Legislature(2023 - 2024)ANCH LIO DENALI Rm
11/29/2023 09:30 AM House SELECT COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE ETHICS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SELECT COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE ETHICS
HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE
NOVEMBER 29, 2023
9:30 AM
9:33:09 AM
1. CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER
Deb Fancher welcomed everyone and she called the meeting to
order at 9:33 a.m.
Deb Fancher asked Tamara Maddox to take roll.
Roll Call
Representative Sara Hannan
Representative Johnson
Deb Fancher
Conner Thomas
Skip Cook
Jerry McBeath
Quorum present.
Deb Fancher announced that having a quorum allows the
committee to conduct business. She requested that cell
phones be silenced.
Others present
Tamara Maddox
Joyce Anderson
Jacqui Yeagle
2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Deb Fancher entertained a motion to approve the agenda.
Conner Thomas so moved. There were no objections. The
agenda was approved.
9:35:52 AM
3. PUBLIC COMMENT
Deb Fancher opened public comment. She noted there were a
number of people both online and present waiting to comment
on Complaint H 22-01 and Complaint H 22-02. She thanked the
members of the public for their participation, she asked
that comments be limited to the topic at hand and to three
minutes.
Pat Martin introduced himself to the committee as a
prominent figure in the complaints. He asked the
committee's indulgence in allowing him to speak for more
than three minutes given his role in the complaints. He
stated that Representative Kevin McCabe was his house
representative at the time and he disagreed with some of
Representative McCabe's votes as both a constituent and as
a representative of two interest groups, Alaska Right to
Life and Alaska Gun Rights.
Pat Martin said he took his concerns to Representative
McCabe directly and as a leader of the interest groups he
took his concerns to the membership. This is how interest
groups work. On April 20, [2022], Representative McCabe
took to the house floor and decried that the interest
groups were holding him accountable for his votes that were
inconsistent with promises and stated intentions. Pat
Martin had a transcript of Representative McCabe's house
floor speech and he referred to a couple of Representative
McCabe's statements that day. Representative McCabe defined
corruption as anything that is morally degenerate,
perverted, depraved, characterized by improper conduct.
Political corruption may also come in the form of
manipulating policies and abusing a position of authority
to increase or maintain an individual's power or status or
wealth. Representative McCabe also characterized
corruption, specifically with respect to Alaska Right to
Life and Alaska Gun Rights. Pat Martin understood
Representative McCabe's references to the two organizations
as an accusation against himself.
Tamara Maddox reminded Pat Martin to limit his comments to
the complaints, and she prompted the committee's memory
that Pat Martin had the opportunity to speak to the
committee on November 18, 2022, so the committee may
already have some of this information.
Pat Martin concluded with a statement of his belief that
this complaint is a continuation of Representative McCabe's
accusation of political corruption on the part of himself
and uses vague language such as "apparently" and "unknown".
He opined that the complaints weaponize the committee and
this process in the fight between Representative McCabe and
himself. When the legislature is in session, constituents
have to wait for opportunities to meet with legislators and
at times that requires sitting on the hallway benches, and
that is not an abuse of state resources.
Deb Fancher thanked Pat Martin for his testimony. She
continued with a statement to the effect that while most
complaints are confidential, both Former Representative
Christopher Kurka (H 22-01) and Representative David
Eastman (H 22-02) waived confidentiality on May 4, 2022,
and that is why the committee is taking public testimony
about them.
Deb Fancher asked if anyone else would like to speak.
Representative Sara Hannan asked Deb Fancher if the
complainants had waived confidentiality.
Deb Fancher indicated to Tamara Maddox that she should
reply to Representative Sara Hannan. Tamara Maddox replied
that the complainants did not waive confidentiality.
Representative Sara Hannan asked for guidance about Pat
Martin publicly identifying elements of a complainant that
are not waived into the public record, should those
elements be kept out of the record or is the entirety of
the complaint now in the public record for public comment.
Tamara Maddox said the committee has not confirmed the
identity of anyone involved in the complaint that has not
waived confidentiality. Members of the public are able to
speak to the complaint as they see fit. She repeated that
we have not confirmed or denied or provided any information
about individuals who have not waived confidentiality.
Representative Sara Hannan asked if Representative McCabe
has waived confidentiality.
Deb Fancher replied that it has not been confirmed whether
he is the person who filed the complaint.
Jerry McBeath said Mr. Martin had made allegations
[against] Representative McCabe. He stated he is
uncomfortable hearing allegations unless they are specified
as such [undecipherable], this is what someone has said
without opportunity for anyone spoken against to defend
himself or herself.
