The next meeting of the Alaska Personnel Board is coming up on September 9, 2009. If anyone remembers the last Personnel Board meeting, we saw how unprofessionally Board President Debra English acted not only towards the general public but the media as well.
This one should be even more interesting for several reasons:
1) There are a couple of newer, open ethics complaints out there with serious teeth. One (Zane Henning) is in regards to the per diem Sarah Palin charged the State of Alaska to live in her own home. Another (Andree McLeod) is in regards to the gifts Palin has received that have gone unreported.
2) (The main subject of this post) We have heard NOTHING regarding Kim Chatman's complaint over the Alaska Fund Trust since a report unfavorable to Palin from Investigator Tom Daniel was revealed. (Of course, it barely covered an iota of the violations revealed by other lawyers in the Fund Trust). While a number of Palinbots claim that there was no violation here, the report very clearly stated that Palin would be in violation of the Ethics Act if she did not accept his remedy.
3) I was notified through certified letter that the Personnel Board would be dealing with my comments in reponse to the Arctic Cat dismissal and I would have a chance to speak in Executive session. (To be covered in Part II)
An article by AP this weekend made it obvious that there is still much interest in the results of unresolved ethics complaints against Sarah Palin:
Palin resigned as Alaska's governor abruptly in July, and an independent investigator said he found probable cause she had violated ethics laws by trading on her position as she sought money for legal fees.
We are waiting to find out exactly what is going on with Palin and her AK Fund Trust since Investigator Tom Daniel's report was revealed offering a "remedy" to keep Governor Palin from facing a hearing. The report was revealed by an unknown source and reported by Alaska AP apparantly a week after Palin and her legal team received it as well as the attached request from the Investigator. The request was for Palin or her representative to either accept or reject the remedy...a response that Alaska Executive Branch Ethics law requires.
The remedy required that Palin:
...the governor should refuse to accept payment of her legal fees and costs from the Alaska Fund Trust and withdraw her authorization for the trust to be recognized as her "official" legal defense fund...
As of today, she is still taking donations on the AK Fund Trust Website which still declares itself the "the official website for the Governor Sarah Palin legal defense fund."
It's safe to say she never accepted the remedy.
According to the Executive Branch Ethics Act, their ONLY response to rejecting a remedy should have been to:
"...initiate formal proceedings by serving a copy of an accusation upon the subject of the accusation. The accusation shall specifically set out the alleged violation."
We haven't heard when this document was sent out--it should have been sent weeks ago and the twenty-day allowance for Palin's response to the "formal accusation" should be over by now. However, as soon as that formal document is served to Palin, long before her response is due, according to the EBEA: "...the accusation is a public document open to inspection."
(In other words, we should have heard by now that the document was sent. Today, I am sending off an email to the State asking for a copy.)
Giving Daniel and the Personnel Board the benefit of the doubt that they obeyed the law, we'll assume the formal accusation was sent and we have passed the 20-day response period. That means one of three things:
1) They admitted the violation, which would mean that we are now heading into the penalty phase;
2) They denied the charges, which means we should soon see preparations for a hearing;
3) They refused to respond, which is treated as if they admitted fault and the Personnel Board must then assign a penalty.
I have a call into Nicki Neal, Director for State of Alaska Personnel, asking for more information on a future hearing for former-Gov. Palin.
************************************************UPDATE********************************************
According to Ms. Neal, she cannot speak about the AK Fund Trust ethics case because CONFIDENTIALITY STILL APPLIES.
That can mean one of two things
1) They have served Palin with the formal accusation but are refusing to talk about the complaint case even though the Executive Branch Ethics Act (EBEA) states that it should now be public information, or...
2) NO ONE is following the Ethics Act in ANY way and Palin has NOT been served her formal accusation document.
September 9th gets curiouser and curiouser...
**************************************************************************************************
|
