Meet Nola Werren, esq., Assistant Director, Compliance Services!

What are your areas of expertise?

Corporate Contribution Compliance, Employee Preclearance of personal contributions, Pay-to-Play Reporting, and State Audits.

How long have you been with State and Federal Communications?

In May, I will have been with the company for 25 years.

How do you help our clients?

I make sure that if a client makes direct state corporate contributions, they are abiding by the state corporate reporting requirements.  For some of our clients, I vet their corporate contributions for compliance with the states’ contribution limits, reporting requirements, restrictions on contributions during legislative session, pay-to-play restrictions and reporting requirements, and restrictions on contributions from lobbyists. For other clients, I pre-clear their employees’ personal political contributions. I ensure that clients file the required pay-to-play reports. If one of our clients is selected for a state audit of its lobbying reports, I draft the response and submit it to the auditor.

Before I can make a political contribution using my own funds, my employer requires that I obtain permission first.  Can my employer legally do this?

 

Yes, employers may require employees to seek preapproval before making personal political contributions. Not only can your employer require this, it’s smart business to do so. Employers may even require preapproval from family members of employees.

This preapproval requirement has evolved as a result of the increased number of jurisdictions enacting pay-to-play laws. A seemingly innocuous contribution by an employee could result in the loss of government contracts, fines, and a ban on future contracting. Criminal sanctions may apply when repeated violations occur. By requiring pre-approval, your employer can properly vet the contribution for compliance with a jurisdiction’s pay-to-play law, including disclosure requirements.

In a majority of jurisdictions, employees covered by pay-to-play laws include officers, partners, directors, senior management, salespersons, and their spouses and dependent children. In Pennsylvania and Kentucky, all employees are covered in the instance of a no-bid contract.

Requiring preclearance of employee personal political contributions is certainly more preferable than imposing a ban on employee contributions, which could result in a violation of applicable labor laws. Various jurisdictions bar employers from retaliating against employees for engaging in political activities, which can include everything from participating in a political rally to making campaign contributions. Even though an employer can require preapproval, an employer cannot directly or indirectly affect an individual’s employment by means of discrimination or threat of discrimination based on the individual’s personal political contributions.

Don’t miss Nola’s October 2022 LobbyComply Pod episode for more information on this important issue.

It isn’t everyday someone walks in your doors and stays for 20 years. I am not talking about my husband or my pets…Nola Werren entered State and Federal Communications and has found a home, which has been fabulous for the company and our clients.

Twenty years ago, I sent letters to attorneys all over Akron looking for an attorney who did not want to practice. The letter made its way to a University of Akron Law School professor who forwarded it to Nola. She has held a lot of different titles at State and Federal Communications, and all have been handled with the love and care only Nola can provide. She leaves no stone unturned in her work.

Nola was recognized for her tenure with a companywide party on May 26. The video tributes from her colleagues are hilarious. Check them out here to see how much she is adored.

Nola is the company’s first employee to reach this milestone…and there are others closely behind. It fills my heart knowing people have the confidence to work for a small business owner.

I cannot thank her enough for sticking with us through thick and thin and building up the company to what it is today…And, I look forward to her contributions for our future.

Thank you, Nola.

Most of us have an idea of what lobbying is, but as states expand the definitions of lobbying, more activities may now trigger registration and reporting requirements. And, as states tighten political contribution rules, more and more contractors may run into problems because of pay-to-play laws. But in order to comply with the rules, you need to know the rules.

State and Federal Communications is taking part in two events over the next few weeks looking specifically at these issues. This fall our Compliance Client Specialist Nola Werren, Esq., will present “Compliance: Pay-to-Play and Procurement Lobbying Process” at events with the Public Affairs Council and WASRG, the Washington Area State Relations Group.

As an expert in the field, Nola will share her knowledge and experiences during a Public Affairs Council webinar and at the annual WASRG Symposium. Topics she will cover include the procurement process; lobbying requirements in the states, including best practices to ensure compliance; and pay-to-play laws. It is this area of pay-to-play, the nexus between making a contribution and the award of a contract, that can have far-reaching consequences for a business.

The Public Affairs Council’s webinar will be held on October 27^th and is entitled “Compliance: State-Level Laws and Recent Trends.” The WASRG Annual Symposium begins at noon on November 2^nd at Carmine’s at 425 7^th Street NW in Washington, DC.

Make sure you keep checking in with State and Federal Communications, Inc. We are your #1 resource on government relations compliance.