Tamara Maddox said due process is an issue that has come up
more than one time throughout this. As Mr. McBeath has
stated, this is not a court of law and we do have a duty
bound by statutes and rules of procedure to keep
confidentiality. However, in public comment, members of the
public are able to speak their mind but we are not
confirming or denying any individual involved in the
complaint who has not waived confidentiality.
Pamela Samish thanked the committee for taking her
testimony. She asked the committee to drop the complaints
against Former Representative Christopher Kurka and
Representative David Eastman. Voters elected Former
Representative Christopher Kurka and Representative David
Eastman for many reasons and one of those reasons was for
the way they defend the children of our future generations.
She added they represent her and the entire pro-life
community. Accusing them is infringing on her rights as a
voter and as a pro-life Alaskan. They are doing the job
they were elected to do. She asked the committee to drop
the complaints to ensure the continued freedom of
representation for the people of the state of Alaska.
Jason Floyd said he is thankful [the complaint] is open to
the public. He is a voting constituent who supports the
right to life. He belongs to a number of associations that
travel to Juneau on his behalf because he cannot do so. He
is a business owner, a father, a grandfather. He pays his
taxes, he loves this country, and he loves what this
country stands for. He is thankful this committee is
meeting because it provides the opportunity to answer
questions and to ask them. He believes the allegations
against Mr. Kurka and Mr. Eastman are fictitious and mean-
spirited, inaccurate and false.
Jason Floyd was a social worker, and he knows there are
laws against false allegations. When making false
allegations, regardless of the veil of anonymity, they
should be held to account. Whoever made this allegation has
obviously has not read the Alaska Constitution or if they
have, [they] do not care about articles 2, 4, and 5, which
are very clear about the role of government and the role of
the people and the people's access to its government.
Jason Floyd said the question of whether Mr. Martin had
access to an office, on his behalf, to get the ear of one
of few great champions in the capitol who stands for the
things in which he believes. Are not the real questions who
made those allegations, were they false, and were they
accurate? If they were false, what kind of investigation is
needed to correct the behavior, so we do not see the
weaponization of the institutions in which he believes very
strongly.
Jason Floyd asked that at the conclusion of this matter,
the committee take up the important follow up question of
whether to open up an investigation of the complainant.
Obviously, Mr. Martin was acting on his behalf to petition
the government for redress of grievances and the
formulation of laws and policies that reflect his values.
He thanked the committee for the time [to speak].
Mike Alexander said this is a frivolous complaint. It is a
major expense to travel to Juneau, and he relies on people
like Mr. Martin to do that. He wishes he could rely on
Representative McCabe, who is his representative, as much
as he can on Representative David Eastman and Former
Representative Christopher Kurka, to fight for the right to
life, to get him a full permanent fund and other things.
Representative David Eastman is a target of Representative
McCabe; he doesn't know why. This [complaint] is taking up
valuable state time and budget. He wants the complaint
thrown out and investigation initiated. He does not see
that sitting in a legislator's office is a concern. He
depends on people like Pat Martin to travel to Juneau to
represent him and his interests. He wishes he did not have
to make this call this morning; he shouldn't have to make
this call because it is a frivolous complaint. It's a waste
of the committee's time and it is a waste of their time,
and he hopes the committee will clear Former Representative
Christopher Kurka and Representative David Eastman, and
then find out who made the complaint. He and other folks
would appreciate it, and he would appreciate if the
committee found out who filed the complaint. He thanked the
committee for their time.
Mark Chryson said he is here to listen to what the state is
doing and how much garbage they are trying to produce. Both
Representative David Eastman and Former Representative
Christopher Kurka have been his representative for years.
He has known Representative David Eastman for a long time.
He asked why time is being wasted because somebody doesn't
like the way somebody votes. First thing people in the
political opposition do is file complaints and try to
impeach them. This is a waste of time, it is a waste of
state resources, and whoever filed the complaint needs to
be investigated and sanctioned accordingly. He and the
Alaska Independence Party stand behind Representative David
Eastman and Former Representative Christopher Kurka. They
are not members of the party, but they are true Alaskans,
they represent their constituents well, and they vote
accordingly.
Karen Lewis thanked the committee for hearing the public;
she thinks that is important. She asked why the person who
made the allegations wants to be anonymous? The complainant
should have the intestinal fortitude to self-identify. She
knows both Representative David Eastman and Former
Representative Christopher Kurka very well. They both have
exemplary character and a profound belief in the creator.
They both fight extremely hard to protect babies in the
womb from being murdered. They are heroes. To her, the
complaint seems like a vendetta and there is no place for
that in our legislature. It's hard enough for them to go
[to Juneau] to fight for righteousness, and to have someone
on the same side make frivolous complaints?it's like
lawfare. She expects it from Democrats but not from
Republicans. It's ridiculous and she asked the committee to
dismiss the complaints. The complainant is trying to
destroy the reputations of these representatives, but he
will end destroying his own.
