Sunday, February 07, 2010

Small World, More First Friday, New Friends, Feeding Ravens, etc.

This is a catch up post.  After the museum Friday, we went down to the Canvas, which in addition to its First Friday exhibit of Magil Pratt's Miniatures, a bunch of which had red sold stickers on,  also had a pottery sale and we got a couple of little bowls to give us a little bit more in our minimalist Juneau household.  I also ran into someone I know from Juneau who lived in the house where we're living.  Our basement apartment was already here when she was a child.  




Then down the block to the Silverbow where an exhibit of pictures sponsored by the  Juneau Homeless Coalition.  Here's Gail, Lance, Teri, and Gil.
















Scott Ciambor's Zen caught my eye.  This wall had landscapes of the homeless.  Here, under a bridge.












We ended our art crawl with dinner at Silverbow.








Our friend Sharman was down from Anchorage last weekend and in the four days she was here, we ran into her three different times before we met her for dinner with her Juneau friends last Sunday.






Last night we had dinner with the Juneau friends who live three blocks down the hill in a wonderful ol house with high ceilings, wood trim, and lots of green plants, and, last night, lit candles. 

A delicious dinner with good folks and cats.  












Today, I took a lazy run over the bridge to Douglas to get this picture I missed last week when I discovered - at this spot - that my credit card was missing.  Grey and drizzly, but still a great view back toward Juneau.


And then I stopped at the Foodland on the way home and as I came out there was someone feeding the ravens.  Not sure this is a good idea. 

And as I made it to the stairs up the hill I ran into Lisa Demer, the ADN reporter who's in town for three weeks replacing Sean Cockerham.

Tonight we're headed to dinner with people we've never met, but  I met their daughter a while back - a former Peace Corps volunteer whose parents, she told me were volunteers in Thailand 1967-69, the same time I was there.  The teacher Joan volunteers with gave her a note with their phone number and a message they wanted us over for dinner.  Small, small world.  But no, I didn't know them in Thailand, but they did know one of the people in my group who was near them. 

The bread is almost done in the oven, the Saints are up by fourteen with just a few minutes to go, and we need to go pretty soon.

Saturday, February 06, 2010

How Do You Know Who's Been To Pebble Mine?

When you go into the front door of the Capitol, just to the right of the stairs, there's this wooden board with little packets of papers.  New ones are added several times a week.  If you are a legislator, the new packets get delivered to your office.  Well, I'm not sure if Representatives get stuff for the Senate and vice versa.   There's a variety of topics covered.  Some of the regular ones are the House and Senate Journals, which tell you what has happened, and the House and Senate Committee Announcements, which tell you what is scheduled to happen. (You can double click the pictures to enlarge them.)

  
 Most of this stuff (probably all) is available online.  I'm still learning where to find specific things.   BASIS has more than you can read, so you don't have to be in Juneau to see this stuff.  Here are some of the links from the BASIS link:


So, the other day, as I was checking if there was a new committee schedule, I came across this document.  I've been going through it in short spurts when I've had time. 

  


It lists various kinds of information about legislators and their staffers.  Were I still a volunteer staffer,  and because I'm on a couple of steering committees, my name would be in here as well.  (Actually, I would have had 30 days from start of 'employment' to file, so it probably wouldn't be in the 2009 Report.)  For the record I'm on the Statewide Steering Committee of DELTA and on the Steering Committee of Healing Racism Anchorage both of which I've mentioned at various times in the blog.  

There are several categories of information published in the Disclosure Report:
  • Memberships on a Board of Directors
  • Close Economic Associations (basically in some sort of business relationship from employee, to website consultants, to renters)
  • Gift of Travel and Hospitality (By far the most entries)
  • Gift Received by Family Member Because of Legislative Connection
Here's what one of the entries looks like for travel (I blurred out the names because I didn't want to highlight just one person, in this case it's the information in general that's important):

 


I figured I should be able to find these reports on line, and probably they are out there.  I checked at the APOC (Alaska Public Offices Commission) but the best I could do there was reports through 2007.  I'm sure more recent stuff is there, but I couldn't find it.



(The other day I had trouble finding a list of the Legislative Council members on BASIS.  I could only get an old list.  I called and they helped me.  I had somehow gotten onto a cached version and not the 26th Session, so there are a lot of ways to go wrong.)

So, I googled specific info out of the hard copy report and got
SELECT COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE ETHICS
YEAR 2009 DISCLOSURES
Reported from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2009
By playing with the URL I got, I was able to get to a page on the Alaska Legislature site that links to the annual disclosures, so you can see the 2009 disclosures here.   [I can't seem to open that file so if it doesn't work for you either, here's a google cached version.I'm not sure how one would get to this particular page from the home page. The ethics button on the bottom gets you into the ballpark. I'll have to try all the possibilities.





This has both more (it includes the Senate for instance) and less (it doesn't say which legislators the staff members work for nor does it break down the costs) information than the booklet I picked up.  But electronic means I can cut and paste the information to the blog.  Since the Pebble Mine is a major Alaska policy issue, I picked out all those people I could find who got trips to Pebble Mine.

And I don't mean to imply that if people fly to Pebble Mine courtesy of the company, that they've done something wrong.  This is a major policy issue facing the state.  Seeing the actual location is important to help someone understand the situation.  But the purpose of disclosure is to make it transparent for the public to know and then follow this down the line.  So, you can ask your legislators, if they're on the list, if going to Pebble with a Pebble Mine advocate changed their minds in any way and what they got out of it. 

A key problem with getting information from one side of an issue in a non-public setting is that the other side doesn't have a chance to challenge what is being said.  So if a person is swayed by such an encounter (and this could happen at a private meeting in an office just as well) the other side doesn't know what was said and can't say, "Wait a minute, you left out the fact that two weeks later the company went bankrupt" or whatever else was unsaid.

If you are smart and a critical thinker, such a trip shouldn't be too problematic.  But if you aren't a critical thinker, especially if you are ideologically predisposed to favor the development of the mine, having just the mine owners' take on things could distort your ability to evaluate this objectively.

