In Alaska, the Personnel Board is responsible for retaining independent counsel in cases of an ethics complaint involving the Governor.
Yesterday the Board posted notice of an upcoming meeting. The reason: "To contract for legal services for the board in a matter and for consideration of ethics matters"
9/11/2008, starting at 12 p.m.
Frontier Building (Room 880)
3601 C Street
Anchorage, AK
The notice says the meeting will be held in "executive" or closed session.
However, if this meeting is related to Troopergate - and there's reason to believe it is - then Gov. Palin has already expressly waived confidentiality (see footnote 1, page 1) and so by law this meeting should be open to the public (AS 39.52.340).
continued...
Now allow me to explain why I believe this Personnel Board meeting is in fact related to Troopergate. There are actually two separate Troopergate-related ethics filings which this meeting may have been called in response to.
First, we have Palin's ethics disclosure (not technically a "complaint" but sometimes being refered to that way in the media) which she filed late Monday (9/1/2008). Then on Wednesday Nicki Neal, director of the Division of Personnel and Labor Relations, tells the Anchorage Daily News that "the board will meet soon... to begin its work" on Palin's disclosure.
Second, we have the state troopers union complaint which was filed Wednesday (9/3/2008). You can read more about that here.
Since the meeting notice was posted on Thursday, it could have been in response to either of these, but one would assume it more likely to be in response to the first which was filed two days before the other.
Could it have been in response to some other complaint that predates both of those two? That's certainly possible but I don't think it likely. Here's why: the last time the Personnel Board posted notice of a closed session to "contract for legal services for the board in a matter" was on 8/12/2008. And what happened less than a week prior to that? Sure enough, an ethics complaint was filed against Gov. Palin in a matter unrelated to Troopergate (a copy of that complaint, made by Andree McLeod, can be found here). So it seems that they respond to these things relatively quickly.
Finally, let's get back to the question of confidentiality. As I've already pointed out, in Palin's ethics disclosure she expressly waives confidentiality . But for some reason Nicki Neal, in that same news report linked above, was saying the Board meeting responding to Palin's disclosure would be held in closed session. The reporter even reminds Neal about Palin's waiver and then Neal says that she'll "check" how the waiver relates to Board meetings. Well no need to rely on Neal - you can easily "check" that for yourself:
AS 39.52.340. Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act, Confidentiality.
(a) .... In the case of a complaint concerning the governor, lieutenant governor, or attorney general, all meetings of the personnel board concerning the complaint and investigation before the determination of probable cause are closed to the public. ....
(c) The subject of the complaint may, in writing, waive the confidentiality protection of this section.
And what if the meeting was called in response to the union's complaint instead? Since that filing and Palin's both involve Troopergate would her waiver extend to cover the union's complaint as well? As for the legal question I have no idea. But Palin's lawyer reponded to news of the union's complaint by claiming that he "couldn't discuss or even acknowledge a new ethics complaint". So it appears as though Palin wants to have it both ways.
(end of diary)