Former Legislative Consortium Lobbyist, Kathy Teigland wrote a letter to the Mayor Finkbeiner concerning statements he made concerning her professional and private reputation.
In a letter to Finkbeiner dated Dec. 18, Teigland defends her work with the Consortium.
According to the letter Finkbeiner alleged that Teigland’s extramarital relationship with James Hartung, former president of the port authority, is the reason the city was lobbied to contribute to the Legislative Consortium. Hartung was fired from the port authority for pursuing an “inappropriate” relationship with Teigland.
The entire text of the letter is below:
Dear Mayor Finkbeiner:
Last year you made allegations directed to my personal life and to my professional reputation. Knowing this to be untrue, you alleged that an extramarital relationship in which I was engaged was the reason that the city had been lobbied to contribute to the Legislative Consortium membership. On October 16, 2007, in a memo to your senior staff, you stated: “Last year we paid 0. This year we have a $10 million budget deficit, Kathy delivered nothing.” In your memo to the Port Authority Board Members on July 11, 2008 you stated: “Since returning as Mayor, my staff and I have been lobbied to contribute to the Consortium, which is solely Kathy Teigland.” Your slanderous remarks and misstatements sought to misdirect the sequence of actual events leading to my being hired during your 1998 and current term. I will leave the speculation about what motivated these irresponsible actions to others. Before you leave office on January 4, I choose instead to set the record straight as it relates to my lobbying activities for the Legislative Consortium.
You suggested that contracts were steered to me to work on behalf of the Consortium due to an “alleged extramarital relationship.” In fact, it was you who were relentless in your requests that I spearhead the campaign to gain voter approval of a waiver of provisions of the City’s charter known as “Section 79” as I was departing the office of Senator Mike DeWine. I refused your requests countless times because I had never led a campaign and did not believe that I was best able to serve the City’s interest. When you refused to take no for an answer, you enlisted the help of the President of City Council, the President of the Port Authority and others to contact me in order that I might reconsider. Day after day, generally late in the evening, you continued to call. Finally, I relented and accepted the City’s charge. After a short and successful six-week campaign, the public and private praise you heaped on my successes was humbling.
During the Section 79 campaign, as you well know, you and other leaders of the community came together to form a Consortium. The object was to develop a focus-strategy to obtain funding and other considerations from various Federal agencies, commissions and congressional representatives. Don Jakeway at the Regional Growth Partnership spearheaded that process. Indeed, you Mr. Mayor were part of this process and you too were made aware of my intent to team with a Washington firm submitting a proposal to advance the Consortium’s agenda. In keeping with the regional strategy embraced by the Regional Growth Partnership and approved by you, I made the initial application more robust by persuading the then President of the Lucas County Commissioners, Sandy Isenberg, University of Toledo Government Relations Executive Director Sally Perz, Mark V’Soske, President of the Toledo Area Chamber of Commerce, and all the members intending to be part of the new Legislative Consortium to use a single lobbying firm with whom I had partnered. And you also know it was my hope to continue to enhance this community’s competitiveness in the area of economic development by creating one voice for the region. In so doing, I teamed with colleagues from Senator Mike DeWine’s office who submitted a proposal, as did nine other firms.
Seven members of the Consortium voted and selected the firm with whom I partnered, Wise and Associates. You will no doubt recall that this meeting occurred just before our wrap up session for the Section 79 Campaign. How could you forget? You understood the selection process. You congratulated me and most importantly you were happy for me. And why not? I had won a competition. Specifically, four out of seven members of the Consortium had selected Wise. Therefore the choice of lobbyist was neither the Port nor the City’s sole prerogative but was a majority vote of the membership. In fact, if any mistakes had been made it was the City’s. Your point person voted for a different lobbying firm, a firm represented by an individual with whom he had a long-standing friendship and personal relationship. If there was a conflict, Mr. Mayor, indeed it was yours.
In 2005 Wise and Associates had only one remaining principal and it was decided by the Consortium members to dissolve the contract. Requests for proposals were made and interviews were held with firms in DC. After the one-year rule prohibiting me from lobbying Senator DeWine had expired, I had obtained other accounts and lobbied Washington for other community minded organizations and submitted my bid for the Legislative Consortium contract. It was ultimately decided by all the members of the Consortium to retain my services for the balance of 2005 until the process was completed for selecting a permanent Washington firm for 2006.
Wise and Associates charged $240,000 per year for their lobbying activities. As a result of their premature departure in February 2005, $240,000 of the Consortium’s money remained. I received $80,000 to continue lobbying activities for the remainder of that year leaving $120,000 to be carried over into 2006 to pay my contract of $108,000. This was agreed to by each of the Consortium’s members. As a consequence, no additional funding was required from ANY member other than what was originally budgeted in 2005. To suggest that members of the Consortium, including the City, had been “lobbied to contribute” to the membership until 2007 is both untrue and specious.