So, based on setting my search function for "Pebble Mine" here's the list of people I got who have visited courtesy of the company in 2009.  If they're legislators, it will say Rep. or Sen. before their name.  The others are legislative staffers.  I'm not going to go through all the records to pick out which legislators the staffers work for.  Sorry, I'm not quite that anal.
[I think the first dates are when they reported (they have 30 days) and the second date is when they traveled.]
SENATE
  • 08-19 07-28 Michael Rovito $800     The Pebble Partnership-tour of proposed Pebble Mine site; airfare and meals; Iliamna, AK
  • 08-19 08-09 Patricia Walker  $800     Pebble Ltd. Partnership-helicopter tour Pebble mine proposed site; airfare  and meals; Iliamna, AK
  • 08-19 07-28 Sen Menard  $800     Pebble Partnership-tour of the proposed Pebble Mine site; airfare and meals; Iliamna, AK
  • 08-25 08-18 Matthew Moser  $800    Pebble Limited Partnership-site tour of proposed Pebble Mine; airfare and meals;  Iliamna, AK
  • 10-13 09-21 Andy Moderow  $694 Pebble Partnership; tour the Pebble job site in Iliamna, AK; airfare and meals
  • 10-23 09-23 Sen Olson  $694   Pebble Limited Partnership; visit and inspect Pebble Mine core drilling sites and related processing facilities; airfare, lunch and helicopter tour; in and near Iliamna, AK
  • 10-23 09-23 Tim Benintendi  $694   Pebble Limited Partnership; visit and inspect Pebble Mine core drilling sites and related  processing facilities; airfare, lunch and helicopter tour; in and near Iliamna, AK
HOUSE
  • 08-19 08-09 Charles Heath, Jr.  $800   Pebble Partnership-tour of the proposed Pebble Mine site; Iliamna, AK
  • 08-21 08-18 Jennifer Senette   $800    Pebble Limited Partnership-tour of Pebble Limited Partnership site; airfare, meals, ground transportation; Iliamna, AK
  • 08-21 07-28 Rep Holmes   $800   Pebble Limited Partnership-on-site helicopter tour of proposed Pebble Mine area; airfare and meals; Iliamna, AK
  • 08-21 08-18 Rep Olson  $800  Pebble Limited Partnership-overview of proposed mine site; airfare, lodging & meals; Iliamna, AK
  • 08-24 08-18 Rep Petersen   $800   Pebble Limited Partnership-helicopter site tour of potential Pebble mine and Pebble operations; airfare and meals; Iliamna and Newhalen,
  • 08-24 07-28 Konrad Jackson   $800   Pebble Limited Partnership-tour of proposed mine site; airfare and meals; Iliamna, AK
  • 08-27 08-28 Rex Shattuck  $800  Pebble Limited Partnership-onsite briefing/overview of project; airfare and meals; Iliamna, AK
  • 08-28 08-18 David Dunsmore  $800  Pebble Limited Partnership-helicopter tour of Pebble operations in Iliamna and potential mine site; airfare and meals; Iliamna and Newhalen, AK
  • 09-08 08-09 Mike Kelly  $800 Pebble Ltd. Partnership; tour the proposed mine site; airfare, helicopter tour and lodging; Anchorage – 200 miles SW in Bristol Bay region
  • 09-08 08-09 Rep Coghill  $800 Pebble Partnership; tour of Pebble Mine; airfare and lunch, Iliamna, AK
  • 09-08 08-09 Rep Wilson   $800 The Pebble Partnership; tour Pebble Mine area; airfare and meals; Iliamna
  • 09-22 09-11 Nick Henderson   $743.98 The Pebble Partnership; Legislative tour; airfare and lodging; Iliamna, AK
This is just one destination.  The disclosure list has lots of trips.  Now, in some cases legislators and staffers may just be taking advantage of the donor's largess to see different parts of Alaska, the US, and the world.  In other cases, the accumulation of trips from donors of the same ideological perspective, might well seal a legislator's or staffer's brain from taking in opposing ideas.  In other cases the traveler will learn a lot about issues facing the legislature and will be more informed when making decisions.  Probably, there are differing aspects of all three of these outcomes in most trips.

While I suspect that all who went on trips would agree that some people could be unduly influenced, I doubt any see themselves as vulnerable.

Again, here's the link to the 2009 Disclosures.

Juneau First Friday - Juneau Douglas City Museum

From the Holy Trinity Church we walked a few more blocks over to the City Museum where the 12X12 show was opening. This is the show where all the entries have to be 12 inches by 12 inches. All were at least fun and a few were terrific.

[From top to bottom, left then right:  Noelle Derse - A Boy's Dream;  Clare Brooks, Woodland;  Megan Eagle, Computer Age of Nothing; Jeff Brown, Maze;  Joanne Sam, Untitled; Andrew Moeser, Albatross] [My dilemma was that I got home and realized a couple of the titles weren't clear.  Do leave all the info off?  That didn't seem right.  Maybe someone will fill in the blanks in the comments.  Otherwise I'll go back to the museum and fix it later. Done.]

This one by Fumi Matsumoto recalling the World War II Japanese internment camp at Manzanar  showed more originality than most. 





And this one by Cameron Byrnes seemed to attract the most attention while I was there.

But for me, the absolute standout was this one:





Rachel Juzeler's Hidden Work Series:1989, w/ fortunes.  I realize that there may be a lot of folks who really scratch their heads over this one.  "But what is it?"  This one is for people whose brains don't demand everything be served up in instantly recognizable packages, who like being challenged with the unexpected, and who can appreciate the shapes, the colors, the forms.  A dynamite piece.











The food was provided by the Juneau Dental Society and I was impressed.  It was basically healthy.





But then I went into their exhibit.  Oh dear.  Maybe at a trade show. But this was a museum. The Mouth Power exhibit logo was fine, and I expected something with artistic taste, not some tired commercial art.  Reminded me that most of the stuffed bears in glass boxes at the Anchorage Airport were shot by dentists. 

But the kids did seem to enjoy playing dentist.

Friday, February 05, 2010

Juneau First Friday - Holy Trinity



I got an email invitation to walk down the hill a couple of blocks to see the new Holy Trinity Church for the First Friday Art Walk when there was going to be something about puppets.

