seems like we are settling into a routine 20 to 25 registrations a day. That's about 8 a day or one an hour for each of the 3 ladies processing registrations. Just think how many they could do if the queen of typo's and ampersands, Amy Nicotera, stopped nitpicking and pitched in to lend a hand.
I'm sure if Martin and Seth started processing registrations we could up the number to close to 30 a day.
Meanwhile you can't file an amendment until the registration is approved. What a nightmare Agata has created thru bad, bad management.
But don't worry these are the same people that will be rolling out a new computer filing system . . . someday and are writing new regulations for lobbying. Anyone want to bet how badly they will screw that up?
Tuesday, March 7, 2017
JJOKE slowing down only 21 registrations approved as of 3pm maybe a big push is coming
March 2, 2017 - 3993 registrations had been filed for 2017 and 3587 were still being processed which means 406 had been approved. 406 in over 2 months. That's about 10 a day.
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
March 6 - 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved.
Today 4017 registrations had been filed and 3532 were still being processed which means 485 had been approved. That's 21 registrations approved today.
Word is the staff is stressed and Martin and Agata have no solution other than overtime for the 3 young ladies doing all the work.
Free hint Agata ALL HANDS ON DECK
I'd pay to see Seth Agata and Martin Levine processing registrations
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
March 6 - 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved.
Today 4017 registrations had been filed and 3532 were still being processed which means 485 had been approved. That's 21 registrations approved today.
Word is the staff is stressed and Martin and Agata have no solution other than overtime for the 3 young ladies doing all the work.
Free hint Agata ALL HANDS ON DECK
I'd pay to see Seth Agata and Martin Levine processing registrations
Monday, March 6, 2017
How many registrations today? 40
March 2, 2017 - 3993 registrations had been filed for 2017 and 3587 were still being processed which means 406 had been approved. 406 in over 2 months. That's about 10 a day.
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
Today 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved. That's 40 registrations approved today.
Somebody is reading the blog and cracking the whip.
But still 40? that's 5 per hour That's pathetic
A nut less monkey would be better.
March 3, 2017 - 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved March 3, 2017.
Today 4013 registrations had been filed and 3549 were still being processed which means 464 had been approved. That's 40 registrations approved today.
Somebody is reading the blog and cracking the whip.
But still 40? that's 5 per hour That's pathetic
A nut less monkey would be better.
Friday, March 3, 2017
Is anyone actually working at JJOKE?
This is a new feature and I will try to update it at the close of business everyday.
HOW MANY REGISTRATION STATEMENTS DID JJOKE APPROVE TODAY?
Go ahead and take a guess,.
This is the same system the old lobby commission used to use and we prided ourselves on getting the registrations approved as quickly as possible. You assign everyone to registrations for a week or two and the problem is solved. An average lobby commission staffer could do 12 reports an hour for 8 hours that 96 reports a day times 6 staffers that's 576 reports a day times 5 days is 2880 reports a week.
So how many did JJOKE process today? With a huge backlog they managed to process 18 registrations. 18 think about that WTF are they doing?
JJOKE has a reputation for backlogs that would choke a horse. I've blogged about it in years past but nothing has changed other that the angry amish smurf has gotten more angry and arrogant and is stockpiling logjams like a Canadian lumberjack (including the Larry Schwartz financial disclosure report delinquency notice).
How did I get my number of 18?
Easy its on the website.
Yesterday 3993 registrations had been filed for 2017 and 3587 were still being processed which means 406 had been approved. 406 in over 2 months. That's about 10 a day.
Today 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved today.
I guess you could say they are picking up the pace. But at there present rate the registrations will all be approved by 200 business days from today. That's 10 months.
That is a total disgrace. Seth Agata do you even know whats going on? Go ask Martin Levine to explain.
The only thing slower than the registration approvals is listening to Commissioner Gary Lavine speak. Could he talk any slower? Gary enunciating every syllable doesn't make you sound any smarter it's just painful to listen to.
Embrace serendipity and go where the wind takes you.
HOW MANY REGISTRATION STATEMENTS DID JJOKE APPROVE TODAY?
Go ahead and take a guess,.
This is the same system the old lobby commission used to use and we prided ourselves on getting the registrations approved as quickly as possible. You assign everyone to registrations for a week or two and the problem is solved. An average lobby commission staffer could do 12 reports an hour for 8 hours that 96 reports a day times 6 staffers that's 576 reports a day times 5 days is 2880 reports a week.
