Lobbying Expenditures Disclosure - Climate

2017 – Motorola Solutions Inc

WHEREAS, we believe in full disclosure of Motorola Solutions’ (MSI) direct and indirect lobbying activities and expenditures to assess whether MSI’s lobbying is consistent with its expressed goals and in the best interests of stockholders.

RESOLVED, stockholders of MSI request preparation of a report, updated annually, disclosing:

1. Company policy and procedures governing lobbying, both direct and indirect, and grassroots lobbying communications.

2. Payments by MSI used for (a) direct or indirect lobbying or (b) grassroots lobbying communications, in each case including amount of payment and recipient.

3. MSI’s membership in and payments to any tax-exempt organization that writes and endorses model legislation.

4. Description of management’s and Board’s decision making process and oversight for making payments described in sections 2 and 3 above.

For purposes of this proposal, a “grassroots lobbying communication” is communication directed to the general public that (a) refers to specific legislation or regulation, (b) reflects a view on the legislation or regulation and (c) encourages the recipient of the communication to take action with respect to legislation or regulation. “Indirect lobbying” is lobbying engaged in by a trade association or other organization of which it is a member.

Both “direct and indirect lobbying” and “grassroots lobbying communications” include efforts at local, state and federal levels.

The report shall be presented to the Audit Committee or other relevant oversight committees and posted on MSI’s website. 

Supporting Statement:  As stockholders, we encourage transparency and accountability in use of corporate funds to influence legislation and regulation. MSI spent $3.38 million in 2014 and 2015 on federal lobbying (opensecrets.org). These figures do not include lobbying expenditures to influence legislation in states, where MSI also lobbies but disclosure is uneven or absent.  For example, MSI had 160 lobbyists in 26 states in 2015 (http://www.followthemoney.org/), and MSI’s lobbying in Florida has attracted media attention (“Special Interests Flood Florida Legislative Campaigns with $28 Million in 6 months,” Miami Herald, January 17, 2016). MSI’s lobbying over police contracts has also drawn scrutiny (“Why Police and Firefighters Struggle to Communicate in Crises,” The Atlantic, September 19, 2015).

MSI belongs to the Chamber of Commerce, which has spent over $1.2 billion on lobbying since 1998, and the Business Roundtable, which spent $34.09 million on lobbying in 2014 and 2015.  MSI does not comprehensively disclose its trade association memberships, nor payments and amounts used for lobbying on its website. Further, MSI does not disclose memberships in tax-exempt organizations that write and endorse model legislation, such as the American Legislative Exchange Council.

Absent a system of accountability and disclosure, corporate assets may be used for objectives that pose risks to MSI. For example, MSI is an EPA Green Power Partner, yet the Chamber has sued to block the EPA Clean Power Plan to address climate change (“Move to Fight Obama’s Climate Plan Started Early,” New York Times, Aug. 3, 2015). We are concerned that MSI’s current lack of trade association lobbying disclosure presents reputational risks.