We passed St. Ann's Parish Hall - where the Holy Trinity Congregation met after the fire - and the last block to the new, not yet completely finished church. Before the fire, Holy Trinity was one of the oldest churches in Juneau.


 
We got into Holy Trinity in the middle of a puppet show presentation about the puppets of the church, how they were made, and tricks of puppeteering. 

  

  
That goat is also a puppet.  


  
These puppets were in the back of the hall.


  
And all along a couple of the walls were puppets made by younger members of the congregation.  [kids at the charter school across the street.  A reader emailed that Aaron Elmore, of HT and Theatre in the Rough,  HT's resident theater company was an artist-in-residence at the Charter School and taught them how to make puppets]

  
The ceiling of the new building is starkly stunning.

 
More puppets.


Legislative Council on Public Relations, Facebook, and Other Issues

I got to the Capitol at 8am Thursday morning to hear the discussion in the State Affairs Committee over Rep. Gruenberg's bill to apply proportional representation to the Legislative Council and the Legislative Audit and Budget Committee.  You can read about that here with background on these committees.


[Front left, Rep. Stoltze; in blue Rep. Peggy Wilson; at the end of the table Rep. Harris, Chair; I think the next person in Pam Varni, head of Leg. Affairs Office;  Rep. Nancy Dahlstrom;  and on the far right, Sen. Johnny Ellis.]

So I thought I should see a Legislative Council meeting and there was one at 4pm Thursday.  This is the group made up of Senators and Representatives to deal with joint issues and to act for the Legislature during the interim between sessions.  So they should be covering weighty stuff.

There were a lot of housekeeping issues.  You can see all the details below.  They did talk about the Request for Proposal that was characterized in the press a while back as hiring a PR firm to lobby against protections for beluga whales and polar bears.  The best soundbite of the day came from Senator Ellis:   "Scientists doing science is fine if it is professional. Politicians doing science will get us a black eye."

There was also a long discussion about allowing access to Facebook on Legislative computers.  Right now it is blocked.  They postponed the decision.  Details in the rough minutes below.



Below are my rough notes. WARNING:  I typed as fast as I could, but there are gaps, mispellings, and probably paraphrasing as I tried to catch up. As always, I'm offering this to give an overall sense of things, but don't rely on the details completely. I apologize in advance to anyone I've seriously mischaracterized.  Let me know and I'll make  corrections.  I've been something of a perfectionist most of my life, but I know if I go for perfection here, there will be nothing posted.  Notes in [Brackets] are my notes of explanation as I write this now.

I've taken the online agenda and then written my notes between the lines:



LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL JOINT COMMITTEE * Feb 04 Thursday 4:00 PM SENATE FINANCE 532 - Legislature


Feb. 4, 2010 4:05 opened
1.  Roll Call: Harris, Chenault, Dahlstrom , Stoltze, Wilson, Guttenberg, Sen Davis, SEn Egan, Sen Ellis, Hoffman, STedman, Stevens. [I didn't catch everyone, and there was someone audio-conferenced in.  I believe it was Senator Lyman Hoffman]
2.  Approve Minutes
3.  FY09 Audit - [ I don't have notes.]

4.  Sanctioning of Charitable Events: 
[One of the waivers for lobbyists giving gifts to legislators is giving tickets to charity events.  So, they can buy tickets to such events and give them to the legislators and their staff.  There is a $250 limit.  But, the charities have to be approved.  And so, if I understood this right, the Leg. Council was approving these charity events.]
Thanksgiving in March;
Legislative Skits;
Neighbors Feeding Neighbors;
Fahrenkamp Classic Events;
Kenai River Classic Event -
Shamrock ???
Approving charitable events approved.

5.  Late Per Diem Requests - Travel & Per Diem Policy Approval
Speaker Chenault and for Rep. Gruenberg-
Stolze - can we have a round contrition from both members?
Chenault - I don’t grovel very well, as you know.
Stolze - I withdraw my objection
Approved.

6.  New per diem policy  [If I were any good, I'd link to it, but I'm way behind on things as it is and I can't find it immediately.  I couldn't bring up the documents for this meeting on my computer, so I don't have the backup.  Sorry.]


7.  Presentation of State Flag Policy - To present a flag flown over the capitol to families of legislators or former legislators when they die.

8.  Fosler Law Group Contract Amendment - Extends Mr. Foster’s contract for one year, not increasing the contract amount. Balance of $28K, offers services to Leg. Council and member. He doesn’t charge if we don’t ask him to do anything.

Item 6 back, [Rep. Stedman came in late and had a comment on Item 6 so it was reopened]  Harris: ... even though we approved it - Per diem policy. Sen Stedman, can you give us your concern.
Stedman: Apologize for being late, was in another meeting. Page 3, about eating allowance. If I leave from Sitka to Anchorage and return the same day, I have to take the 6am flight out and don’t get back until 11pm. [I think the issue was that the new regulations don't allow reimbursement for food you eat on the day you leave home.  And this was what he was questioning.]
Harris: I’ll have Pam give explanation.
Pam: This policy goes along with travel officers guidelines. Not affected during session since you already get a meal allowance. Only for the interim time. Your suggestions don’t go along with the ?? guidelines.
Harris: We’ll leave it in place and come back to it at next meeting.
Not revisiting our vote, just brought it back so member could discuss it.

9.  Revisor's Bill - Kathryn Kurtz, Leg. Affairs Agency. One job is to create bill to to clean up the language (I think). Cleaning up problems with the language and references - ‘and’ or ‘or’ etc. References explaining why the change was made. If approved, can be introduced by the Rules Committee.  [The Legislative Affairs office reviews parts of the statutes each year and then recommends changes which don't change the law, but simply clean up the way it is written - typos, consistency, etc.]
Harris: I remember these things being really thick. Things must be getting better.


10.  90-Day Session Report - [Each House was asked to do a report on how the new 90 day session is going.  The House wrote a report, but the Senate committee sent in three separate 'reports' from the three members.  I don't have copies of these.]
Harris: Sen. Egan says he wants to cut it down to 60 days cause he’s tired of his home town….[Egan represents Juneau]
From the Senate it’s sort of a mixed bag
????: I beg your pardon
I didn’t say you were a bag, just a mixed bag.
And from the House a report that is unanimous.

