It's NOT Better To Ask Forgiveness . . . Why The Assembly Shouldn't Settle With Roger Hickel

Roger Hickel's construction company filed suit against the Municipality of Anchorage.

"In its lawsuit, Hickel says it wants to be paid for the nearly $2.5 million of work it did last year, plus damages to be determined."  (From Alaska Public Media)

He claims he had a contract with the Municipality to do the work and now he's not getting paid.  

The problem is that his contract wasn't valid because it had never been approved by the Assembly.

"It started last year when the administration authorized Hickel to begin construction without Assembly authorization. That came to light last fall, and the Anchorage Assembly suspended the project." (same APM article.)

Last September, the Mayor brought a contract amendment to the Assembly.  

"On March 21, 2022, MOA Purchasing approved a Contract with RHC for Pre-

11 Construction Management (CM) services for the MOA Navigation Center as the

12 result of Request for Proposal 2022P007. Of the two proposals received,

13 reviewed, and evaluated, RHC received the highest score. The contract amount

14 was $50,000.00 and the period of performance was through December 31, 2022.

15 M&O is now requesting approval of the addition of General Contractor (GC)

16 construction services at a Not to Exceed (NTE) cost of $4,900,000.00 and a

17 contract extension through June 30, 2023. This will increase the contract amount

18 from $50,000.00 to $4,950,000.00."

But the Assembly rejected the extension of the contract:

"In a 9-3 vote, members rejected the administration’s request for $4.9 million so the city could proceed with the project. Assembly members Randy Sulte, Jamie Allard and Kevin Cross voted to approve it."

Why?  Because the Mayor had earlier secretly approved the contract without getting the Assembly's approval for the contract extension, which is required.  

"The vote came weeks after the revelation that, against city code, Bronson officials authorized millions in construction work over the summer without first getting the required Assembly approval to increase the contract with Roger Hickel Contracting by the $4.9 million. Work had begun weeks before Bronson officials in early September sent a request to the Assembly to change the contract."

“The municipality and the contractor have both been operating in good faith based on no less than three Assembly actions that appropriated to the tune of $9 million towards this project,” Municipal Manager Amy Demboski said. “It was our intent — we thought we were collaboratively working with the Assembly.” 

 About that 'good faith.'  Amy Demboski is the City Manager who a short time later, after she was fired by the Mayor, published a 'scathing letter' with a long list of things the Mayor had done very much in bad faith.

"It's better to ask forgiveness than permission" is a phrase often uttered in large bureaucracies when someone is proposing to skip over the rules.  The most positive spin would be that the complication of such organizations often frustrates folks to the point that they think it's easier to just plow ahead, without jumping through all the hoops to get permission.  But on the negative side, it's interpreted to mean 'since we aren't likely to get permission, let's just do it and it will be too late for them to do anything about it.'

The latter would seem to be what happened here.  There weren't that many hoops at the Municipality.  They just had to get the Assembly's approval.  But the Assembly had serious misgivings about the Mayor's project and there was a good chance they wouldn't approve it.  

We know the Mayor's office had to know they needed the Assembly's approval.  Contract approval is a very important and frequent part of running the Municipality.  The requirements for contract approval are one of the first things a Mayor needs to know.   There were still some pre-Bronson era employees who knew the rules and would have mentioned this.  At the very least, the Municipal Manager, Amy Demboski, a former Assembly member, knew well that the Assembly's approval was required.   

And Hickel?

Roger Hickel's LinkedIn Page says he's been doing construction in Anchorage for 28 years.

His construction company's website identifies over a dozen civil projects done for the MOA and the State of Alaska.  (I couldn't fit them all in one screen shot) And over 28 years he's done many, many such projects.

He also has the MOA and State of Alaska on his list of repeat customers among other government entities like the School District and the University of Alaska Anchorage. 

A FEW OF OUR REPEAT CLIENTS

Walmart

Nordstrom

Home Depot

Lowe’s

United Parcel Service

Federal Express

Army and Air Force Exchange Services

Food Services of America, NC Machinery

Providence Alaska Medical Center

Anchorage School District

Alaska Pacific University

University of Alaska

State of Alaska

the Municipality of Anchorage

Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium

Alaska Regional Hospital

As an Anchorage contractor for over 28 years with numerous contracts with the MOA of various sized projects, there is no way that Hickel didn't know that the contract extensions over a certain amount required the Assembly's approval.  You don't do this many government construction projects without knowing the rules of the Muni and the State, without knowing the cost limits that require additional approval, without experts in your office who do this routinely.  