Mark Glatt said his issue is the ability to access
legislators during session both logistically and
geographically. And when you do go down there, you have to
speak louder in person to be heard than the lobbyists.
Because of geography and infrastructure, you may have to
sit outside a legislator's office because sometimes it is
difficult to find a room down there. If he could afford it,
he would be camped outside his legislator's office because
he has issues he wants to address, but he cannot afford it.
The state's rules favor lobbyists, and the state is run by
lobbyists, not citizens, because lobbyists can afford to
camp out down there. Lastly, a citizen goes to Juneau to be
heard and is called an unregistered lobbyist? If a person
is representing themselves or representing a group of
people and is not being paid, are they considered an
unregistered lobbyist? That is an unfair accusation too. It
is a closed system [in Juneau] and whoever filed the
complaint needs to have the guts to self-identify. He
thinks the complaint should be dropped. He thanked the
committee.
Melanie Glatt asked if this means it will make it harder
for her to talk or work with representatives in Juneau? She
went to Juneau about 10 years ago to talk with legislators
about issues concerning the disabled. She was there for a
couple of days and was unable to talk to a single
legislator, only to their staff. It was a waste of her time
and effort. If these kinds of situations continue to arise,
it will inhibit her and her family's constitutional rights
by limiting her ability to petition my government. She is
troubled the complaint is anonymous. She asked the
committee to drop the complaint, and thanked the committee.
James Squyres identified himself as the husband of Pamela
Goode, former staff for Representative David Eastman before
she was fired by House leadership. It seems as if the
spirit of the Salem witch trials is still walking the halls
of Juneau with these complaints. He said he listened to Pat
Martin's public testimony to the committee in November
2022, where he said, "Based on my visits to the capital, it
seems that either Representative McCabe or Senator Hughes
or their staff members seem to have taken a very, very,
very politically motivated stance against me, against a
private citizen, against Alaska Right to Life, a simple
pro-life activist group, and the representatives that we
work with."
James Squyres subsequently posted a meme on social media
asking if Republican Representative McCabe or his staff
filed ethics complaints against Republicans Representative
Eastman and Representative Kurka. Senator Shelley Hughes
quickly and publicly denied filing the complaint. Alaskans
can easily deduce that Representative McCabe is the one
behind these complaints.
James Squyres said he has in his possession a copy of the
redacted complaint. The complainant signed the complaint on
April 25, 2022. The complaint is one year and seven months
old. That is a long time to not be resolved. There has been
serious [defamation] to various parties during this
inordinately long process. Senator David Wilson testified
publicly in November 2022, indicating there was a problem
with staff. Maybe they should be fired. The problem was
apparently with the investigator, not the staff, and yet my
wife was fired by House leadership with no input by her
previous boss, Representative David Eastman.
James Squyres continued: The core of this complaint looks
to be one paragraph containing a phrase that Mr. Martin and
his assistant apparently used the offices, and it is
unknown if he was allowed to use computers or telephones.
Apparently? Unknown? Is this all it takes for one person to
baselessly weaponize this committee to spend public funds
to engage in what amounts to a witch hunt? This complaint
should have been dismissed with prejudice a long time ago
and the complainant disciplined for weaponizing this
committee. Article 12, Section 5 of the Alaska Constitution
Oath of Office to support and defend the Constitution.
Article 1 Section 6 Assembly, the right of the people to
peaceably assemble and to petition the government shall
never be abridged. He advised the committee to think about
where they stand on this issue.
Waynette Coleman agrees with James Squyres 100%. This
erroneous complaint is completely unjustified. She hopes
the committee will quickly come to the decision to drop the
complaint. She believes in the Constitution and that we
have every right to approach our elected officials for we
are the people, and we are the ones who elect them. We have
every right to come to them, whether it be their office, by
phone, by text, [or] by email. They are in Juneau, a
crucial and terrible place for them to be for constituent
access. She encourages the committee to have common sense
and practicality and use the Alaska Constitution to do the
right thing by dropping the complaint and investigating the
complainant. The complaint is ridiculous, erroneous, and
she looks for a quick and practical decision by the
committee. She thanked the committee for the time to speak.
Richard Stoffel of Palmer cannot believe another frivolous
action to take away the God-given constitutional freedoms
of two wonderful representative: Representative David
Eastman and Former Representative Christopher Kurka,
champions to save the life of the unborn. Richard Stoffel
signed the constitutional petition that Pat Martin took to
the legislature. This frivolous complaint is because all
three men are so effective in saving babies' lives.