Stoltze: Thank you, debate ongoing ad naseum, part of the fabric of the session. Just happy with the 90 day session. Reflect there’s no desire on the part of this committee to change, just passing on the report.
Wilson: Process question. So it does take a bill?  Our Constitution says we have 120 days, do we have to do anything?
Harris: You can do anything you want and I’m sure someone will litigate. I think the Constitution is clear that we are not to go over 120 days.
Some of you aren’t speaking into the mikes and you aren’t being picked up.
OK, well, send them [Reports] on.


11.  Building Naming Policy Discussion -
Brought to me by Sen. Stevens.
Stevens: Just seemed to me as ???
Harris: process for naming for someone who isn’t a House or Senate member. And also concerned about naming about someone who is still alive.
Stevens: We could name it after someone who later does something outrageous
OK, take it up and bring it back.
Stolze: I appreciate the level of caution. Concerned about Beltz room, someone said, Who was William Beltz, I take those issues seriously, have a lot respect for the past history. Hasty moving toward people we have emotions and friendship for. Deeper appreciation for the longer history. People who reigned and ruled in this room that staffers know nothing about. I’d like to reserve some of the real lions of this process. We should not forget our richer past.
We’ll bring it back.



12.  IT Subcommittee Recommendations: 
-Web Filtering Authority; [This is about having a joint committee to decide on what sites to block on the Legislative computers.  Now it is done separately by each House.  The proposal, as I understand it, is to have just one authority on this.]
Curtis: Info SErvices manager for Leg. Affairs. Establish who is in charge for web filtering, which sites should be blocked and allowed. This is to consolidate so we have one policy maker and both chairs have worked on this together.
Stedman: Committee action to
Harris: Not sure, brief at ease.
Harris: Motion will be that Leg Council decision making body for blocking sites, and Leg Council chair in charge of making exceptions. I don’t intend to be a dictator, every issue that comes up we don’t need to have a meeting of the whole committee.
Stedman: Clarification. Comm will take positive action on list of websites and chair can override that if brought by particular legislator.
Harris: Yes, probably staff members will do a lot of this. Part of the issue was that the Speaker and Pres may have different policies and they want a uniform policy and this the that body for both.



-Facebook Access - [Facebook is currently blocked on Leg. computers.  People have requested it be accessible.]
Curtis: number of offices ask for access to FB.com to better communicate with constituents. For years we have had different interpretations. Now requesting to lift the block on FB and see if this works, in terms of virus, campaign issues, etc. Let them use it for three months to see if it is something we want to do.
Dahlstrom: If this goes through I suggest it be 30 day, not 90 days because we would be out of session by then. Concerned about virus, but mostly ethics, even if it is unconscious. Everything we do has pitfalls, Need to be cautious. I think FB is great, but should do it on their personal computers, i-Phones. I would be a no vote on this.
Harris: I believe it reads to only be during the session. I think that deals with your time issue.
Wilson: This brings up something. I cannot use my personal computer and get on the network in the building.
Harris: I thought we fixed that.
Wilson: You did, but if we are going to open up, maybe I should go back.
Curtis: Originally we were looking at 90 day session, but yes, that’s what we meant.
Stoltze: Where has been the impetus. I don’t have facebook, my neices and nephews do, I heard one of our former politicians uses it. I don’t understand the boundaries and barriers of this. The public doesn’t see the problems we see. I hear about teenagers and pedophiles. How do we keep that off our system. I’m confessing a total lack of knowledge on this. I don’t know enough to vote other than negatively.
Harris: Any folks on IT subcommittee want to talk.
John: John Bitney, I work in your office and on the committee. When we started this discussion about FBI on legislative systems I was skeptical. I would say the discussion your having common in other legislatures and board rooms. It’s a heavily used system and several offices have come to ask for access with legislative computers. We discussed it with the Ethics committee. If this were a pproved, if your office begins to use it. You can’t start it and ignore it. If you open a site you need to actively manage it, partake and keep and eye on it. Valuable tool, but requires active management and monitoring.
Stoltze: Said social networking, makes me shy about this. Maybe I’m totally off base technologically, What are we opening ourselves up for. If someone decides to be a social networking, while I’m working on the budget, I don’t want to see personnel doing a whole new activity. I’ve heard people spend a whole evening on FBI. I’m really nervous about this. ….
Wilson: Curt, how does security, because I was told if I connected to the network I’d be a security risk. We’re opening up to the whole world.
Curt: FBI is the most popular website on the internet, about 200 million users. When you have lots of usage, it’s a target for hackers. Those are the security related issues. Great way to exchange info and that info could be laden with virus and trojans.
Gatto: If someone asks you to friend them, I just say no if I don’t know them.
Curt: I have a FB account, don’t do much, checking it out for job.  I had someone ask me to be their friend, it turned out to be a cousin I didn’t know. If your constituent asks and you say no….
Gatto: Bitney says if we don’t maintain it we’re in trouble

Harris: move it to next meeting

13. Personal Service Contracts/PERS Waivers -[I didn't understand what they were talking about]
Skiff Lobaugh: Memo from Pam Varni, Jan. 26
Stedman: I think it’s a bad call, impact isn’t so severe on treasury, retire Friday, then get your pension and show up Monday and get your salary and pension.
Need to have continuity amongst ourselves. Employees compensated well, have good benefit package. I understand some after 30 years have to cap out. That’s just embedded in the system. Not good public policy.
Skiff: Differences between executive and legislative employment. Leg. and Exec has differences that makes the comparison different.
Stedman: As legislators we have employees who are hired for a session then terminated, possibly hired for the interim. We have a quirk in the sytem how we operate. But overall, I think it isn’t a good practice. Gun shy with this policy.
harris: What would you like, mull it over a bit?
Stedman: Mull it over, no need for a new committee.
XXXX: I would agree, this is a big policy call and will affect how other employees are treated in the future.
14.  RFP 505 - Public Relations Consultations -[this is about the Request for Proposal that got a lot of attention earlier, when it was characterized in the press as asking for  a PR firm to advertise against protections for beluga whales and polar bears.]
Harris:  In Leg. Council we put money into Leg Council to look at Global Warming and Endangered species. Intended for Execs to spearhead it. What this proposal does, Eddie Grasser has talked to you, requests a proposal for people around the country, what the leg. should do to address this issue. We have belugas and polar bears and we need to see what is out there and help us defend ourselves, work with other states. We have the proposals back. Haven’t seen them, They are all sealed. I would appoint subcommittee to evaluate the proposals. We money in the interim

