Friday, February 27, 2009

A Tribute to Frank Gwartney

It takes a lot of guts to file an ethics complaint against a powerful person, whose unethical, perhaps criminal, actions you can't abide. Some people in Alaska have complained several times about such conduct by public officials. And others have built their political careers around creating a perception that they had the guts to confront the powerful.

Alaska's 2007 Muckraker of the Year Ray Metcalfe is in the first category - a person who keeps on coming back, knowing that our state laws and guidelines on ethics for elected officials and state employees are often poorly written, vague or meaningless. His fights to get the truth out about
behind-the-scenes deals involving people all across the political spectrum go back into the 1980s.

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is in the second category. If one might distill the muckraker story she has tried to sell into a single sentence, it might read, "I fought the good ol' boys and their crooked deals, whether it was in Wasilla, Frank Murkowski's office, or the Alaska Republican Party."

Her battles in 2003 and 2004 against Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission member Randy Ruedrich, and her involvement in the complaints that led - in part - to Ruedrich's resignation from that board, have long been held by Palin and her supporters to be the central pillar of her title claim as an "Ethics Reformer." The fact that Ruedrich was then also Chairman of the Alaska Republican Party, and a possibly powerful blocker, should she choose to move upward, is the central pillar of her claim to be a "Maverick."


In 2004, Richard Mauer, Alaska's finest investigative reporter,
published a long article about Palin's role in Ruedrich's exit from the Commission. In light of this week's announcement by the Governor's office that she has reached an agreement to return almost $10,000.00 to the state for illegal travel charges she made since her term as governor, it is probably time to compare her statements regarding the 2003-2004 complaint period to what she is stating now, regarding the travel expense repayment agreement.

In Mauer's article, written after the Ruedrich affair was past, he writes of Palin's serious concerns about Ruedrich combining AOAGCC business with dates that coincided with Republican Party meetings or activities.
She complained that he emailed from a computer in his AOAGCC office. She searched it herself, while he was out of the office.

She complained Ruedrich wasn't open when confronted about combining possible personal business or Party business with AOAGCC functions.
Regarding Palin's concerns about the last of these matters, here's a lengthy excerpt from Mauer's article:


Long before she found those e-mails on Ruedrich's computer, Palin came to fear that she and the commission would lose all credibility in the Valley. She attended many of the same meetings as Ruedrich, she said, and tried to be neutral. She said she was upset by his promotion of the industry.


But the final blow came when the commissioners were in a meeting in Anchorage in October, and she asked Seamount, who had firsthand experience with coal bed methane as a geologist in the Rocky Mountain states, to represent the commission on an Anchorage radio call-in program.


A few minutes later, Seamount charged into her office. "No, no, no, no, this isn't right. He should not be doing this," Seamount told her.


"And I was telling Dan, 'I thought you called in, I thought you were talking.' And he said, 'No, Randy heard you asking me to call in so he went over to his office and he just called in, and he's on the radio right now.' So I turned it on, and went, 'Oh, no.'"


Palin asserted several times in the 2004 Mauer article, that Ruedrich's combinations of possible personal, business and party activities with his duties as a state employee were wrong. Because Ruedrich didn't supervise a lot of people, possible misuse of the time of those serving under him never came up.

In the complaint Palin and then-State Representative Eric Croft made against then-Attorney General Greg Renkes, Palin was quoted numerous times as believing the complaint process against Renkes, including all documents relevant to the case, should be made public. Even after the case was closed, and Renkes disgraced,
Palin stated, "It's important to get these documents made public so Alaskans can make their own judgments."

In
the Governor's statement on repaying the thousands of dollars she illegally took from Alaskans, this particular paragraph is the most galling, after re-reading the Ruedrich and Renkes material:
It is troubling that this complaint was such an obvious political weapon, with an associate of a political adversary filing this and making it public – against state law – just before the election. Beyond objecting to the obvious gamesmanship that serves the public so terribly, I think it is important to prevent the ethics act from being used as a tool to ensure that only the wealthy can seek higher office in Alaska.

Many have written about the ironies of Palin touting herself as an ethics reformer, while at the same time performing, herself, in extremely unethical modalities, sometimes on several levels simultaneously.


Frank Gwartney, who filed the complaint, has now been slimed by his Govenor. He merely read an accurate article, immediately realized that what Palin had done was 100% wrong, found out how to complain, did that, and let people know the truth. All he gets from this so-called ethics reform maverick is an accusation that he has violated state law.


For me, this is one of the most despicable things Sarah Palin has yet done. At least that we know about.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Somebody please explain how Petumenos and the Personnel Board have ANY authority to have anything to do with this ethics complaint.

According to the article Petumenos was only "hired by the Personnel Board to investigate the case as an independent counsel." That does not give him any authority to settle anything, just to investigate the case. This is the same as a cop, who investigates a case and then negotiates a plea deal with the accused. That is not the cop’s role. Here too, it was not Petumenos’s role to negotiate any settlement.

The article also states: "A state law specifically exempts the governor . . . from state personnel laws . . . The governor is taken out of the entire personnel act . . . Petumenos said."

Thus, any questions about Palin’s compliance with "state personnel laws” is not for the Personnel Board to consider, since apparently it only deals with matters within the “entire personnel act.”

So, something is very wrong with how this ethics complaint was handled, no?

Philip Munger said...

anon @ #1 - it was a case study in seeing how very, very, very far Alaska has to go before we can claim to have ethics accountability for all our elected officials.

Anonymous said...

Correct me if I am wrong, but there is no legal "requirement" that ethics complaints be kept secret on the part of the complainant?

