Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the County Appointments Lobbying topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pitkin County commissioners review committee appointments, clarify staff lobbying role and outside lobbying requests
Summary
At a Jan. 7 work session the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners reviewed final chair, vice chair and committee appointments, discussed making a county staff member a registered lobbyist and considered outside lobbying partnerships and representative additions to intergovernmental bodies.
Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners members reviewed a final list of chair, vice chair and committee appointments at their Jan. 7 work session and discussed how a county staff member’s new status as a registered lobbyist would affect committee representation and outside meetings.
The board was presented a revised appointments list and agreed to remove a question mark next to Levi’s name as proxy for CCI committee assignments; commissioners said the board will formally adopt the appointments at their scheduled action on the following day, and that any changes would take effect the Tuesday after adoption.
Why it matters: the discussion touched on the practical effects of registering a county employee as a lobbyist and on who should represent the county in intergovernmental organizations. Commissioners flagged potential perception or bylaw conflicts if a registered lobbyist fills a commissioner’s seat at outside meetings, and asked staff to check bylaws and membership rules for groups such as CCI and others before finalizing representative roles.
Board members and staff described the county’s approach to a staff member performing lobbying work as different from hiring an outside, full‑time lobbying firm. County staff explained that when a county employee registers as a lobbyist at the state level the employee continues to be on county payroll and reports time spent on lobbying activities as part of their broader duties.
Discussion also covered appointment additions and alternates. Commissioners asked for the county’s NACO representation to be added to the appointment list, and several commissioners volunteered as alternates for other regional bodies. One commissioner asked for better communication between primary and alternate appointees so alternates can step in prepared if needed. The board also discussed adding a liaison to CORE’s advisory committees and formally recognizing Ashley (last name not specified in the transcript) as the county’s representative to the regional housing coalition listed as “West Row Mountain Regional Housing Coalition.”
Separately, commissioners raised an outside lobbying request from Protect Our Winters and Ski Co’s environmental foundation, which proposed a joint lobbying effort on carbon‑fee issues at the federal level. The foundation proposed a $75,000 budget for an external lobbyist, and asked Pitkin County to consider contributing $25,000. Board members said the county already retains lobbyists and directed staff to coordinate existing county lobbyists with outside groups to avoid duplicative contracts or spending and to check whether participation would require changes in any association policy platforms.
Next steps and directions from the board included: staff and the county attorney’s office will check bylaws and membership rules for groups where a registered lobbyist might attend in the stead of a commissioner; staff will circulate the packet for the courthouse award and appointments that will be included in the resolution to be presented the following day; and staff will work with retained county lobbyists to assess the Protect Our Winters/Ski Co proposal before any contribution is authorized.
Ending: Commissioners said they would sign and present the appointments at the next business meeting and asked staff to return with any clarification about organization bylaws or conflicts before the county takes further representational steps.