So how many did JJOKE process today? With a huge backlog they managed to process 18 registrations. 18 think about that WTF are they doing?
JJOKE has a reputation for backlogs that would choke a horse. I've blogged about it in years past but nothing has changed other that the angry amish smurf has gotten more angry and arrogant and is stockpiling logjams like a Canadian lumberjack (including the Larry Schwartz financial disclosure report delinquency notice).
How did I get my number of 18?
Easy its on the website.
Yesterday 3993 registrations had been filed for 2017 and 3587 were still being processed which means 406 had been approved. 406 in over 2 months. That's about 10 a day.
Today 3999 registrations had been filed and 3575 were still being processed which means 424 had been approved. That's 18 registrations approved today.
I guess you could say they are picking up the pace. But at there present rate the registrations will all be approved by 200 business days from today. That's 10 months.
That is a total disgrace. Seth Agata do you even know whats going on? Go ask Martin Levine to explain.
The only thing slower than the registration approvals is listening to Commissioner Gary Lavine speak. Could he talk any slower? Gary enunciating every syllable doesn't make you sound any smarter it's just painful to listen to.
Embrace serendipity and go where the wind takes you.
Tuesday, February 14, 2017
Rob Cohen, Larry Schwartz and failure to file
Recent story in President Trump's paper of record the New York Post about Larry Schwartz failure to file his financial disclosure reports for the last 2 years http://nypost.com/2017/02/12/mta-board-members-failed-to-declare-income/
I especially like the JJOKE comment when asked what they will do about it “we have processes to follow.” Processes to follow that's funny. Here is the JJOKE process we learned from Seth Agata when he got caught with his thumb up Joe Percocco's ass.
Step one: Don't review 2nd floor big shots financial disclosure reports
Step two: pray no one FOILS said reports
Step three: notify the 2nd floor when a FOIL comes in requesting said reports
Step four: pray the media doesn't report on the reports or JJOKE's coverup of said reports
Step five: say we will follow a process and do better next time.
NEXT TIME JUST ARRIVED Mr. Agata
How could you possibly have missed Schwartz's non filing after the Percocco disaster?
Is this your idea of doing better?
I was told by my sources on the second floor that after Percocco JJOKE had reviewed all the top staffs reports. (that could be a lie)
Maybe they did, in which case step three above is in effect.
Which brings me to Rob Cohen.
Why would Cuomo appoint "Mr. walk into closets" "Don't file my attorney registration" to be a commissioner at JJOKE? Could it be that Rob Cohen was the JJOKE staffer responsible for the financial disclosure reports and knows where all the bodies are buried? Maybe the timing of his appointment makes more sense now. And we know he knows about not filing reports on time. http://davidgrandeau.blogspot.com/2013/09/out-of-closet-rob-cohen.html
I guess I should add a step six to the process.
Step six: let the JJOKE commissioners meet in executive session so Rob Cohen can explain why he is covering up for the 2nd floor.
Now lets just hope he puts another book down on the mic button so we all can listen in.
JJOKE is the absolute worst ethics agency in the history of New York ethics agencies and that is saying something.
I especially like the JJOKE comment when asked what they will do about it “we have processes to follow.” Processes to follow that's funny. Here is the JJOKE process we learned from Seth Agata when he got caught with his thumb up Joe Percocco's ass.
Step one: Don't review 2nd floor big shots financial disclosure reports
Step two: pray no one FOILS said reports
Step three: notify the 2nd floor when a FOIL comes in requesting said reports
Step four: pray the media doesn't report on the reports or JJOKE's coverup of said reports
Step five: say we will follow a process and do better next time.
NEXT TIME JUST ARRIVED Mr. Agata
How could you possibly have missed Schwartz's non filing after the Percocco disaster?
Is this your idea of doing better?
I was told by my sources on the second floor that after Percocco JJOKE had reviewed all the top staffs reports. (that could be a lie)
Maybe they did, in which case step three above is in effect.
Which brings me to Rob Cohen.
Why would Cuomo appoint "Mr. walk into closets" "Don't file my attorney registration" to be a commissioner at JJOKE? Could it be that Rob Cohen was the JJOKE staffer responsible for the financial disclosure reports and knows where all the bodies are buried? Maybe the timing of his appointment makes more sense now. And we know he knows about not filing reports on time. http://davidgrandeau.blogspot.com/2013/09/out-of-closet-rob-cohen.html
I guess I should add a step six to the process.