Obviously, this [complaint] was initiated by RINOs
(Republicans in name only) who don't adhere to the people's
platform. Representative David Eastman and Former
Representative Christopher Kurka have exposed them and they
are being vindictive and bringing forward one frivolous
thing after another to try and stop any effective
[legislator] representing us from doing good constitutional
godly actions.
Michael Garhart thinks the complaints against
Representative David Eastman and Former Representative
Christopher Kurka should be dropped. Michael Garhart knows
them both, he's heard them speak, and they have the highest
morals of all the representatives in Juneau. They do not
waver in their good moral standing. He appreciates them
being there; it's wrong what happens to good politicians,
and it should be stopped. He asked the committee to drop
all the frivolous complaints. Thank you.
Andrew Elliott, of Eagle River, worked as a staffer for
Former Representative Christopher Kurka. The complaint and
proceedings concern him because as we all know, traveling
to Juneau to petition state government is difficult. It can
be discouraging for some people to petition their
government; they get persecuted and discriminated against
because of it. That a group or an individual like Mr.
Martin cannot travel to Juneau and not have conversations
with multiple representatives without getting himself or
those representatives in trouble with frivolous and
completely false ethics complaints like this one is
concerning.
Andrew Elliott thinks the complaint should be dropped; and
he encourages the committee to take a hard look at the
facts. The words "apparently" and "unknown" were used in
the complaint. Those words suggest the facts of the case
are unknown. He posits if the committee seeks out the
facts, they will find the complaints are false, no laws
were broken, and Mr. Kurka, Mr. Eastman, and Mr. Martin
acted well within their rights as representatives and as a
private citizen to petition their government. Again, he
encouraged the committee to look at the facts and consider
the broader implications that this will further
discourage individuals who already go to great lengths to
get to Juneau and to address legislators. Thank you.
Dixie Banner, from Wasilla, said both Former Representative
Christopher Kurka and Representative David Eastman have
been her representatives. She has advocated with especially
Representative David Eastman for the last 10 years about
parental rights and the family court system. Alaska has
poor family values; spending more time and money on social
issues [like] crime because they fail to instill the
fathers back into the equation. The law system and state
court system are weaponized against us; there is a two-tier
justice system. Legislators can do what they please but
they are never reprimanded for their behavior. [Their]
chooses are based on who is paying them in regard to
lobbyists. The bottom line is we need Juneau to be pushed
back and we need to move the capital. The concept of
weaponizing somebody's reputation based on somebody not
liking them is totally wrong. This is just one more witch
hunt. There are definitely going to be term limits. Both
Representative David Eastman and Former Representative
Christopher Kurka about parental reform and no one wants to
do it because their fear of the caucus. The caucus is wrong
as well. Dixie Banner highly suggests term limits in 2024.
The government belongs to the people, not a selected few.
Archibald Campbell, of Anchorage, has been an educator of
adults and children for over 30 years, and recently he
launched a civics class for kids. The class will cover the
principles of the great republic and representative
government. The classes talked about the time and energy it
takes to go to the capital and to meet with their
representatives and those who hold opposing views in an
effort to try and use influence and logic with powerful
language where change is needed.
Archibald Campbell also teaches them how the republic is
being thwarted because they have to think twice about
bringing ideas to the legislators. This is crazy. Other
forms of government like socialism or fascism limit the
ability of citizens to exercise their rights in a
representative government. He strongly encourages the
committee to stop wasting time, drop this frivolous
complaint, and move on to more important things. He hopes
to be able to continue challenging his students to
participate in their government.
Jackeline Goforth is a staunch supporter of the
constitution. She believes it was written by the people for
the people. Every person in the state has the right to
travel to Juneau and speak with her representative and
other representatives without worry about a frivolous
ethics complaint filed against them that stifles their
voice. This is one of the most outrageous and egregious
actions taken against these two gentlemen. She has nothing
but awe and amazement at their ethics and their integrity.
This is a hit piece, another part of the witch hunt, and
she it totally against her tax dollars going toward this
kind of activity when we should be working on real
problems. Thank you.
Pam Goode, from the Deltana area, worked for Representative
David Eastman in Juneau. Representative David Eastman's
office upholds the oath of office and their duty more
seriously than any other office. When she was hired
Representative David Eastman made sure [staff] upheld the
principles and values and their oaths of office and they
did what they were hired to do and that over 16,000 voters
elected Representative David Eastman to do; he represents
over 18,000 voters. That was always the focus.
In 2022, she noticed there were those who were not
supportive of their office, but they were sent there to
represent the constituents. She started locking her office
door because nearby there was a representative she deemed
to be vindictive, unstable, and had a temperament around
which she did not comfortable. She was often the first in
the and the last person in the building often alone.