Break -

Concerned about black eye for Alaska.
Eddie, proposal ended up being a conference and proposal after that from what we find out after that. We want to look for a balanced approach, both sides being invited. If you don’t do that you will have a black eye. My discussions with leg leg. Actions would be things only legal for the governor can do legally.
Ellis: Scientists doing science is fine if it is professional. Politicians doing science will get us a black eye. We need to be mindful that there is great pr damage that could come from this if we do it wrong.
Harris: I agree, you want to sit on this?
Stoltze: I share STedman’s concerns about time. Go in with some concerns as Sen. Ellis. Follow your leadership as always, sometimes with more trepidation than others. I think we have a firebreathing AG working with F&Game my pref is to give him the money to work with other AG’s in the US. Just because we have money, doesn’t mean it is imperative to spend it. The misuse of ESAs affects North slope and ESA’s permeate every part of the state. We had NS borough talking about how ESA’s affect their borough. Appreciate Sen. Ellis’ concerns. I’ve been a skeptic, cautious nature, frugal nature. Model myself after first governor on frugality.

I’ll appoint a subcommittee, not right now, see who wants to be on it.


15.  NOBEL Conference Funding Request.
Davis: Package for Request for Conference to be held in Anchorage, Group black state elected officials. ABout 365 African American elected to state legislature in 48 states. I would like to get 1000, but even 500 would be good. I’m proud of my state. They are going to sightsee and spend money here. I’m requesting $50,000 to cover the conference, Marriot Hotel in Anchroage. I’ve hosted other Womens Conferences. I have reputation in Lower 48 where people think they have to come to my state because they’ve heard about my conferences. $50K would just be a portion, we are getting money from other sources

Stedman: IN support, I was in San Diego, several of her colleagues, they were all excited about coming up, if it weren’t for Sen. Davis, but it’s a good opportunity for the State. Don’t know what the budget has.

Dahlstrom: I support strongly, but I would like to know if I would be able to come if I am not black.?

Davis: This is open to everyone.

?????; I support it….
Motion by Harris.
Passed.

16.  ESA - Executive Session: Legislative Office Space -  [Since this was in executive session, I had to leave.]

17.  Other Business

Sitka's Mayor, Scott McAdams, In Juneau - Lobbyist or Advocate?

[Update Aug. 26, 2010:  More recent Scott McAdams video available speaking to Democratic Unity Dinner after 2010 primary election.]

As I've said, I'm trying to convey what it is like in and around the Capitol Building in Juneau. And one thing that stands out for me is the constant stream of people coming to talk to their legislators.  In an earlier post about receptions and lobbyists,  a staffer left a comment correcting my characterization of school children as lobbyists.  Lobbyists get paid, while advocates are volunteers.  I knew that wasn't all of it, so I looked it up in the statutes.  (This isn't as hard as it may seem.  I simply googled "Alaska Statutes Lobbyist Advocate" and that got right to the statutes.)

AS 24.60.990. Definitions.

(12) "lobbyist" means a person who is required to register under AS 24.45.041 and is described under AS 24.45.171 , but does not include a volunteer lobbyist described in AS 24.45.161 (a)(1) or a representational lobbyist as defined under regulations of the Alaska Public Offices Commission;
(14) "registered lobbyist" means a person who is required to register under AS 24.45.041 ;
Based on (12) and (14,) lobbyist and registered lobbyist sound an awful lot alike.  

So, the link to AS 24.45.041 doesn't tell us much more but gives the information needed to register as a lobbyist.  Lobbyist is further is described under AS 24.45.171


(11) "lobbyist" means a person who
(A) is employed and receives payments, or who contracts for economic consideration, including reimbursement for reasonable travel and living expenses, to communicate directly or through the person's agents with any public official for the purpose of influencing legislation or administrative action for more than 10 hours in any 30-day period in one calendar year; or
(B) represents oneself as engaging in the influencing of legislative or administrative action as a business, occupation, or profession;

"Advocate" shows up once in this section:
(9) "influencing legislative or administrative action" means to communicate directly for the purpose of introducing, promoting, advocating, supporting, modifying, opposing, or delaying or seeking to do the same with respect to any legislative or administrative action;
The next link takes us to  Exemptions.  This would then apply to people who get compensation to influence more than ten days in a thirty day period. 

AS 24.45.161. Exemptions.

(a) This chapter [60 Standards of Conduct of Title 24 Legislature] does not apply to
(1) an individual
(A) who lobbies without payment of compensation or other consideration and makes no disbursement or expenditure for or on behalf of a public official to influence legislative or administrative action other than to pay the individual's reasonable personal travel and living expenses; and
(B) who limits lobbying activities to appearances before public sessions of the legislature, or its committees or subcommittees, or to public hearings or other public proceedings of state agencies;




(2) an elected or appointed state or municipal public officer or an employee of the state or a municipality acting in an official capacity or within the scope of employment;







(3) any newspaper or other periodical of general circulation, book publisher, radio or television station (including an individual who owns, publishes, or is employed by that newspaper or periodical, radio or television station) that publishes news items, editorials, or other comments, or paid advertisements, that directly or indirectly urge legislative or administrative action if the newspaper, periodical, book publisher, radio or television station, or individual engages in no further or other activities in connection with urging or advocating legislative or administrative action other than to appear before public sessions of the legislature, or its committees or subcommittees, or public hearings or other public proceedings of state agencies;







(4) a person who appears before the legislature or either house, or standing, special, or interim committee, in response to an invitation issued under (c) of this section.






So, I don't seem to find the term 'advocate' in the sense of a non-paid lobbyist, but the term "voluntary lobbyist" did appear in AS 24.60.990. Definitions (12).
.