And he knew the project was controversial.  That it might not get the approval.  He and the mayor may have convinced themselves the project was critical to solve the Anchorage homelessness situation, but they still knew it required the Assembly's permission.  

The Assembly should call their bluff.  Let them go to court.  Let them explain why they went ahead without the Assembly's approval before a judge and a jury.  My guess is that the judge and jury will understand they were taking a calculated risk.  That the project was controversial and not likely to get the Assembly's approval.  That they were betting that moving the project ahead would force the Assembly to approve a project that they had serious questions about.  

I'm not a betting man, but I take the rule of law seriously.  I urge the Assembly to be firm.  To hold the Mayor and the contractor accountable for breaking the Municipal ordinance.  To let a jury decide.  I'm fairly confident that going to court will cause Hickel to settle for a much lower sum from the Muni.  And that a jury would side with the Assembly.  

Wally Hickel and Jay Hammond Go Two Great Rounds: Why You Should Buy A Ticket For The Ticket -

I admit, when I heard that Dick Reichman had written a play about a fictitious conversation between two of Alaska's most illustrious former governors, I had trouble imagining how that would play out.

But forces were moving me toward Cyrano's.   Cliff Groh at Nerd Nite on Wednesday, had highlighted the different visions of the Permanent Fund between Hickel and Hammond,  and I'm reading Hammond's Bush Rat Governor for my book club this month.  Seeing this play seemed inevitable.  The world premiere was Friday night and so we saw the second performance.

And it turned out to be a wonderful evening.  The dialogue is a quick and witty serving of non-stop delicious  bonbons* about Alaska politics, about public service, about ego, about growing old, and about friendship, to name a few.   The enjoyment of the play comes from the conversation between the two characters, played by Outside William S. Murphy and Matt K. Miller.

The 'plot' is just a device for getting them together.  But if you want to see this play with no hints at all, skip the next  paragraph.  And the actors were superb, though it seemed to me a couple of times they almost lost control of a couple of the words, but they did it so seamlessly I can't be sure.

The play begins with Hammond arriving at Hickel Captain Cook Hotel office.  He's been summoned by Hickel, who's not at all sure Hammond will show. Republican  Hickel tells him he's going to run as an Alaska Independent, against the Republican nominee Arliss Sturgulewski,  for another term as governor and that Jack Coghill is going to be his running mate.  Unless . . .


You can start reading again here

This is a terrific Alaskan play. I added Alaskan there because it was written by an Alaskan about Alaskan figures, but it's really a universal play that happens to have Alaska as its setting.  Even if you know nothing about Alaska politics or about Hickel and Hammond, it's an interesting political flirtation between two men who have feuded in the past, approach the world very differently, yet ultimately have an unexpected affection for each other.   One of the characters is self aware and comfortable with himself, while the other needs a late run for governor to 'keep in the game.'  There's a lot of bluster and affection as they learn about each other and themselves.   It's serious, good theater.

But for Alaskans, there's the added factor that these are two former governors and most of the issues they discuss are still current today, 26 years after this imagined conversation.

Adding to the juiciness was the after theater discussion with someone who knew them both.  Last night's discussant was Sen. Johnny Ellis.  Ellis was the valedictorian  at his Bartlett High graduation when he first met Hammond who was the other speaker, which led to Ellis working on Hammond's reelection a year or two later.

If I understood it correctly, there will be guests after each performance, including Arliss Sturgulewski, whom Hickel stole the gubernatorial election from in that 1990 election.

There were also some luminaries in the audience including former Anchorage Mayor Jack Roderick and former Alaska attorney general John Havelock.

So, yes, this is a strong endorsement for everyone in or around Anchorage this month to get tickets for a lively and entertaining evening.

