Dunleavy's partisan spending on legislators needs clarification

An inconsistency in the reporting about the ethics complaint against Gov. Mike Dunleavy needs to be clarified for the public.

Alaska Public Media, quoting Dunleavy attorney Brewster H. Jamieson, said the only ad spending deemed inappropriate by the independent counsel went for mailers backing Sen. Mia Costello and then-Rep. Josh Revak.

John Tiemessen, the attorney hired by the state personnel board, wrote that the mailers should not have been funded by the state because two office holders had already declared plans to run again. In Tiemessen’s stretched interpretation of the law, that made the mailers “partisan” and not something that should be paid for by the state.

“An attorney for Dunleavy, Brewster Jamieson, declined to be interviewed. But he confirmed the ads questioned by Tiemessen were physical mailers sent by the governor’s office that praised a pair of Anchorage Republican legislators, Sen. Mia Costello and Rep. Josh Revak. (Revak was later appointed to a state Senate seat by Dunleavy.),” Alaska Public Media reported.

The Anchorage Daily News included a similar statement: “Tiemessen concluded most of the governor’s advertising campaign did not violate the law. Only in two cases — paper mailers referencing Sen. Mia Costello, R-Anchorage and then-Rep. Josh Revak, R-Anchorage — did the governor violate the law, Tiemessen found.”

Tiemessen claimed that the governor’s spending on partisan communications about himself and legislators was appropriate as long as the office holders had not filed “regulatory paperwork” about running for re-election. As I have written, that is not what the law requires. All of Dunleavy’s partisan spending dealt with “potential” candidates, which is the word used in the law.

In any case, either Jamieson or Tiemessen is wrong about Costello and perhaps about Revak.

Costello is not up for re-election until 2022 and had not filed a letter of intent in 2019 saying that she would run again in three years. Such letters are only accepted 18 months in advance.

Revak filed a corrected letter of intent July 12, 2019, which was after the offending mailer went out on his behalf, meaning it should have been OK under the Tiemessen plan.

On July 10, 2019, the Alaska Landmine reported on the mailers backing Revak and Costello that were paid for with government money. Revak had filed a letter of intent, the Landmine reported.

Revak did file a letter of intent on June 13, 2019, but he forgot to include his name as a candidate. A letter of intent that does not name a candidate is not a letter of intent that an independent counsel can claim as “regulatory paperwork indicating an intent to run for reelection.” The Alaska Public Offices Commission did accept the incorrect filing, however, believing that Revak had just made a mistake. He filed a corrected form on July 12.

Dunleavy’s office later admitted that it had sent the missives, spending a total of $3,100 on mailers and $31,500 on Facebook ads.

The Landmine quoted the APOC executive director in 2019 as saying that the agency had become aware that the state paid for the mailers and that a “paid for by” disclaimer was required.

The APOC should have taken action against the governor’s office on this matter instead of letting it slide.

All of this needs to be clarified, given that of all the Dunleavy partisan communications only those backing two of his supporters prompted a claim from Tiemessen. The governor agreed to pay back $2,800, but nearly $32,000 won’t be repaid.

If the Costello mailer, a partisan document, is acceptable because she has not filed to run again in 2022; and if the Revak mailer, a partisan document, is acceptable because he filed a letter of intent that did not include the name of a candidate, this shows the mighty slim threads on which attorney John Tiemessen hangs his conclusions.