Now, when we get to the Mayor of Sitka, I suppose he fits into the category of "less than ten days in a thirty day period." But, even if he did lobby that much, he would be exempt because he would be doing it as an elected official.  So, maybe he's an advocate or maybe he's a 'volunteer lobbyist."  Here's what he had to say Thursday:






The reference he made to expanding the legislature was the subject of the State Affairs committee earlier I covered earlier this week.

Thursday, February 04, 2010

PEER Supports Steiner's Position

The title of this blog isn't just whimsical.  I am concerned about how people approach knowing 'the truth.'  Here's an exercise in that activity.  

Below is a press release.  I've read about some of this on Progressive Alaska, but I have no direct knowledge of what has happened.  I know that people react to something like this based on their predisposition toward the situation.  This situation is about a University professor in Alaska who has resigned after the University interfered with his funding apparently because of what they saw as inappropriate political speech.  He was doing work related to environmental issues and spoke up at public forums.  So, if one is disposed against 'intellectuals' or 'environmentalists' you might well dismiss this organization's statement as 'obviously politically biased.'  If you are a strong supporter of civil rights and environmental issues, you might just as uncritically bristle with indignation at the injustice you read. 

It's reasonable to read such things, from sources you don't know, skeptically.  It's what one should do, no matter what side of an issue you are on.  And then do more research.  I'm in the middle of doing legislative coverage and this is a bit of a distraction at the moment.  But I think it behooves us all, especially as the University of Alaska is searching for a new president, to pay attention to what is happening at the state's university. 

As a former grievance representative for the University faculty union, I know that grievants come with one thing in common:  they feel that they've been wronged.  Inevitably, there are parts of the story that have been left out.  After more research, it becomes clear whether they have a valid grievance (a. their problem is covered by the rules as a legitimate basis for a grievance and b. the violation has, in fact, taken place.)

I don't have enough information on the Steiner case.  Here we have PEER protesting the treatment of one of its members.  What is PEER?  From the PEER website:
Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) is a national alliance of local state and federal resource professionals. PEER’s environmental work is solely directed by the needs of its members. As a consequence, we have the distinct honor of serving resource professionals who daily cast profiles in courage in cubicles across the country.
An organization that does such work, has to carefully choose the battles that they fight.  There are plenty of disgruntled workers who have weak or no grounds for protest, who may themselves be the source of the problems.  Organizations like PEER, who take on unfounded cases will quickly use up their resources fighting losing battles.  This will decrease their membership and do harm to their reputations.  So we have to see what others say.

Charity Navigator rates them highly, which relates to their organizational effectiveness and capacity.  This doesn't mean they are right on this case, but it does suggest they aren't some rock throwing group that takes up the cause of every angry public employee working on the environmental issues.

On the other hand, in 2005 the Catholic League was disturbed by PEER's work:

LEFTISTS RESORT TO BIGOTRY TO TAR SCOTT BLOCH

March 30, 2005


Scott Bloch commands the U.S. Office of Special Counsel (OSC) and has come under attack by a left-wing non-profit group, Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), for his policy decisions and hiring practices.  PEER, headed by Jeff Ruch, has protested publicly that Bloch has hired some graduates of Ave Maria law school.  His most recent criticisms came on March 25 in an interview he had on National Public Radio (NPR).  The host of the show, Bob Garfield, sided with Ruch.
 
But as I followed up on this story, I found a National Journal  story three years later that reports:  

White House Fires Special Counsel Bloch


Scott Bloch, the embattled head of the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, was fired today in a meeting with White House officials, according to several sources. Bloch is under federal investigation for possible obstruction of justice ...

I urge readers to do their own background research to satisfy themselves one way or the other on this report. 

All that said, here's the beginning of the press release.  You can click here or at the end, to read the rest.  I put this up, not because I've confirmed all the details, but rather to let people know, so they can educate themselves on the issue.

For Immediate Release: February 3, 2010
Contact: Kirsten Stade (202) 265-7337
INTERNATIONAL SCIENTISTS CONDEMN PURGE OF PROFESSOR — Scientific Commission Decries Oil Industry Influence at University of Alaska
Washington, DC — A prestigious international scientific body today sent a blistering letter to the University Alaska protesting the influence of the oil industry in the treatment and funding of academic researchers. Released today by Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), the letter condemns the University’s decision to revoke federal funding for a marine conservation specialist in retaliation for his protests of bias in University-sponsored programs promoting drilling in Arctic waters.
The February 3, 2010 letter from the Commission on Environmental, Economic, and Social Policy (CEESP) of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) takes the University to task for its actions against Professor Rick Steiner, who has resigned from its faculty (effective this past Monday, February 1, 2010) following its removal of any further National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Sea Grant funding this past fall:
“CEESP members have become increasingly concerned at the way in which Prof. Steiner has been treated by your University. They believe that the University of Alaska administration has engaged in what is known as “constructive dismissal” of Prof. Steiner. From the documents we have seen, it is clear that Prof. Steiner was punished for publicly expressing his expert perspective on one particular offshore oil and gas proposal in Alaska’s Bristol Bay, and for criticizing a University of Alaska / Shell Oil conference on the matter which he felt was biased toward a pro-drilling decision. This was not just his right to do so, it was his job to do so. Academic freedom and the responsibility of academics to be the public conscience are cornerstones of being a credible academic.” [Emphasis in original]

The rest can be read here.

HB 76 - Proportional Rep on Key Leg Committees - Passes Out of State Affairs

I know something about this bill, because I was working on this bill for Rep. Gruenberg when I was his staffer.  The purpose of the bill is to make the representation on two key legislative committees - the Legislative Council and the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee - more reflective of the proportion of the political parties in the legislature.

[Photo:  State Affairs Committee members (left to right) Reps. Johnson, Gatto - partly visible - and Seaton on panel.  Minority leader Kerttula and bill sponsor Rep. Gruenberg with backs to the camera testifying.]

Right now there is a requirement that there be at least one member of the minority party on each committee.  HB 76 requires that there be proportionate representation.  The Legislative Council and the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee were established in Statute:

AS 24.20.010. Legislative Council Established.