State and Federal Communications’ Client Specialist Nola Werren was a presenter at the State Legislative Leaders Foundation DC Dialogue: A Conversation about Ethics and Campaigns on May 7, in Washington, D.C.

Werren discussed “The View from the Legal Perspective: What are the Rules?” with Robert Bauer of Perkins-Coie LLP, former White House Counsel to President Obama.

Congratulations, Nola!

Q. With the start of the New Year, are there any changes I should be aware of in political contribution limits?

 A. Aside from changes as a result of new legislation, the most common adjustment of contribution limits is indexing for inflation.  Typically, adjustments are made biennially for inflation according to the Consumer Price Index.  The Consumer Price Index is calculated by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

This concept was addressed by the United States Supreme Court in Buckley v. Valeo (1976).  The court allowed federal contribution limits to be adjusted upwards at the beginning of each calendar year by the average percentage rise in the Consumer Price Index for the 12 preceding months.

The principal behind this is quite simple:  it is based on the recognition that the cost of campaigning steadily increases each year based on the increase to cost of living.  Campaign fliers, mailers, yard signs, and media buys do not cost the same in 2013 as they do in 2015.

This year, California adjusted its contribution limits for the 2015-2016 biennium.  In doing so, corporate contributions limits for general assembly candidates increased from $4,100 per election to $4,200.  Washington adjusts its limits in even-numbered years, so the 2014 corporate contribution limit of $950 per election for state legislative candidates will remain the same for 2015.   Illinois adjusts its limits in odd-numbered years, so the 2014 corporate contribution limit of $10,500 per election cycle for legislative candidates will increase to $10,800.

Finally, the indexing of contribution limits usually results from amendments to a state’s administrative code as opposed to its statute.  In order to ensure compliance, a contributor should review both of these sources.

 

You can directly submit questions for this feature, and we will select those most appropriate and answer them here. Send your questions to: experts@stateandfed.com.

(We are always available to answer questions from clients that are specific to your needs, and we encourage you to continue to call or e-mail us with questions about your particular company or organization. As always, we will confidentially and directly provide answers or information you need.) Our replies to your questions are not legal advice. Instead, these replies represent our analysis of laws, rules, and regulations.

A team of experts from State and Federal Communications is presenting the Public Affairs Council’s Compliance on the State Level webinar this afternoon from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. ET. Join us for an hour full of compliance information you need right now.

1.  Director of Client and Product Operations Amber Fish Linke will start our program by talking about state and local lobbying laws and gift laws.

2.  Client Specialist Nola Werren will continue the conversation and discuss the pay-to-play laws, strategies for compliance, and how to avoid violations. She will follow that up with a discussion about state campaign finance laws and where you can make corporate contributions.

3.  President and CEO Elizabeth Z. Bartz will round out the discussion with what to watch for in the procurement process.

Riveting conversation for a Thursday afternoon … but so important to know in 2014. If you haven’t already, take the time to register now for the webinar by going to www.pac.org or contact Piper Evans, manager of the council’s Government Relations Practice, at 202-787-5978 or pevans@pac.org.

Your company’s reputation in its home state and where it has business operations depends on it. As we are preparing our program if you have a specific question to ask, please send me an e-mail at ebartz@stateandfed.com.

 

In 2010, shortly after I told my daughters—ages 11 and 9 at the time—that I had been diagnosed with breast cancer, we were watching television when an advertisement for the new Seidman Cancer Center at University Hospital in Cleveland came on.  I looked at my 9-year-old’s face as she watched the commercial.  I knew the word “cancer” would now take on an entirely different meaning when she heard it.

Now, it was personal.  She turned to me and asked, “Mommy, why is breast cancer more important than other cancer?  Why does it get more attention?”  To which I responded, “Maggie, I can tell you the answer in two words:  Susan Komen.”  “Huh?” she replied.  My daughter then got a crash course in patient advocacy, medical research, awareness, education, sisterly love, and yes, even grassroots lobbying.  Her eyes got a little wider when I told her that in 2009, the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation [now known as Susan G. Komen for the Cure] illuminated the Great Pyramids at Giza in pink.  “Wow!” she replied. “Every cancer needs a Susan Komen.”

So when the Northeast Ohio Affiliate of Susan G. Komen for the Cure announced in 2011 that it would host its inaugural Akron Race for the Cure on Sunday, July 29, 2012, at Firestone Country Club, I knew I would be there.