Step six: let the JJOKE commissioners meet in executive session so Rob Cohen can explain why he is covering up for the 2nd floor.
Now lets just hope he puts another book down on the mic button so we all can listen in.
JJOKE is the absolute worst ethics agency in the history of New York ethics agencies and that is saying something.
Tuesday, January 31, 2017
Rob Cohen nuff said
JJOKE's newest commissioner is Rob Cohen.
Formerly a JJOKE special counsel.
The same special counsel that was responsible for turning on the hot mic during an executive session of JCOPE almost 4 years ago to the day (Jan 30 2013).
I promised some of my second floor friends I wouldn't say anything about the pick so I'm just going to pass on a story I just heard that the governor's office picked Rob Cohen because the following people turned them down.
Joe Percocco
Alain Kalyeros
Todd Howe
Vito Lopez
Barry Ginsberg
Herb Teitelbaum
Elliot Spitzer and David Patterson
Well if nothing else Rob Cohen will make Seth Agata and Martin Levine look like Benjamin Cardozo
Hey Rob I'm just trying to be helpful you might want to edit your law firms website to tone down your role at JJOKE it looks a lot like you might be violating the Public Officers Law by using your state gig to get business.
Rob Cohen - the gift that will keep the blog in material for months.
I wonder what Weismann and Jacobs think about Rob Cohen being a commissioner?
Too funny let me thank whomever suggested Rob Cohen for the job you are a true friend for bringing me this much joy!!!!!
Formerly a JJOKE special counsel.
The same special counsel that was responsible for turning on the hot mic during an executive session of JCOPE almost 4 years ago to the day (Jan 30 2013).
I promised some of my second floor friends I wouldn't say anything about the pick so I'm just going to pass on a story I just heard that the governor's office picked Rob Cohen because the following people turned them down.
Joe Percocco
Alain Kalyeros
Todd Howe
Vito Lopez
Barry Ginsberg
Herb Teitelbaum
Elliot Spitzer and David Patterson
Well if nothing else Rob Cohen will make Seth Agata and Martin Levine look like Benjamin Cardozo
Hey Rob I'm just trying to be helpful you might want to edit your law firms website to tone down your role at JJOKE it looks a lot like you might be violating the Public Officers Law by using your state gig to get business.
Rob Cohen - the gift that will keep the blog in material for months.
I wonder what Weismann and Jacobs think about Rob Cohen being a commissioner?
Too funny let me thank whomever suggested Rob Cohen for the job you are a true friend for bringing me this much joy!!!!!
Monday, January 23, 2017
Piling on
I almost feel bad writing this blog entry.
Poor Martin Levine got bitch slapped by a federal Judge. That has to smart.
What am I talking about? The Federal courts decision to abstain from ruling on Andy Celli's lawsuit claiming the JCOPE opinion on grassroots lobbying (that Martin wrote) violated the First Amendment. Now regular readers know how much I enjoy saying I told you so but this time it's especially pleasurable because both sides, JCOPE and Andy Celli had their heads up their asses and I told them so at the time. https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8012724775250138264#editor/target=post;postID=6904127879962274436;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=10;src=postname
Here is the article Bill Mahoney wrote at the time http://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2016/03/pr-firms-file-suit-over-hopelessly-vague-jcope-lobbying-definition-032090
Pay careful attention to the last paragraph "Celli said. “The good news is that we have federal courts and judges who determine these things, and I’ll let the court determine the case. I’m not going to respond to David Grandeau.”
Hey Andy the federal courts have decided I'm not the only one that thinks you just wasted a good bit of your clients money chasing a lawsuit that just wasn't ripe. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
And Martin don't kid yourself that JCOPE won anything here read what the Judge said about your legal acumen and writing skills: http://www.campaignfreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/JCOPE.-Memorandum-and-Opinion.pdf
This is my favorite part:
Poor Martin Levine got bitch slapped by a federal Judge. That has to smart.
What am I talking about? The Federal courts decision to abstain from ruling on Andy Celli's lawsuit claiming the JCOPE opinion on grassroots lobbying (that Martin wrote) violated the First Amendment. Now regular readers know how much I enjoy saying I told you so but this time it's especially pleasurable because both sides, JCOPE and Andy Celli had their heads up their asses and I told them so at the time. https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=8012724775250138264#editor/target=post;postID=6904127879962274436;onPublishedMenu=allposts;onClosedMenu=allposts;postNum=10;src=postname
Here is the article Bill Mahoney wrote at the time http://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2016/03/pr-firms-file-suit-over-hopelessly-vague-jcope-lobbying-definition-032090
Pay careful attention to the last paragraph "Celli said. “The good news is that we have federal courts and judges who determine these things, and I’ll let the court determine the case. I’m not going to respond to David Grandeau.”