By any reasonable standard the Consortium’s investment in me has proven to be more than good. In 2005 I helped to return $7,660,000 in federal appropriations. Then in 2006, I helped to return nearly $5 million during a year Congress pledged to cut earmark spending by 50%. My fee in 2005 was $80,0000 and increased to $108,000 in 2006. This is significantly less than what Wise and Associates had been paid earlier. Not only was I effective in pursuing the Consortium’s interest but also I did so at a cost significantly lower than DC standards. Let me refresh your memory as to the details, Mr. Mayor. It was by no means certain that I was to be retained after 2005. In fact bids were solicited from well known lobbying firms in Washington, DC for the 2006 contract. It remains my understanding your same representative again interviewed a DC firm for the 2006 contract. And it was this very competitor that suggested to your representative that the City should retain my services due to my successes and modest fee structure. As a Consortium member, you know that the DC lobbying fees quoted by my competition were upwards of $300,000 per year. Not one member of the Consortium was prepared to allow this high expense. Because of the obvious cost/benefit the Consortium elected to retain my services for the 2006 contract year.
The city remained an active participant in the Consortium and was represented at meetings by Senior Staff. In this connection, Dave Moebius, your Assistant Chief Operating Officer, remained part of the decision making process, bringing what appeared on the surface insurmountable projects to the table, more projects and larger funding requests than any other Consortium member and outside the purview of the economic development focus and intent of the Consortium. Consequently Mr. Mayor, you gave me ALL of the City’s federal funding requests; work on behalf of the City that was outside the intent of my contract. Mr. Moebius also traveled to Washington with me and the other members to lobby the entirety of the Ohio Delegation. As you well know, the business of the Consortium was always corporate and no one member ever received preferential treatment by me at the expense of any other.
Our productive relationship continued into 2007. You called me to discuss ways of obtaining already appropriated grant funding. I was surprised to learn that your Administration did not submit grant applications, as had the previous Ford Administration. I had to correct your staff on the specifics of the City’s projects submitted in 2007. You in turn complimented me and I was gratified that I continued to enjoy your confidence.
Apparently, I also enjoyed the confidence of the other four members of the Consortium as my contract was extended in 2007. Hence, your assertion “since returning as Mayor, my staff and I have been lobbied to contribute to the Consortium” remains a mystery to me. Perhaps you confused Mr. Hartung’s repeated attempts as the new Administrator of the Consortium to collect the City’s lobbying fees that were in arrearage for the year. It is hard for me however to understand how the timely payment of bills can be confused with a “lobbying” request. In total I am particularly disturbed by your assertion that I “delivered nothing” on the City’s or Legislative Consortium’s behalf. This is simply untrue and does violence to my reputation. My lobbying efforts, both as a subcontractor to Wise & Associates and as an independent consultant, brought back to this community in excess of $30 million. I am proud of the work I did and if you were a reasonable man you would be too. I hesitate to ask if the City during your most recent tenure, managed to submit and receive grant funding for competitive grant proposal opportunities that present themselves every day in the Federal Register or through close contact with federal agencies. It must be asked: what resources has the City proactively received without the efforts of the Consortium or what was advanced by the city in a timely fashion for the Fiscal Year 2009 and 2010 appropriations process?
While I watched as the City and Port volleyed, my career has been damaged and my reputation is in shreds. My contracts with the Legislative Consortium were all awarded by a vote of the majority. It is beyond belief that seven months after I voluntarily surrendered the contract, you began these allegations. You have gifted me with a terrible grief, Mr. Mayor. I brought the Consortium in excess of $30 million and charged $450,000 over a 7-year period. In case you’re wondering, the Consortium was able to keep 98.5 cents for every 1.5 cents my firm was compensated.
In conclusion, your motives for the trashing of my career are your own. And I am at a loss to understand. All decisions taken by the Legislative Consortium were by vote, no one member counted more than another as each paid the same fee. At anytime my services could have been terminated and no reason given. I was after all an at-will employee. My contract was not terminated but was extended, this by vote. Moreover, the Consortium valued my work accordingly to allow my contract to increase annually. At no time did any member ever express dissatisfaction with my work. And then you took it upon yourself to substitute performance for rumor, rumor that had no basis in fact. You must explain yourself not only to me but as a man and as the mayor of this city. And the clock is ticking. I have long awaited your public apology for your reckless allegations for some time. Especially since you were no doubt made aware, from at least several of the Port Authority Board Members you appoint, that the Hartung investigation leading to his dismissal deemed all of your allegations to be unfounded.
The Legislative Consortium was a group of well meaning people that you decided to game. Please give to all community conscious members respect, dignity and an honest rendition of the facts for these final days of your tenure. It is difficult to justify any of your whispering allegations based on the efforts of many of the good professionals who were part of the Legislative Consortium and who simply wanted to see Toledo a viable, livable and successful community.
Sincerely,
Kathy Teigland