Little did I know that by then, State and Federal Communications, Inc. would have started its own “Walking Challenge” as part of a fitness initiative and wellness program for its employees.  Little did I know that by then, a team consisting of numerous co-workers and their family members would be participating in the Akron Race for the Cure, including Elizabeth Bartz, President and CEO of State and Federal Communications and a 6½ year breast cancer survivor herself. Little did I know that my breast surgeon, Dr. Jessica Partin from Akron General Hospital’s Reflections Breast Health Center, would speak at the Survivor Ceremony and get to meet my daughters (“Mommy, tell Dr. Partin that she has a really great smile!).

But here is what I did know:  that when I crossed that finish line, I would be hand-in-hand, arms raised above our heads, with my two daughters and my “rock”—my sister, Christine Tvaroch.  We crossed the finish line in honor of the family members, friends, neighbors, and co-workers that have fought the good fight, some winning and unfortunately, some losing their battle with breast cancer.  But thanks to Susan G. Komen for the Cure, a breast cancer diagnosis today is no longer a death sentence.  And when the second annual Akron Race for the Cure is held in 2013, who knows what might happen? I sure intend on being there to find out!

Here is the Akron Beacon Journal coverage of the event: “Cancer survivors race toward a cure” by Dave Scott.

Above photo courtesy of Karen Schiely. Nola Werren is a Client Specialst at State and Federal Communications.

Q. If I receive an invoice from my contract lobbyist for services rendered during one reporting period, but I do not make payment on the invoice until the next reporting period, how do I know when to accurately report the payment?

A. You need to determine whether your particular state uses the cash or accrual method of disclosure.

The cash method is based on when money is actually transacted; in other words, when funds in point of fact change hands from client to contract lobbyist.  In direct contrast to the cash method, the accrual method focuses on the obligation to pay as opposed to when funds actually change hands. Essentially, when you receive the invoice from your contract lobbyist, you are obligated to pay.

So which date do you use for reporting purposes?  Is it the date you actually mail the check to the contract lobbyist, or the date you receive the invoice?  These rarely, if ever, occur on the same date and therein lies the issue:  what happens when these dates fall in different reporting periods?

Some states, such as Tennessee and Texas, specifically provide by statute or rule the method of disclosure that should be followed.  When the law is silent, the most prudent thing to do is call the disclosure office for that particular jurisdiction and get an answer.  Be sure to take the name and title of the person you spoke with and keep it in your records.  You may often hear, “It doesn’t matter; report the expense however you choose.”  This sounds great, but in reality is very frustrating. Whichever method you choose, be consistent. If you decide upon the cash method, document that and use it for all future reports.

When it comes to your contract lobbyists, be sure they are using the disclosure method required by law. This can be important in an audit when the state looks to see if your report aligns with the contract lobbyist’s report.  If the method is optional, discuss with your contract lobbyist which method they intend to use and be consistent.

You can directly submit questions for this feature, and we will select those most appropriate and answer them here. Send your questions to: marketing@stateandfed.com.

(We are always available to answer questions from clients that are specific to your needs, and we encourage you to continue to call or e-mail us with questions about your particular company or organization. As always, we will confidentially and directly provide answers or information you need.) Our replies to your questions are not legal advice. Instead, these replies represent our analysis of laws, rules, and regulations.

You can directly submit questions for this feature, and we will select those most appropriate and answer them here. Send your questions to: marketing@stateandfed.com.

Q. I attended the annual meeting of the National Conference of State Legislatures. While there, I took a group of legislators from various states to dinner and picked up the tab. Most of the legislators were accompanied by spouses. In those jurisdictions requiring disclosure of this dinner expenditure, must I also disclose the amount spent on the spouse?

A. Almost all states requiring disclosure of food and beverage expenditures incurred on behalf of reportable officials also require disclosure of the amount spent on the official’s spouse or immediate family member. However, there are exceptions.

• In Idaho, the lobbying law does not require disclosure of expenditures for spouses and family members of legislators. However, it is common practice for lobbyists to report such expenditures anyway.

• In Michigan, food and beverage expenditures on behalf of spouses or family members are not reportable. However, travel expenditures greater than $725 on behalf of spouses or family members are reportable.

• In Montana, a principal is not required to report expenditures made on behalf of a spouse or immediate family member of a legislator, public officer, or employee.

• In Rhode Island, expenditures made on behalf of family members are not reportable as lobbyist expenditures, but are reported by elected officials.