That same year, she was interviewed no fewer than three
times for ethics complaints that had no weight whatsoever.
There was a miscommunication and when they found out about
the miscommunication, they addressed it right away. It was
supposed to be confidential, but the treatment she received
at the airport going to Juneau in 2023 was uncomfortable.
On January 20, she received a termination letter.
Representative David Eastman knew nothing about her
termination. She was given five days. Representative David
Eastman and Representative Louise Stutes were both down to
one staff. In her opinion, there are probably a lot of
constituents that are not aware that over 36,000
constituents are not being represented. What the
legislature is doing was beyond unethical and in her
opinion, corrupt. That situation continues to this day.
Representative David Eastman only has a part time staff
running his office. These are her personal experiences. She
finds it unethical and corrupt, and she asks the committee
to address her concerns.
Deb Fancher said she wanted to make sure both
Representative David Eastman and Former Representative
Christopher Kurka had ample time to speak to the committee.
But first, she responded to two concerns she heard
repeatedly in the public comments: confidentiality and
timeliness. She read from the first page of the complaint
form a section of AS 24.60.170: ? pursuant to AS
24.60.170(l): The person filing a complaint shall keep
confidential the fact that a complaint has been filed as
well as the contents of the complaint.
Deb Fancher stated that complaints are confidential until
they are further and fully investigated. This complaint is
confidential at the current stage of the process. In
response to concerns about timeliness, she explained that
while in the administrator position, Jerry Anderson
unexpectantly died. On behalf of the subcommittee, she
apologized and took responsibility for the length of time
the process has taken.
Deb Fancher said that Representative David Eastman and
Former Representative Christopher Kurka had waived
confidentiality, but the complainant has not waived
confidentiality. On Friday, November 24, 2023, Joe Miller
notified the committee that he had been engaged as legal
representative for both Representative David Eastman and
Former Representative Christopher Kurka. On November 27,
2023, Tamara Maddox provided him a copy of the complaint
public packet.
Tamara Maddox advised Deb Fancher to close public comment
before continuing. Deb Fancher did so.
4. COMMENTS
Deb Fancher invited Former Representative Christopher Kurka
or Joe Miller to speak to the subcommittee.
Joe Miller spoke first about the confidentiality
provisions. He said he understands a lot of what the
committee does is established by statute, and some by its
own rules of procedure that are derived from statute. The
confidentiality procedure in statute appears to be afforded
to the complaint subject, but not to the complainant. That
makes it difficult for Representative David Eastman and
Former Representative Christopher Kurka to confront the
complainant and others.
In a criminal court, and Joe Miller understands this is not
completely analogous to the committee process, a subject
has the opportunity to confront witnesses against them and
whether there are issues with credibility. That is not
possible with a blanket confidentiality prohibition that
does appear to be a privilege held by anyone other than the
complainant. AS 24.60.170(c) provides that "A proceeding
conducted under this subsection, documents that are part of
a proceeding, and a dismissal under this subsection are
confidential as provided in (l) of this section unless the
subject of the complaint waives confidentiality as provided
in that subsection." Both Representative David Eastman and
Former Representative Christopher Kurka waived
confidentiality.
Joe Miller addressed also due process concerns. He
recognizes the committee has broad discretion, and there
were a couple of cases that have gone to the courts for
review. But first he wanted to address the confidentiality
issue.
Joe Miller said he thinks one of the reasons for the
confrontation clause in the U.S. and state constitutions
comes out of the American experience with tyrannical system
in which they lived. Justice Brandeis said, "Publicity is
justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial
diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants;
electric light the most efficient policeman." More
recently, JFK said, "The very word secrecy is repugnant in
a free and open society, and we are as a people inherently
and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret
oaths and to secret proceedings." And that really is the
American experience. We pride ourselves as having
democratic principles and we want to make sure the people
can see and hear what is going on.
Joe Miller continued, asking what would be more important
than trying to take sanction against one that has been
elected by their constituents? Both Representative David
Eastman and Former Representative Christopher Kurka were
elected by wide margins. Representative David Eastman had
over 50% of the vote and thinks Former Representative
Christopher Kurka had close to 70% of the vote.
Representative David Eastman also suffered the indignity of
having to defend against litigation during his election,
which was also an attempt to impact his ability to
represent those who elected him, and that is effectively
what is happening here too.
Joe Miller said he understands the Ethics Committee has
responsibilities to ensure members comply with the ethics
code, but the reality is that every time action is taken
even by public notice and press releases, it impacts the
legislators' ability to do the business of the people, as
has this whole proceeding because it takes time and
obviously has big import. Undercutting confidence in
institutions is another aspect the committee needs to
consider.