The Alaska Legislative Council is established as a permanent interim committee and service agency of the legislature. The establishment of the council recognizes the need of the legislature for full-time technical assistance in accomplishing the research, reporting, bill drafting, and examination and revision of statutes, and general administrative services essential to the development of sound legislation in the public interest.

AS 24.20.151. Legislative Budget and Audit Committee Established.

The Legislative Budget and Audit Committee is established as a permanent interim committee of the legislature. The establishment of the committee recognizes the need of the legislature for full-time technical assistance in accomplishing the fiscal analysis, budget review, and post-audit functions.
The standing committees such as State Affairs, Judiciary, etc.  already have proportionally representation.  Rep. Gruenberg has made the point that when the Democrats were in the majority, the Republicans asked for proportional representation on the standing committees and the Democrats agreed and established that.  Standing committees are set up in the Alaska State Legislature Uniform Rules which are established to run the Legislature and are re-established every two years with each new Legislature.

This bill has been introduced regularly since 2003.  It was brought up at an earlier session of the State Affairs Committee when there was some vocal objections.  But at this meeting today, there was some discussion, but it passed out of the committee with no objection.

The questions today focused mainly on the fact that the Senate is divided by a coalition of Democrats and Republicans in the majority and just Republicans in the minority.  (There are ten Democrats and ten Republicans in the Senate.)  Even in the House, where the Republicans have a stronger majority, three of the rural Democrats have formed a coalition with the Republicans, in order, I was told, to have more clout in getting expenditures for their districts.  So, the questions were about the difference between the coalition majority and minority versus the majority and minority political parties.  

The impact in some sense would be more symbolic than substantive.  When I was still a staffer, I ran the numbers, and the way the committees are set up, and with the proportion calculations rounding down (1.9 would be 1 not 2) the most that would be required by this bill would be at most three minority members on the twelve member Leg. Council and two minority member on the ten member Leg. Budget and Audit Committee.

With the coalition of Democrats and Republicans in the Senate, the current Leg Budget and Audit Committee has two minority party (Democratic) members out of ten.  The new legislation wouldn't require more than that.  The current Legislative Council has six minority party (Democratic) members - one on the House side out of six and five on the Senate side out of six.  In the Senate, the Democrats are part of the majority coalition.

In any case, the bill moves out of the State Affairs and is now scheduled to go to Finance, which is a bit unusual because the Fiscal note on this bill was zero. 

Below are my notes from the meeting as it was happening.  As always, take them with a BIG grain of salt.  I think I've got a reasonable representation of what happened as a whole, but I certainly did not catch everything everyone said, and some that I captured is not always their exact words.


[Photo: Bill sponsor Rep.Gruenberg after it was voted out of committee.]


State Affairs Committee
Open 8:05

Gruenberg:  HB 76 Bill which would allow minority representation in the Legislative Council and Legislative Audit and Budget.  This is only fair.  When the Republicans were in the minority, they asked that the standing committees be proportional and the Democrats agreed.  We only have these two committees, which were not proposed [for change] at that time, to change.  It would give us one more seat.  It’s only fair, sometimes it’s hard for the single member to always be there.

Wilson:  Thinking about what could happen.  Used to be majority and minority were parties, but now they are not anymore.  So possible now that one party could fill all the seats, because of our makeup.  We have to be careful.

Gruenberg:  Good question.  Let’s say we are dealing with the Senate.  The minority would be . . .

Seaton:  On page 1 last line.  We didn’t eliminate the parties, we moved it.  I misinterpreted that last time, but it was just moved to section b. 

Gatto:  Reference at least twice here to two major political parties.  An awkward phrase here if we have 15, 15, and ten.  What happens if we don’t have one in the lead.  Does it upset the proportionality if we have a tie.  And then we have a third party that could be clamoring for a seat.

Gruenberg.  No question it the two major parties are Democrats and Republicans…

Gatto:  Excuse me.  Are you speaking for the next 20 years?

Gruenberg:  The only time I can think of we had anyone who was not Dem or Rep, was ??? 

Seaton:  I’d point out that in section 1, that is the existing statute and is being removed, so if the language is problematic, it’s problematic in the existing law. 
It seems like this has come about because the org of the leg has somewhat changed in function of parties and affiliations have changed and recognizing we have mixed majority and minorities in both parties.  While this is offered by the minority, things are really much more even than that.  Things change all the time.  Even if there was a total political split - all Repubs in majority and all Dems in the minority - this doesn’t complicate anything and recognized that it may be mixed or more separate in the future, but this doesn’t complicate appointment by party to committees.

Lynn:  Anyone in Leg Council or LB&A?

[Gatto and Wilson say they are]

Johnson:  You have bill now - HB 288, any party that has 2500 members registered becomes a political party, when it passes, 2500 could sign up for a party.  Suppose they get elected, where wuld they be.  They would not qualify unless they elected enough people to be 25% of the party. 

Gatto:  What if we had 27 and 7 and 7?  If not two major parties.

Gruenber:  Neither would qualify, each would qualify for one, the same as if they were in one party.

Gatto:  It’s existing language, that we have two major parties, we don’t have two parties.

Kerttula:  The way it is, the two major political parties, if you had 25 7 and 7, you’d still have Rep and Dem because the second one hadn’t hit 25%. 

Seaton:  Unless they organized together, they wouldn’t have a rep. 

Gruenberg:  1.  As rep seaton said, no change from current law.  I think when drafted, they didn’t consider the possiblity and it’s not likely.  If there were 26 and two minority parties of 7 each, I suspect they would form together as a minority party and they’d be entitled to two and they would each get one seat.  That’s what I would do. 

Seaton:  I don’t think we should assume that we have the seven joining the majority.  Flexibility for the future and how people decide - we can’t resolve all those questions.

Gatto:  In statute does it mention Democrat and Republican as the two major parties?

Gruenberg:  I don’t think so.

Kerttula:  I appreciate the opportunity to speak here before you vote.  I’ve been the sole minority member on Leg. Budget and Audit, and it is a very difficult task.  It has ten members and I don’t think anyone in this room wants to do without minoirty representation.  It’s valuable.  It’s part of our democracy.  We’ve had a shift to these skewed numbers.  We have coalitions now, which seems more Alaskan anyway.  It seems this brings things a little closer to true representation.  You will never have a skewed vote on the minority size, but they will have a voice.  As a member in the minority, I fantasize that the shoe will be on the other foot.  And you have my word that we’ll recognize the minority. 