• In Vermont, expenditures on behalf of a spouse or immediate family member are not reportable.

(We are always available to answer questions from clients that are specific to your needs, and we encourage you to continue to call or e-mail us with questions about your particular company or organization. As always, we will confidentially and directly provide answers or information you need.) Our replies to your questions are not legal advice. Instead, these replies represent our analysis of laws, rules, and regulations.

The Council of Engineering and Scientific Society Executives [CESSE] held its annual meeting in Pittsburgh from July 13 to July 16, 2010. CESSE is a professional society comprised of over 1,200 executives from 165 science and engineering societies, whose combined memberships total approximately four million.  Some of CESSE’s members include the American Association of Artificial Intelligence, the America Association of Pharmaceutical Scientists, and the Society of Critical Care Medicine.

The objective of CESSE is to advance, in the public interest, the arts and sciences of the management of engineering and scientific societies.  Essentially, CESSE is an “association of associations”….and therein lie the unique compliance challenges when it comes to government relations and grassroots activity.

I was invited to speak to those members attending the conference’s general management and public affairs program tracks.  Not only did this include those individuals working in the company’s public affairs department, but also its senior executives.

At the federal level, the biggest concern for the group was compliance with the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 [LDA], as amended by the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 [HLOGA], along with federal lobbying restrictions by nonprofit organizations.  In particular, I addressed the permissible monetary thresholds for lobbying expenditures by a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization when making an election under Internal Revenue Code Section 501(h).  Group discussion included questions regarding the difference between direct and grassroots communication, both at the state and federal level.  Finally, no discussion about compliance would be complete without addressing the ethical disclosure obligations that accompany the vast array of state and federal gift laws.

Although no ninety minute presentation could ever include an in-depth, detailed discussion of state and federal lobbying regulations, the CESSE group walked away with a very comprehensive and practical overview.  I’d like to take this opportunity to wish CESSE all the best for its 2011 annual meeting in Vancouver!

Photo of Nola Werren and Brad Smith of the American Chemical Society.

For the twelfth consecutive year, State and Federal Communications, Inc. exhibited at the National Conference of State Legislature’s Annual Legislative Summit. This year the conference was held in Louisville, Kentucky. We always find that our attendance at the conference is enriching and productive, even when some days start with a 7:30 a.m. team breakfast meeting and end with the SGAC Late Night event [which, by the way, is never a disappointment]!

However, this year stands apart from the rest in that I was invited to moderate one of the continuing legal education sessions.  Entitled Citizens United v. FEC:  Political Blockbuster?, the panel addressed the ruling in January by the United States Supreme Court that it is unconstitutional to bar corporations and labor unions from making either independent expenditures or electioneering communications.  At NCSL’s 2010 Spring Forum held in Washington, D.C., in April, the group immediately saw the importance of including a session at the annual Legislative Summit to address the impact the Court decision will undoubtedly have on the states.

The panel was comprised of Ken Gross, a partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom in Washington, D.C.; Jason Torchinsky, a partner at Holtzman Vogel PLLC, in Virginia; and Maryland Delegate Jon S. Cardin, who represents Maryland’s 11th District in Northwest Baltimore County. Disclosure requirements in light of the post-Citizens United political landscape were perhaps the most lively debated issue by the panel, and it could not have been more timely given the fact that within the hour after our panel adjourned, Senate Democrats failed to gather the 60 votes needed to overcome an expected filibuster of The DISCLOSE Act, Congress’ legislative response to the ruling in Citizens United.

 

Here is Nola Werren moderating the Citizens United Panel discussion at NCSL:

No recap of this year’s NCSL Legislative Summit would be complete without mentioning Ohio Night. The venue for the event was the LeRoy Neiman Gallery at the Muhammad Ali Center. Having grown up watching a lot of Sunday afternoon sports with my dad, I was quite familiar with LeRoy Neiman and his signature artistic style. He would usually start with a blank canvass at the beginning of, let’s say, a golf tournament, and by the end of the tournament, his abstract was complete and captured the essence of the event in all its vivid glory. Well, the gallery at the Muhammad Ali Center did not disappoint. Especially impressive were his renderings of the two Ali versus Liston fights for boxing’s world heavyweight championships.

Every year since 1999, our experience at the annual NCSL Legislative Summit seems to outdo the previous year. Next year’s summit in San Antonio will undoubtedly live up to that expectation….and who knows what “political blockbuster” might occur between now and then.