As Troopergate watchers are aware, Palin has improperly asked for the Republican-dominated Legislative Council's investigation to be shut down, and asked instead that the matter be referred to the Personnel Board. So it's understandable that the left blogs (mostly prominently TPM) have taken a dismissive view of a potential Personnel Board investigation.
But in doing so they have misread the history and disposition of the Personnel Board, overlooked actions the Board has already undertaken towards a Troopergate investigation, and failed to appreciate this might be the only Troopergate investigation with potential to damage Gov. Palin before the election.
In this diary I will cover all these points in a roundabout way while examining the question of why Palin and her lawyer called for a Personnel Board investigation to begin with.
continued...
Before we go further, why did I say this may be "the only" investigation with potential to do pre-election damage? First, I think Palin will successfully stonewall the legislature's probe. Second, by expressly waiving confidentiality (see footnote 1, page 1) in the Personnel Board investigation I think Palin blew it and left herself dangerously exposed. But so far, she's getting away with it - more on that later.
So why did Palin request the Personnel Board investigation to begin with?
1. She figured the Board investigation would be distracting.
On this point Palin and her lawyer have already clearly succeeded. Calling for this alternate investigation allowed them to muddy the waters, pick a fight with Hollis French, get a bunch of witnesses to stop cooperating with Branchflower, and at the same time make a big show of Palin's openness and desire to be held accountable.
2. She figured the Board investigation would be deferential.
There is no reason to believe the Board would do Palin any favors. First, contrary to what has often been asserted or assumed on the left blogs, the Personnel Board is not comprised of Palin appointees. All three members were appointed by former Gov. Murkowski (though one was reappointed by Palin) and under Alaska law (AS 39.25.060(c)) Palin cannot replace them without cause. Second, a review of news archives covering some past investigations launched by the Personnel Board (Attorney General Gregg Renkes in 2004-2005, State GOP Chair Randy Ruedrich in 2003-2004, and Governor Walter Hickel way back in the early 1990s) don't reveal any signs of partiality towards or manipulation by high executive officers.
3. She figured the Board investigation would be slow.
Here again, let's turn to precedent. The ethics complaint against Attorney General Renkes in 2004 was reported on December 12 and within a week the Personnel Board had considered the complaint and announced their intention to hire an independent counsel. Renkes would resign in February 2005 and reach a settlement in the Personnel Board probe in March. At that time the Anchorage Daily News reported that the independent counsel's investigation was complete after a bit less than 3 months of work. For comparison, then Gov. Murkowski had launched his own investigation into the Renkes matter in early October 2004. That probe, led by former U.S. Attorney Robert Bundy, released its final report in late January 2005 after a little less than 4 months of work.
More recently, an ethics complaint against Gov. Palin was filed by former state employee Andree McLeod on 8/6/2008 in a matter unrelated to Troopergate and within a week the Personnel Board had posted notice of a meeting to consider hiring an independent counsel. Furthermore, after Gov. Palin filed her ethics disclosure on 9/1/2008 the Board responded within a few days by scheduling another meeting (which by the way is being held today - see the bottom of the page for details).
4. She figured the Board investigation would be confidential.
Unlike the legislature's probe, the ongoing workings of the Personnel Board investigation would have been confidential if Palin - as I've pointed out many times by now - had not expressly waived confidentiality in her ethics disclosure. This is where I think Palin blew it. Without the waiver the Board's appointment of an independent counsel and all the work of that appointee (up until a positive finding of probable cause) would have been kept entirely secret (AS 39.52.340).
But oddly, most people seem to be pretending that Palin's waiver doesn't exist!
First we have Nicki Neal, Palin's Director of the Division of Personnel and Labor Relations (nicki.neal@alaska.gov), telling a reporter last Wednesday that the Board would soon consider Palin's ethics disclosure in executive or closed session and when the reporter reminds her of the waiver she says she'll "check" on that. But she must not have checked because the very next day we get the Board's meeting notice erroneously stating that the meeting must be in closed session under AS 39.52.340. Then, we have Palin's lawyer telling a reporter last Thursday that he "couldn't discuss or even acknowledge a new ethics complaint" ( granted he was referring to the separate troopers union complaint there, but why wouldn't Palin's waiver and self-promoted desire for openness cover all Troopergate related investigation? ) Finally, we have the NYT incorrectly reporting the following last Saturday:
Ms. Palin took the extraordinary step Tuesday of filing an ethics complaint against herself, making the matter fall within the bailiwick of the personnel board .... The proceedings of the board are conducted in secret, in contrast with the public deliberations of the Legislature.
A Call For Action to Anchorage Kossacks
If any of you reading this are near Anchorage today please make time to attend the Personnel Board meeting. Before they go into closed session they are required to at least open the meeting in public, which may give you the chance to ask the Board members why they are ignoring Gov. Palin's waiver of confidentiality.
Here are the details again:
9/11/2008, starting at 12 p.m.
Frontier Building (Room 880)
3601 C Street
Anchorage, AK
(end of diary)