Joe Miller continued, saying that practically, there are
additional considerations beyond undercutting confidence in
institutions. A number of people commented about how they
would like to travel to Juneau. It is difficult, expensive,
and now a generational issue about the capital being in
Juneau and the difficulty of accessing legislators. Joe
Miller thinks the legislature likes the remoteness because
it allows them to not have the public eye on them. When a
person who comes to Juneau to have impact on the public
process ends up causing sanctions to be applied to the
legislators whose offices were visited, it chills public
contact. Pat Martin is not a paid lobbyist, he's Joe Q.
Citizen, there on his own dime, trying to influence the
process. The complaint is that he "camped out" in a couple
of legislators' offices, which was somehow an ethics
violation.
Joe Miller said any aggressive complainant can drive a
truck through [undecipherable], and the next thing you
know, half of the legislature is up on complaints, and
probably justly so for other reasons, but not for having
somebody in their office for an inordinate amount of time,
perhaps longer than other constituents. That, in his
opinion, is not the road the committee wants to go down.
Joe Miller commented on the language of the complaint. Does
the complaint state the legislator violated the law? No, it
does not. Neither complaint identifies any direct action by
either Former Representative Christopher Kurka or
Representative David Eastman that violates the ethics law.
The complainant says they [the legislators] were present at
the time, effectively arguing guilt by association. He
would never accept a complaint [arguing] guilt by
association, one without action or something that allows
them to have been in charge of the supposed ethics
violation, that would not pass muster on probable cause.
Joe Miller identified other problematic issues with the
complaint. The term "base of operating" is undefined,
amorphous, and ambiguous. Is five minutes ok but an hour is
too long? Or maybe an hour is ok, but seven or eight hours
is not ok? Are legislators going to allow more leeway to
somebody who traveled by car, by ferry, by plane, spent
hundreds of dollars than someone who lives in Juneau? Even
trying to find probable cause in these complaints under
those facts spells disaster because he thinks many if not
most legislators will fall askance of standards that
suggest that hours in the office translates to operating a
base of operations.
Joe Miller addressed the petitions referred to in the
complaint, and whether it makes a difference that somebody
carries in a bag, a suitcase, or a dolly. Does that trigger
a concern about whether it violates the Ethics Act? Again,
not a precedent, he thinks, the committee wants to endorse,
assuming other similarly motivated complainants in the
future and that will make the workload exponentially
higher.
Joe Miller asserts there is no statement of personal
observation in the complaint, and that is fatal to a
complaint on probable cause. He said he had spoken to the
committee chair and staff, and he understands he may be
looking at this complaint from the context of a lawyer. He
is, in the sense that he looks at the law and tries to
interpret and apply the law. Probable cause is not
supported by the lack of personal observation.
Joe Miller moved on to statute, specifically AS
24.60.030(a). It states a legislator or legislative
employee may not (2) use public funds, facilities,
equipment, services, or another government asset or
resource for a nonlegislative purpose, for involvement in
or support of or opposition to partisan political activity,
or for the private benefit of the legislator, legislative
employee, or another person; this paragraph does not
prohibit, and this is the important aspect of this, there
are a number of exceptions to that general statement, in
his opinion, the first may be the most important. Even if
the allegations are true and that there is personal
observation, (A) provides that a limited use of state
property and resources for personal purposes if the use
does not interfere with the performance of public duties
and either the cost or value related to the use is nominal
or the legislator or legislative employee reimburses the
state for the cost of the use.
Joe Miller asserted there is no allegation of any
interference with the performance of public duties, and
there is no allegation there was any cost incurred. He
opined the committee could read from the face of the
complaint the nominal nature of this. Subsection (D) says,
"? if the use does not interfere with the performance of
public duties and if there is no cost to the state for the
use of the space and equipment,?" a legislator can use
their office for nonlegislative purposes. Subsection (G)
allows for use by a legislator of photographs of that
legislator.
Joe Miller recognizes that the committee's interpretation
of confidentiality is different than his, and asked the
chair if he could refer to information within the
investigator's narrative of the interview.
Chair Deb Fancher replied she would appreciate it if he did
not, and to instead refer to the complainant as the
complainant.
Joe Miller replied he wasn't talking about naming anybody;
he was talking about the details of discussions with
certain witnesses.
Chair Deb Fancher replied that at this stage of the
process, the investigation is still in the early stages, in
discovery, and she did not think it necessary to do that.
She deferred the question to Joyce Anderson or Tamara
Maddox.
Joyce Anderson said because the information is public
information even though it is redacted, she saw no problem
if Mr. Miller wants to refer to something in the testimony
in those documents as this is the time to respond to them.