Hey Andy the federal courts have decided I'm not the only one that thinks you just wasted a good bit of your clients money chasing a lawsuit that just wasn't ripe. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
And Martin don't kid yourself that JCOPE won anything here read what the Judge said about your legal acumen and writing skills: http://www.campaignfreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/JCOPE.-Memorandum-and-Opinion.pdf
This is my favorite part:
First, the Advisory Opinion is an unclear state regulation that is subject to multiple,
contradictory interpretations. The Advisory Opinion states that a grassroots communication by a
consultant constitutes lobbying where it (1) “[r]eferences, suggests or otherwise implicates an
activity covered by [the Act],” (2) “[t]akes a clear position on the issue in question” and (3) “[i]s
an attempt to influence a public official through a call to action, i.e., solicits or exhorts the public
. . . to contact (a) public official(s).” Adv. Op. at 2.
However, the Advisory Opinion does not define what it means to “reference, suggest or
otherwise implicate lobbying activity.” Depending on the definition of that phrase, the number
and types of activities covered by the Advisory Opinion could be dramatically different. While
the Act defines lobbying as an attempt to influence the “passage or defeat” of legislation, among
other similar acts, N.Y. Legis. Law § 1-c(c ), “referenc[ing], suggest[ing] or otherwise
implicat[ing] lobbying activity” could mean something much broader. If a consultant helped
organize a campaign to inform legislators of their constituent’s views on an issue that is not the
subject of pending legislation, but which later could be, the Advisory Opinion might cover that
activity as suggesting or implicating lobbying activity, while the Act’s definition of lobbying
would not cover it.
The Advisory Opinion is also internally inconsistent. Its conclusion section states that a
call to action is necessary for a grassroots communication to fall under the Act, and defines a call
to action as soliciting or exhorting the public to contact public officials. Adv. Op. at 4. In
contrast, both the Advisory Opinion’s discussion section and the Grassroots Lobbying FAQ
imply that a consultant could be subject to the Act even if the relevant communication does not
include a call to action. According to the Advisory Opinion, consultants who both deliver a
message and control its content are engaging in grassroots lobbying. The discussion section and
Grassroots Lobbying FAQ both provide examples of delivering a message that do not include a
call to action. The discussion section notes that a consultant who “speaks to a group to advance
[a] client’s lobbying message” is delivering a message. Id. at 8. The Grassroots Lobbying FAQ
states that, where a consultant appears on television to support a client’s position on a
government action, that consultant is also delivering a message. Grassroots Lobbying FAQ at 1-
2. Because the Advisory Opinion states that a consultant has engaged in lobbying when the
consultant delivers a message and controls its content, it is possible to read the Advisory Opinion
as both expressly requiring and not requiring a call to action as part of the test for determining
whether an activity constitutes reportable lobbying.
In addition, the Advisory Opinion is ambiguous in light of the August 2016 amendment to
the Act. That amendment exempts press communications from reportable lobbying where a
putative lobbyist is speaking to a professional journalist about news. N.Y. Legis. Law § 1-
c(c)(B)(ii). Prior to the amendment, the Advisory Opinion included as reportable lobbying
urging a newspaper to publish an editorial that included a call to action. Following the
amendment, it is unclear whether an editorial that includes both a discussion of news and a call
to action is within the definition of lobbying, or whether communications with the press must be
solely related to current events with no additional agenda to be exempt. These ambiguities create
issues of first impression that are best resolved by a state court.
Hey Martin how many different ways can the Judge tell you that you suck at your job? LOLOLOLOLOL
I told Agata a year ago not to waste the taxpayers money on this opinion and Andy's litigation. Mercury, Heller and Berlin Rosen have not registered STOP TALKING ABOUT IT AND BRING A CASE TO ENFORCE YOUR SHITTY OPINION. Then Andy Celli would at least have a real case to litigate and bill his clients a second time for the work he should have waited to do to begin with.
And remember Martin is the same JCOPE counsel writing the new lobby regulations that JCOPE lacks statutory authority to issue. I've got that Article 78 drawn up already I'm just going to wait until it's timely to file. Unlike Andy Celli I'm not a premature litigator.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)