Alaska
David Eastman: Corruption on full display in Alaska during Ethics Committee confirmation
By DAVID EASTMAN
The legislature recently held confirmation hearings for three appointees to the hyper-partisan Legislative Ethics Committee. I highly recommend watching the first hearing, as it offers a rare glimpse into why it is not at all surprising to legislators that Alaska was just again ranked the #1 most corrupt state in the union.
By the end of the hearing, Democrats on the committee were in full blown damage control mode.
Watch the committee meeting here.
For years, the unelected members of the Legislative Ethics Committee have operated as highly partisan quasi-legislators who have never actually been elected to any office.
Because they were never elected and are therefore not subject to recall, they don’t represent voters. Nominally, they represent the chief justice of the Alaska Supreme Court, who appoints them to 3-year terms. However, since most of the public members have worked with the committee for well over twenty years, for all practical purposes, they simply represent themselves.
This is what was on full public display during yesterday’s confirmation hearing.
While the committee is supposed to be politically neutral, of the six individuals currently appointed to the committee by the chief justice, four participated in the effort to recall Governor Dunleavy (a no-no for appointees to the committee), the fifth appointee has teamed up with the ACLU in her current lawsuit against the Division of Elections and received a $50,000 contract from the Ethics Committee itself (a clear no-no for appointees to the committee), and the sixth appointee is a Democrat megadonor with frequent donations to groups like “Stop Republicans” and the Alaska Senate Democratic Campaign Committee (again a clear no-no for appointees to the committee).
According to testimony from the returning appointees, they see nothing wrong with the current makeup of the committee and would like it to continue “for the sake of continuity”. Democrat legislators on the Judiciary Committee were also quick to applaud their “many years of service” on the Ethics Committee, despite the fact that all three appointees have participated in clear ethics violations since their appointment.
While the recall petition and lawsuit were each mentioned in passing, the bulk of the committee’s questions related to the fifth appointee, Joyce Anderson. She received the $50,000 contract from her long-time fellow members of the Ethics Committee (a no-no for an appointee to any committee, least of all an appointee to the ethics committee).
Her fellow members of the Ethics Committee saw nothing wrong with this arrangement. She asked the attorney they hired and he said it was ok.
Even so, when she was asked during her confirmation hearing what her hourly rate was under the contract she refused to answer.
It is an interesting study in human psychology to watch as individuals who have been sitting on the Ethics Committee, enforcing public transparency requirements for decades, come finally to view those same public transparency requirements as entirely optional in their case.
Imagine the state of mind required to have an hourly state contract of up to $50,000, paid by taxpayers, then to come before the legislature for a confirmation vote and refuse to answer questions about how much you were getting paid for your work.
The irony here is that when this contract was about to be voted on by the ethics committee a fellow member of the committee asked her on the record what her hourly rate was, and she declined to answer then as well. At the time, she dodged the question by saying that she didn’t know what her hourly rate was, but that her hourly rate had been approved by the committee at their previous meeting. Only, it never was.
The hourly rate for each of the committee’s contracted staff were discussed in detail and approved at a previous meeting; that is, the hourly rate for every contract, except hers.
The Contract That Never Was
The missing details from the contract sparked questions over how the contract had come to be approved in the first place, and by whom. Notably, when the Judiciary Committee requested a copy of the missing contract they were informed that a copy of the contract was unavailable because no such contract actually existed.
The contract that the public was told had been approved by the Ethics Committee turned out not to be a contract at all. The chair of the Ethics Committee, whom Ms. Anderson had worked closely with for the last twenty-three years, and whom she anticipated continuing to work closely with for another 3-year term, arranged for her to instead be hired as a legislative employee with full benefits.
Of course, state law (that same law the Ethics Committee is supposed to be enforcing) explicitly bars a legislative employee from being appointed to, or serving on, the Ethics Committee.
“A legislative employee may not serve in a position that requires confirmation by the legislature.” (AS 24.60.030(f))
“A committee employee, including a person who provides personal services under a contract with the committee, may not be…an elected or appointed official…” (AS 24.60.130(f))
“Public members of the committee serve without compensation for their services…” (AS 24.60.130(f))
Ms. Anderson, while serving as a voting member of the Ethics Committee, was also hired as a legislative employee of the Ethics Committee on July 17, 2023. At the August 10th meeting of the Ethics Committee, she sought blanket, retroactive approval of her employment, described then as a contract, She also requested a retroactive “temporary leave of absence” beginning on July 17th. As a voting member of the committee, when the vote was taken she abstained from voting on her own request.