Tamara Maddox agreed with Joyce Anderson Joe Miller may
refer to the public documents.
Joe Miller said part of the reason Pat Martin was in the
offices for so long was for the purpose of taking
photographs, which AS 24.60.030(a)(2)(G) allows. More
importantly, both AS 24.60.030(a) and (e) both provide
exceptions for personal use if the use is de minimis and it
doesn't interfere with the performance of public duties.
Joe Miller argued the facts should not be reasonably
contested. The complainant was out of town so there was no
personal observation. Mr. Martin is not an unregistered
lobbyist. His "assistant" was his juvenile daughter. It is
a matter of public record that Representative David Eastman
and Former Representative Christopher Kurka were on the
House floor or in committee meetings on April 14, 2022, so
it is difficult to prove that Pat Martin spent extensive
periods of time in their offices under the direction or
express approval of either legislator. The committee needs
to demand more from complaints than generalized statements
not based on personal observation, and on the face don't
meet probable cause especially when combined with statutory
exceptions.
Joe Miller said there are clearly some constitutional
issues like due process. In addition, he offered that he
did not think a complaint filed after a legislator leaves
office would withstand judicial scrutiny but if it did it
would be accompanied by judicial oversight over the
committee's actions is a far reach under any reasonable
interpretation. There are first amendment issues. This is a
clear chilling of the ability of constituents to interact
with their legislators, and that if the complaint goes
further, it will chill speech under both the U.S. and state
constitutions. The U.S. and the state were built on the
idea of discourse; it's a sign of a healthy democratic
system. When discourse is shut down, it's a sign of an
unhealthy democratic system.
Deb Fancher invited questions from the committee for
Representative David Eastman or Former Representative
Christopher Kurka before asking questions of Joe Miller.
There was no objection to her suggestion.
Deb Fancher invited Former Representative Christopher Kurka
to speak to the committee.
Former Representative Christopher Kurka was stunned and
shocked when he received the complaint. His former attorney
laughed at the complaint because on its face it complains
about protected constitutional activity. The issue is that
the complainant is upset with the message and the petition
being delivered to the capitol, and that he (Former
Representative Christopher Kurka) aided Pat Martin. If he
had aided Pat Martin, he would have been doing his job.
It's a freedom of speech issue, and the freedom of
assembly, the freedom to petition your government.
Former Representative Christopher Kurka reported that Pat
Martin came at his request to his office, and they met for
over an hour in his office strictly for legislative
purposes. That it is unethical because the complainant
finds Pat Martin repugnant is outrageous. On its face the
complaint is absurd, and it should be dismissed; it is
complaining about first amendment protected activity.
Former Representative Christopher Kurka addressed the issue
of due process. He understands there is discussion about
whether the Ethics Committee is part of the judicial branch
[of government] because public members are appointed by the
judicial branch or is it under the legislative branch. It
doesn't matter, his due process rights still apply. You are
still obligated to allow us discovery, they are still
obligated to see the evidence against them, they still have
a right to cross examine the complainant and question their
credibility.
Former Representative Christopher Kurka is upset he is
still dealing with this issue and that state resources are
being spent on it. He does not see where in the process
Article 1, section 11, Rights of Accused has been observed.
Deb Fancher invited Representative David Eastman to speak.
Representative David Eastman stated for the record that he
thinks the committee mistook the importance of this issue
to his constituents and others who called in. He hopes and
expects the committee to dismiss this complaint. His
biggest concern is the impact this has had on himself, his
family, his staff, and his constituents. Those cannot be
undone by dismissing the complaint. The complaint does not
address anything he himself did, yet he is accused of
violating the Ethics Act. The only reference to him in the
complaint is a statement that he was present at the time.
That is impossible. He could not have been as he was on the
house floor and in a committee meeting. Yet the complainant
had gotten notarized a statement that he was there. He
offered that if his name had not been mentioned, the
committee would not even have looked at the complaint.
Representative David Eastman read from the Ethics Act Sec.
24.60.010. Legislative findings and purpose: The
legislature finds that ? (9) a fair and open government
requires that constituents have unencumbered access to
legislators about issues important to the state under art.
I, secs. 5 and 6, Constitution of the State of Alaska,
which protect the right of a legislator and a constituent
to meet and the right of a person to petition the
government, and this chapter is not intended to restrict
those rights.
Representative David Eastman asserted there is nothing in
this chapter intended to restrict those rights, and people
exercising these rights are being threatened with
investigations. There is no small impact to himself or the
few of his constituents who are able to travel to Juneau
because of the hostility some legislators to some people
coming to the capitol.
