Last night Gov. Palin filed an ethics disclosure which in effect is an ethics complaint against herself and which requests the matter be referred to the Personnel Board for appointment of an independent counsel.
It's misleading to call it a "request" since that's exactly what the law requires to happen anyway (AS 39.52.310(c)). But curiously it seems the Personnel Board may have already appointed an independent counsel back on 8/20/2008.
The following unheralded public notice was posted on 8/12/2008.
The Personnel Board for the State of Alaska will hold a public meeting August 20, 2008 ... on the following matter:
To contract for legal services for the board in a matter. Deliberations on this matter will occur in [closed] session, as authorized by AS 44.62.310(c)(3), to consider matters required to be kept confidential under AS 39.52.340.
continued...
So what are those two statutes referenced in that public notice?
First, AS 44.62.310(c)(3) is the part of Alaska's public meetings law which allows for "executive" or closed sessions in matters where other state laws require it. Secondly, AS 39.52.340 states - among other things - that an ethics complaint and its related documents are held confidential and any related meetings of the Personnel Board are "closed to the public".
Therefore, the only reason I'm aware of why the Personnel Board would need to meet in closed session to "contract for legal services for the board" is if they were appointing an independent counsel to look at a complaint against the governor (or lieutenant governor, or attorney general).
Also note a recent remark from Hollis French, manager of the (mostly Republican) Legislative Council's totally separate investigation into Troopergate. In a letter to Palin's lawyer that predates her disclosure/"request" of yesterday, French reportedly states:
"While the Board may be engaged now in investigating an ethics complaint, that process is held confidential until the Board makes a finding of probable cause."
So is the Board already so engaged? Was that confidential meeting of 8/20/2008 in fact related the Palin and Troopergate? Normally, we'd never know. Under AS 39.52.350 the proceedings of an ethics probe only become public - as French correctly stated - after a finding of probable cause to initiate full hearings is made (if it even gets that far).
However, as stated in the diary title, in yesterday's filing Palin expressly waives her right to confidentiality under AS 39.52.340 (see footnote 1 on page 1).
What reporter will now contact the Personnel Board and inquire about the 8/20/2008 meeting? If it indeed involved Palin - who has now waived confidentiality - the Board should disclose what prior complaint led to the meeting (with related documents), what was discussed in the meeting, whether an independent counsel was retained, the identity of said counsel, and his or her findings to date.
*** UPDATED 9/5/2008 ***
I contacted a reporter in Alaska about this and they pointed out to me that the prior complaint which triggered the mysterious 8/20/2008 Personnel Board meeting was more likely the Andree McLeod complaint from 8/6/2008 rather than one related to Troopergate.
The McLeod complaint, which alledges that Palin improperly used her influence to get a political supporter into a certain state job, can be found here.
If that is correct then the primary question becomes:
When will Gov. Palin waive confidentiality on the McLeod complaint?
(end of diary)