Because of the inherent conflict of interest associated with hiring someone with whom you are currently working on a board (and in this case had served with on the same board for many years and intended to serve with on the same board for many years to come), our state ethics laws explicitly bar you from continuing to hold your appointed seat on that same board. This would be true for any legislative committee, least of all an ethics committee.
It is noteworthy that none of the permanent members of the ethics committee noticed anything inappropriate with this arrangement at the time. It is perhaps even more notable that when Ms. Anderson and Mr. Cook were questioned about it they continued to insist that retroactive approval from their fellow members on the committee fully resolved the conflicts.
Ms. Anderson’s employment with the committee began on July 17th and continued through February 21st. While employed by the legislature, Ms. Anderson continued to serve alongside other committee members on the committee’s official subcommittee. While employed as a legislative employee, she also went to meet with the chief justice and lobby him to reappoint her to the Ethics Committee, which he did. When questioned about the propriety of this, she did not see anything wrong with this.
As there were some concerns that the legislature might not immediately confirm appointees who had already served on the committee literally for decades, the committee requested that the chief justice delay reappointing members of the committee until their current terms of office had already expired. By intentionally delaying the reappointments until later in the legislative session, current members of the committee could stay on the committee an extra year, even if the legislature flatly rejected their reappointment. The chief justice did so. Again, when questioned, Ms. Anderson did not see anything concerning about this.
As Ms. Anderson reported, she appraised the chief justice of the circumstances surrounding her continued employment with the committee and he saw nothing wrong and went ahead and reappointed her, despite the fact that she was legally barred from accepting an appointment to the committee while continuing to be employed by the legislature.
- “A legislative employee may not serve in a position that requires confirmation by the legislature.” (AS 24.60.030(f))
No doubt a retroactive leave of absence from some of her long-time colleagues on the committee will be in the works for this latest appointment as well.
After all, the hyperpartisan character of the committee could be put in jeopardy if even one member of this committee ever retires.
Given that the four longest-serving members of the committee, including Ms. Anderson, average more than twenty years a piece with the committee, efforts to retain the current political orientation of the committee are likely to grow increasingly difficult over time.
Resumes for each of the three recent appointees to the committee are available on the House Judiciary Webpage.
Rep. David Eastman is a legislator representing Wasilla District 27.
Alaska
Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport busy with holiday travelers
ANCHORAGE, Alaska (KTUU) -Many of the people arriving to and departing from Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport Sunday agreed that Anchorage’s main airport isn’t as tough to navigate as most right now.
On Dec. 22, three days out from both Hanukkah and Christmas, travelers at the airport were lined up, checking in, waiting for baggage, or going through security; all of those, demanding a wait. However, several travelers told Alaska’s News Source about their experiences and what they were expecting during their flights.
Matt Howard departed from Raleigh-Durham International Airport in North Carolina around 5 a.m. “It was the busiest I’ve ever seen it,” Howard said. He estimated he touched down in Anchorage around 6 p.m., adding Ted Stevens was much “less frantic” than the other airports he was at, but thought the evening time frame might have been a contributing factor.
Flying in from Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport in Atlanta, Georgia, Kimberly Lamar said she visits her mother in Alaska at least once a year.
“It was pretty overwhelming, trying to get through from Atlanta,” she said. “Then I got to Seattle; it was hard to get through to the gates of Seattle. And finally, this is the easiest airport I’ve actually been in all day.”
Born and raised in Alaska, Gideon Mahoney was traveling to Colorado where he recently relocated. “I’m actually really surprised, right now it’s easy and we were a little late, so…” Mahoney said, glancing at the line for security.
Growing up in Alaska, Mahoney said flying into Denver International Airport can be overwhelming at times.
“We’re working on figuring out how to deal with that,” he said. “We’re getting it.”
As for travelers who haven’t left just yet, Lamar’s advice was aligned with a prepared statement from Alaska Airlines: both said arriving early is the key for holiday travels.
“If you’re flying, make sure you leave early because those lines are crucial,” Lamar said.
See a spelling or grammar error? Report it to web@ktuu.com
Copyright 2024 KTUU. All rights reserved.
Alaska
Hydroponics provide year-round growing for Alaska farmers
On a recent December afternoon, Soldotna farmer Taylor Lewis preps for a day of harvesting crops. She walks to a tray filled with ripe lettuce and snips a head of it by the stem.