*Bonbons might imply light and insubstantial and perhaps appetizers might be a better word to use there because it would imply warming you up for something more filling.  It's an entertaining play, not deep history.  But Reichman (and Paul Brown who helped with this and was there last night) offer us the broader themes that usually get missed in the contemporary reporting of events.  So, feel free to substitute appetizer, and after you see the play, you can read more about these two fascinating men.  You can even watch Brown's movie on Hickel which is available

Why War? Why Not Big Projects? Wally Hickel - The Movie

I got an email invite to see the premiere of "Alaska, the World, and Wally Hickel" from Paul Brown.  I thought back to a meeting I had with Paul some years ago.  He was up here just starting the film. . . and now it was done.

So I looked up the old post to show the beginning of this project and it turns out my memory is very vulnerable to suggestion.  We met in April 2009, but he was up here scouting out Alaska for a Common Cause chapter.   Good thing I have a blog to keep me grounded.  But I also saw him since then and he must of told me he was working on this project. 

portrait of Wally Hickel

Wally Hickel is bigger than life here in Alaska.  I first heard of him before coming here - when Nixon made him his Secretary of Interior.  He surprised us all when he wrote a letter to Nixon after students were shot by the National Guard at Kent State.  (One of the people interviewed claims to be the person who leaked the letter to the press. Based on the others interviewed, this may well have been a new revelation.) When I got to Alaska he was businessman Hickel again, but jumped into the Governor's race as an independent in 1990 after Arliss Sturgulewski won the Republican nomination.  She would have been the first woman governor and a good one.  But Hickel took the election.

My opinion of Hickel went back and forth and toward the end, when he began talking about the Owner State and getting strongly involved in pushing communication and exchange among Arctic Nations, he showed a leadership, passion, vision, and integrity that Alaskans, and the nation, need more of.

The movie reflected this hard to pin down Alaskan.  It more than hinted at weaknesses - portraying him as a man who didn't read much (he was dyslexic it said), as an impulsive decision maker, over confident (various people said he "believed his own stories"), and that he loved attention.   Overall though, this is a very positive portrait.  

Was he just lucky he got to Alaska when the opportunities were good for a charismatic young man who who could work hard?  I think that helped a lot.  Probably in a more established city and state he might have been lost in the crowd.  But the movie also portrayed him as making people feel good to be around him, as having an infectious enthusiasm that made people believe in his projects, and a perseverance and self confidence that made things work out.

I think the movie spent a little too much time on his departure from the Nixon administration and omits any explanation of how or why an apparently healthy young man in the early 1940's managed to stay in Alaska to start his career instead of enlisting or being drafted to fight in World War II.

Was there a health reason?  Was he a draft dodger?  A secret pacifist?  The National Governor's Association website bio of Hickel says,

"During World War II, he served as a civilian flight maintenance inspector for the Army Air Corps."

Is there something here that would help explain his support of the anti-war activists during the Vietnam war? 

Executive Producer of the film, Ken Mandel, in an introduction to the film said they only had 60 minutes to cover a lifetime and they had to make choices.  He also offered the Hickel quote about war in the title of this post, which further tickles my curiosity about this.


No film or book can tell the whole story of a man.  Others need to fill in other aspects and other details.  This is a reasonable film that celebrates the things Hickel did well, hints at some of the flaws, and left me pondering the differences between those who take action after careful analysis and those who think after they act.  (The movie mentions the Hickel highway he had built through the tundra to the Prudhoe Bay oil fields that destroyed the permafrost and had to be abandoned to hopeless summer mud, leaving a scar across the landscape with an unmentioned pricetag.)  The Hickel portrayed in the movie seems to be a man with great integrity, great vision, and great confidence in his own greatness.

I talked to Paul Brown after the film and in this very short video, you get a sense of how Hickel affected people. (This is also about as close as I've ever had the camera to someone's face. I'm not sure how this happened. Sorry Paul.)





It was fitting that the movie premiered in a ball room of the Captain Cook Hotel, a hotel Hickel built in downtown Anchorage shortly after the 1964 earthquake to show confidence in Anchorage's recovery.  And it's still a world class hotel.  

The film will be on shown on Alaska Public television (KAKM, KTOO, and KYUK) on May 9, 2013 at 7:00 pm.  In Fairbanks (KUAC) on May 26.