Representative David Eastman reported he received petitions
only from Pat Martin last year. He wishes he had received
petitions from all sorts of groups, but he didn't. When he
delivered those petitions, he was accused of carrying a gun
in the capitol, which was a false statement. Security was
called. It is a crime to provoke a confrontation with law
enforcement by accusing someone of having a weapon when the
allegation is false. The statements in the complaint are
either exaggerated, don't apply, or are outright false
statements. They have consequences, not least of which is
time spent by the committee investigating it. There is a
dollar sign attached to it. If the complaint had not been
filed, neither he nor his staff members would not have had
to deal with the investigation and hopefully the staff
member who was fired would not have been fired. He wishes
the committee would have dismissed the complaint earlier in
the process
Deb Fancher closed public comment and entertained questions
from the committee for Representative David Eastman, Former
Representative Christopher Kurka, or attorney Joe Miller.
Jerry McBeath thanked Representative David Eastman for his
comments. He noted that as a political scientist, and
political scientists look at legislatures differently than
legislators. Maybe the view of political scientists is
mistaken or immature or wrong. You said you would welcome
petitions from other groups. When you represent groups, do
you represent them all as constituents or do you represent
some of them as stakeholders (meaning larger groups with
whom you agree or agree with you but do not live in your
legislative district) and others of them as constituents?
Representative David Eastman knows there are other people
who feel the same way as the very few people who call,
email, or send a petition. Regarding stakeholders, the
public record is there for the community to review special
interest groups and campaign donations. Last time he
checked he was the only candidate not to have money from a
special interest group on his campaign. If he had gotten
money from a special interest group, it would not make him
a representative of those groups, and maybe that is why
they don't give him money.
Jerry McBeath noted Representative David Eastman indicated
he had been wounded by the inability of the committee to
act quickly on the complaint. The committee chair, the new
administrator, and the interim administrator had all
apologized profusely on behalf of the committee.
Representative David Eastman nodded and replied with his
thanks.
Representative Sara Hannan addressed the question of
timeliness. In 2022, the investigator attempted over a span
of four months to make contact with you and your staff as
well as Former Representative Christopher Kurka and his
staff. That stretched out the timeline. She asked if
Representative David Eastman would speak to why there was
no response for the period between September 2022 and
January 2023.
Representative David Eastman said he can't speak for Mr.
Elliott or Mr. Moffat or Former Representative Christopher
Kurka's office. He learned for the first time at the
November Ethics Committee meeting there had been
unsuccessful attempts to reach out to him or to his staff.
No emails had been sent, there were no voice mail messages.
They discovered the investigator had been leaving messages
in Juneau when staff worked in Wasilla. They were unaware
there were messages. He wishes an email or text message had
been sent. His staff acted quickly when they were made
aware of it.
Representative Sara Hannan asked if phone messages from the
Juneau office are forwarded to the Wasilla office when
absent from the Juneau office?
Representative David Eastman replied no, but he appreciates
the question. There is a peculiar and historical technical
problem with forwarding messages from Juneau to the Wasilla
offices due to the age of the system. Complaints have been
made and he asked for a system upgrade.
Deb Fancher entertained other questions. There were none.
She thanked Representative David Eastman, Former
Representative Christopher Kurka, Joe Miller, and everyone
who had participated.
5. MOTION TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION
Deb Fancher entertained a motion to go into executive
session.
Jerry McBeath so moved.
Deb Fancher reminded everyone to keep in mind that
attendance at executive session will be limited to members
of the committee and essential personnel, as determined by
the committee. In cases of discussion, investigation, data
gathering, interviews, deliberations or decision making on
complaints prior to probable cause determination, neither
the subject of the complaint, nor any other legislator not
on the appropriate subcommittee, shall be allowed in the
executive session.
We will be taking up Complaints H 22-01 and H 22-02 in
executive session in accordance with the Rules of Procedure
of the committee. Both of these [subjects] complaints have
waived confidentiality filed by the respective subject of
the complaint.
11:15:21 AM
6. EXECUTIVE SESSION
12:26:15 PM
7. PUBLIC SESSION
Deb Fancher announced the decision to dismiss complaints H
22-01 Former Representative Christopher Kurka and H 22-02
Representative David Eastman.
Tamara Maddox will draft a decision.
Deb Fancher asked members of the committee to review the
draft dismissal before releasing the decision to the
complainant, subjects, and the public.
8. OTHER BUSINESS
Deb Fancher entertained other business. There was none. She
entertained a motion to adjourn.
12:27:53 PM
9. ADJOURN
Jerry McBeath so moved.
The meeting was adjourned.
12:28:11 PM
ADJOURN:
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Agenda and H 22-01 and H 22-02 Public Documents.pdf |
JETH 11/29/2023 9:30:00 AM |