Monday, February 04, 2008

SC Times Blog: Tinklenberg Lobbying Questioned

Larry Schumacher from the SC Times has a post up on his blog about the Tinklenberg Lobbying situation.

I'll be interested in hearing what Elwyn's response will be. Answering by saying once again that "I have not lobbied at the Federal level" when an investigation seems to be pending may be unwise.

Especially after we find out that Elk River paid him and his Group over $81,000 in services.

Albertville apparently thought he was a lobbyist.


City Administrator Kruse addressed the Council asking what their wishes were after they had a chance to hear what Mr. Tinklenberg had to share with them. Does the Council wish to go ahead with hiring Mr. Tinklenberg as a Lobbyist to represent Albertville?

Mayor Peterson feels Albertville needs to go ahead with hiring a lobbyist. Council member Fay was in favor of hiring a lobbyist but has hopes of getting some funds in return. Council member Berning was not much in favor of hiring a lobbyist at this point. Council member Vetsch was new and was hesitant on hiring a lobbyist. Council member Klecker agreed with Peterson and Fay to go ahead with hiring a lobbyist.

Council understood the need to action now because Congress is back in session if the City wants to get any financial assistance from the federal and state levels.

City Administrator Kruse wanted to clarify with City Attorney Couri how would the City draft the contract between the City of Albertville and Mr. Tinklenberg. Some discussion ensued about how to structure an agreement.

It would be interesting to talk to some of these local mayors, county commissioners, city council members, locally elected officals to determine if they believe that Tinklenberg is a Federal Lobbyist...

1 comment:

eric zaetsch said...

Do you think they should have a lemon law for lobbyists, as they have if the Ford truck you buy is defective or fails to work as it is supposed to?

You get a remedy there. What about --- Cash back, refund, on the Tink - I like the idea but in all those minutes I never saw him give any guarantee or warranty. A careful man.

Probably Tink had an express disclaimer in his presentation -- these are situations where nobody can say for sure how others, the decision makers, will weigh relative merits of competing projects for funding dollars, etc., so forth, and trust my best efforts.

In fairness, best efforts is all a lobbyist can sell, but when you sell it to several competing municipalities, each wanting a share of a limited pool of funding dollars, who gets best of the best? That is one of the more interesting dimensions to what the Tink's been selling. So far, it's an unanswered question. Tink's dodged it.

Back to the Lemon law, I think we need one.