It’s just one of about 900 plants that Taylor and her mother-in-law Jayme Lewis will harvest and process this week – despite freezing temperatures and slushy snow outside. That’s because the duo works for Edgy Veggie, an indoor farm that grows produce year round.
“In the summer, a lot of our business drops off because folks are gardening at home. But in the winter, they’re not, because it costs money to heat your greenhouse,” Jayme said. “It costs a lot of money to heat your greenhouse.”
The company is a hydroponic farm, meaning they grow plants without soil. Hydroponic systems recycle and reuse nutrient-filled water, which minimizes waste. Specially made lighting and climate controlled conditions make it possible for Edgy Veggie to grow indoors during the winter months.
Around Thanksgiving, the company harvested 150 pounds of lettuce, enough to make about 800 salads. That took two days and was one of their biggest hauls of the year. Although not a typical harvest for the company, Jayme says she does see an uptick in business during the winter when Alaska’s produce is almost exclusively shipped up from the Lower 48.
“If you go to the grocery store and pick up a head of lettuce right now, by the time you get it home it will be wilted,” Jayme said. “That’s sad. Literally, that’s sad.”
Jayme says some local restaurants have sourced their vegetables from Edgy Veggie because they last longer and are fresher than grocery store produce.
Nestled between two train cars-turned-restaurants on the other side of town, Henry Krull walks inside his shipping container farm. He points to a wall that’s growing hundreds of bunches of butter lettuce.
Krull is the owner of fresh365, another Kenai Peninsula based hydroponic farm. Just like Edgy Veggie, the farm operates entirely indoors.
“The advantage of growing indoors, in a container like we have, is that we can control the environment,” Krull said. “We can grow no matter what’s going on outside. It can be 30 below outside, but it’s always 70 degrees or so inside.”
fresh365 also sees an uptick in direct-to-consumer sales in the winter. Otherwise, most of their sales go to other businesses, like local restaurants.
And while indoor farming means fresh, local produce year-round for Alaskans, it faces a number of challenges. Krull says growing in a hydroponic setting is much more expensive than traditional farming methods. So, to offset his farm’s energy costs, he installed solar panels, which were partially funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Energy for America Program, or REAP.
But, Krull says the property doesn’t get much sunlight in the winter.
“The sun is a very valuable commodity, it’s valuable for not only producing electricity, but it helps to lower the energy costs,” he said. “And the energy costs of the farm containers we have is actually very, very high, because we can’t take advantage of the sun.”
Edgy Veggie, on the other hand, doesn’t even have solar panels. Jayme says their energy costs are high year round.
“Electricity, especially, is outrageous,” she said. “I wish that the state had some sort of option with the electric companies to help support farming. We’re providing a service to the community, honestly. We’re trying to, but it might run us out of business.”
Other challenges to hydroponics include faulty pumps and timers, ventilation issues and water leaks. Like traditional farming, hydroponic farmers say it’s backbreaking work.
But, for farmers like Taylor Lewis, offering fresh and local produce year round is a labor of love.
“Being able to supply our community with anything fresh is great,” Taylor said. “What we have as options in the grocery store – it’s not cutting it.”
“These belong in every community,” Krull said. “We’ve been able to prove that as a business model, it works. You can make a profit doing it, you can provide a good service to your community, and I think we can really do good for our community by providing something that is not readily available on a year-round basis.”
According to the U.S Department of Agriculture, only 5% of food Alaskans consume is grown locally. The state also has very short growing seasons.
Alaska
Nature: Northern Lights above Alaska
Be the first to know
Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.
-
Politics1 week ago
Canadian premier threatens to cut off energy imports to US if Trump imposes tariff on country
-
Technology1 week ago
OpenAI cofounder Ilya Sutskever says the way AI is built is about to change
-
Politics1 week ago
U.S. Supreme Court will decide if oil industry may sue to block California's zero-emissions goal
-
Technology1 week ago
Meta asks the US government to block OpenAI’s switch to a for-profit
-
Business1 week ago
Freddie Freeman's World Series walk-off grand slam baseball sells at auction for $1.56 million
-
Technology1 week ago
Meta’s Instagram boss: who posted something matters more in the AI age
-
News1 week ago
East’s wintry mix could make travel dicey. And yes, that was a tornado in Calif.
-
Technology2 days ago
Google’s counteroffer to the government trying to break it up is unbundling Android apps