Philip Munger said...

anona @ #3 - I thought not too, but talking to Frank Gwartney today, he says that AS 3952.340 pertains to him in the matter of his complaint. I thought it only pertained to members of the executive branch of state government, but he says he now believes it also pertains to anyone.

Anonymous said...

So. . . Palin's claim to fame happened 4 years ago. Niiiiice. She accomplished everything she would ever accomplish before what-- 40?

Anonymous said...

Palin this week gave up her personal use of a state vehicle because she found out that she would have to pay taxes. Did the state put the value of the vehicle (equivalent to an arms-length fair market lease) on an amended W-2 or 1099?

And if she "didn't know" that the use of a public vehicle by an elected official was taxable, this either means that she never paid taxes on the value of a similar vehicle she had a Wasilla mayor, or that she DID know the state vehicle was a taxable benefit.

Which was it?

Regarding confidentiality, remember that Palin publicly announced the complaint she filed against herself. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your investigative reporting on this. I know back when all this was happening, the talk out here in Wasilla among the Palin clan was that Sarah's kids didn't like her being away from the house for such long days (8 hr days plus 2 hr commutes) and that she had decided to step off the Commission solely b/c of her children. In fact - the way I heard it phrased was "Please pray for Sarah because she needs to get out of the job for family reasons, but she knows the timing of her departure is important." It seemed so weird to me at the time, like, If it's bad for your kids, then simply resign. But it was just a few weeks after I heard about this "pray for Sarah" request that she resigned, but pegged it all on Randy and her inability to work alongside someone who had conducted himself compromisingly on the job.

I never once heard the real reason behind her leaving (her family responsibilities) mentioned. Yet this prayer request came straight from the Palin family - Ruedrich was never once mentioned. Just her kids.

I always felt weird and conflicted once the news came out about Sarah's reason for leaving - and how the ADN kept it on the front page of the paper for days. I had heard, just weeks before, the request for prayer and the real reason - her kids resenting all her time at work.

It just seemed like Randy got the brunt end of the deal - especially knowing what she's done now that is more, in my way of thinking, than compromise. It is downright unethical. Coupled with the absolute knowledge that she lied under oath to the Legislative investigator - whatever high hopes I had for her as a conservative (which I am and she most certainly is not) and as a fellow Christian (where a basic regard for the truth is foundational), is long gone. While Alaska's Christian and conservative communities have finally figured out how she really plays ball, it's all those in the lower 48 that are smitten - not with Sarah, but what she represents to them - who will finance her next run for governor and will send her back to four more years in the boarded up Gov's mansion in Juneau.

(And yes, while I am philisophically and politically far away from many of your views, I always feel welcome on your site and very much enjoy reading what you have to say. Keep up the hard work. Alaska needs strong, independant voices right now)

Philip Munger said...

anon @ #7 - Wow!

I've heard a lot of Palin family stuff over the years that doesn't get printed here, but this particular "pray for Sarah" incident I'd not heard until now. I suppose it will go in the book, if I get around to it.

Thanks for reading Progressive Alaska. Although I'm not a "Christian," I am a follower of Jesus, so please don't take my concerns about Sarah's beliefs to be an attack on Christianity per se.

I was a Republican for a long, long time.

Ennealogic said...

Anon @7 -- You said,
"Coupled with the absolute knowledge that she lied under oath to the Legislative investigator..."

Could you expand on that? Are you talking about the contradictions between Walt Monegan's testimony and Sarah's statement that conversations with Walt never happened?

Would you be willing to explain where the absolute knowledge comes from?

You can PM me at mudflats forums, or my blogger profile has my e-mail.

Thanks!

Anonymous said...

Phil......I'm confused. I thought the ethics investigation was done over the troopergate issue, and was finished months ago.

Was this travelgate issue a whole new investigation since then?

or a part of the troopergate one?

if so, why is the decision and news just now being made public?

and if so, wouldn't that void her being cleared of any wrong doing that was found by that investigation?

Anonymous said...

And how can an investigation not be completed?

how can that be seen as thorough?

why weren't ALL the travel expenditures gone through?

how can Palin and the investigation "choose" to stop before finishing?

Anonymous said...

The IRS has a whistleblower program, with rewards of up to 15% to people “who provide specific and credible information to the IRS if the information results in the collection of taxes, penalties, interest or other amounts from the noncompliant taxpayer.”

http://www.irs.gov/compliance/article/0,,id=180171,00.html

If anyone needs any documentation to forward to the IRS about noncompliant taxpayer Palin, here's a good place to start:

http://media.adn.com/smedia/2009/02/25/16/Travel_Authorizations.source.prod_affiliate.7.pdf

Remember that it only documents the illegal unethical taxfree kid travel; it does not include Todd's; the vehicle(s)- state as well as Wasilla vehicles that were provided and not included as taxable income.

And of course no one-yet- knows if they paid employment taxes for their nanny.

Gotta go wash my pajamas down in the basement. later.

Anonymous said...

"Beyond objecting to the obvious gamesmanship that serves the public so terribly"--like my own complaint against myself that i publicly announced?

"I think it is important to prevent the ethics act from being used as a tool to ensure that only the wealthy can seek higher office in Alaska"- so I'll steal as much money as I can through per diem, tax free vehicle use, free family travel, free clothing.

You betcha-
Sarah the Tax Cheat

ps. My version of the Checkers speech is coming (not sure what I'll use as the "respectable Republican cloth coat." Maybe something "borrowed" from the RNC.

Philip Munger said...

Ratfish - I did a Palin-McCain comparison to the Checkers speech last fall. I'll look it up when I have more time...