Petersen:  could we reword page 1, line 9 and 10, could we just say people from each of the two caucuses?  Would that solve the problem?

Lynn:  I wouldn’t think so.  Caucus more political.  They change all the time. Changing party is like changing religion.

Wilson:  I feel strongly about Leg Council - majority felt it was wrong, and we wanted to come together to fix something.  We were not allwed to go back and rethink a decision and we probably should have.  that’s why I feel strong about it. 

Lynn:  Sometimes difficult to seperate what a particular chair does

Seaton:  It wasn’t that the chair, in that case (to Wilson). Chair was a member of the majority, but it was a coalition and a member of the majority.  We shouldn’t get that confused.

Johnson:  This in no way affects standing committees?  They won’t become statutory?

G:  Correct.

Johnson:  Assume that tomorrow, under this situation.  Finance committee made up of two co-chairs.  Salmon and Joules - would they be the two minority members and then no minority members?

Kerttulla- They would have

Johnson - This has nothing to do with parties, but with coalitions.

Kertulla:  Both. 

Gatto:  Difference between ‘the majority” and “the majority party”?

Kerttulla:  Yes.  They are mixed.  It recognizes Alaska history from before any of us served. 

Gatto:  If we want to be sure the minority party has representation.

Gruenberg:  The way it works now.  Requires that there be at least one member from the Dems and Republicans.  How internal make up is done is up to how the appointments are made.  That is basically from the majority. 
Today the makeup of leg council could be three Democrats.  if the majority wanted to appoint them.  That’s the right of the majority.  The difference is that instead of having only one minority party, there would have to be two. 

Seaton:  This bill talks about major political parties and it shouldn’t.  It should talk to majority and minority.  Agree with Rep Gatto. We shouldn’t confuse Parties and majorities and minorities. 

Kerttula:  We want to come a little closer to fairness.  I agree with Rep. Seaton.

Gruenberg:  On behalf of the entire minority.  Aprreciate your hearing it, and hope that regardless of how you personally think about it, I hope you let it advance.  It will show 1.  that the 26th Legislature is fair, and 2. that the parties can work together and so can the minority and majority can work together for the good of the state.  Thank you. 


Lynn:  Thank you very much.  Anyone in audience or online that would like to speak to the bill?  Anyone else on the committee?

Gruenberg:  Rep. Harris says he supports it.

Johnson:  I don’t think. . . I would like to hear that from the Chair himself.

Gruenberg:  I strike that.

Lynn:  We expect that we trust each other.

Johnson:  I don’t mean to impugn Rep. Gruenberg, I’m just uncomfortable hearing someone speak for others.

Lynn:  This has been properly noticed and people could come and testify.

Committee discussion: 

Jonhnson;  Make up of the committees today are 8 - 4 and 8-6. 

Lynn:  I think the bill is looking at the overall picture, not just today.

Johnson:  I just wanted to point out that it’s working today and I don’t want to fix something that isn’t broken. 

Petersen:  There are only ten on the LBA, so the numbers aren’t right.

Johnson:  That includes the alternates.

Gruenberg:  Not fair to lump in alternates, because they can never vote.  They can’t bolster the vote.

Johnson:  Then 8-6 and 7-3.

Petersen:  Alternates are there if one is absent or if appointed to another position and isnt’ filled?

Lynn:  I don’t know, but I would assume if one can’t be there for any reason.

Gruenberg:  We  also have alternate on ethics commiteee - strictly by party - and I had a conflict and stepped aside, and he took my place.

Johnson:  One thing Rep Gruenberg said, and I agree 100%, I’m not saying that a majority member would necessarily vote with the majority.

Petersen:  I would move CS HB76.

Lynn:  No objections?

It moves out.  I would thank the committee for the thoughtfulness of this committee’s discussion. 

Scheduled Tuesday to hear HB 241 - Divestment in Iran, sponsored by Rep. Gatto.  On the 11th, hearing with APOC on the impacts of the Supreme Court.  Not to debate on how we feel, but whether legislation is needed before the August election.

Amazingly Beautiful Juneau

I'm sorry.  I can't help myself.  Everyday when I first look out the window, I'm surprised again at how beautiful it is here.  Whether it's cloud shrouded or sunny, it's always breathtaking.  Here's what I saw as I left for an 8am committee meeting this morning.  It made me think of all the rosy fingered dawns I read about long ago in The Odyssey. 

 
Then, as I got close to the Capitol Building - about 2 minutes later - the sun was kissing the peaks across the channel while the lower levels were still enfogged.

And after HB 76 was passed out of the State Affairs Committee (more on that in the next post) I kept seeing glimpses of the mountains and clouds through windows in the Capitol as I wandered around talking to people.  Since the sun was out and since I left without breakfast this morning because the alarm didn't go off, I decided I just had to go outside and walk home for lunch.


In the foreground is Capitol Park, just behind and to the east of the Capitol building. Our apartment is in a house the next block above those houses and one block to the right.  And, of course, that's Mt. Juneau in the back, with the light and clouds and snow constantly rearranging the view. 

And another view of the mountain from our place, with a little boost from the telephoto.  The spectacular beauty of this place is addictive. 

And a little early lunch in the sun of our kitchen table. 

Advocates - There Oughta Be a Law!

The halls of the Capitol are often crawling with people who are in Juneau to see legislators about some special project, about a favored agency, to argue for or against some law, or a whole host of other reasons.  Here are a couple that I caught on camera Wednesday.

Emergency Medical Responders staked out the table just outside the Legislators' lounge and were giving blood pressure tests and explaining to people the services they provide around the state. 



Then, later, in the new (this session) staff and public lounge in the Thomas Potter [Stewart] Building, where I've found a new place to blog comfortably, I overheard a group of advocates (I was corrected in an earlier post when I referred to some school children as lobbyists) talking to a legislative staffer and asked them if I could get them to tell me what they are doing here on film. 

[Not sure what happened to the video.  There's a clip that worked right when I did it, but isn't working right now. I'll see if I can fix it later.]