The Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly will hold a special meeting this Tuesday at 5:30 pm to determine what action, if any, will be taken against former Assemblywoman Savannah Fletcher, following findings by the Assembly’s Board of Ethics that she violated the borough’s ethics code — three times.
Fletcher is a well-known “law fare” attorney who works for the Northern Justice Project and has made her living using the legal system to harass and intimidate conservatives. She harassed and won a legal settlement from the MatSu Borough over the removal of about 50 books from school district libraries.
As it turns out, she is an expert in violations; she violated the borough’s ethics code and will now face punishment, although it might be only symbolic.
According to the Board of Ethics’ official “Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law,” Fletcher was found to have committed three violations of borough code FNSBC 6.12.010(O)(2), which governs how public officials must present their personal opinions. The Board determined that Fletcher, in a series of three radio advertisements in 2023, failed to clearly disclose that she was expressing personal opinions rather than speaking on behalf of the Assembly.
The Board of Ethics found that Fletcher’s statements in the radio spots selectively highlighted issues she cared about, used inflection and wording that conveyed opinions, and encouraged the public to take action, such as contacting Assembly members. Under borough ethics rules, public officials must clarify when they are not officially representing the Assembly.
Although the Board determined that the violations occurred, it recommended no penalty for Fletcher. They were deemed “technical.”
Fletcher, who previously served as presiding officer of the Assembly and ran unsuccessfully for State Senate, could be facing further ethics scrutiny stemming from her time leading the Assembly.
Fletcher, a prominent attorney with the Northern Justice Project who has made her career filing ethics complaints against legislators and community members, is accused of failing to disclose an attorney-client relationship during a controversial Assembly meeting held in the early morning hours of July 25–26, 2024.
At that meeting, Fletcher participated in Assembly discussions connected to a letter to the editor that cited exaggerated claims about conditions at Lathrop High School and Tanana Middle School to justify a special election. The letter referenced hyperbolic statements made by Liz Reeves Ramos, who at the time was Fletcher’s legal client.
Borough Code 6.12.010(H)(2) clearly states that a public official “shall be disqualified” from acting on matters involving a client within the past year when the matter is directly related to their representation. The Code further states in Section R that a public official must not fail to disclose a conflict of interest.
Neither Fletcher nor Reeves Ramos disclosed the attorney-client relationship during the meeting. Under borough code, this conflict could not be waived by a simple declaration; they were required to be disqualified outright. Fletcher’s participation in the matter raises serious concerns about whether she improperly used her Assembly position to further her private legal practice.
Records show that on Sept. 28, 2023, Fletcher, acting as an attorney for the Northern Justice Project, entered an appearance in a case on behalf of Reeves Ramos, who subsequently won a seat on the Assembly in October 2023.
The ethics complaint about the July 2024 meeting was filed on Feb. 20, 2025, by Kristen Schupp, wife of School Board member Bobby Burgess.
During the ethics process, Fletcher disclosed that Schupp had previously volunteered for her campaign and contributed financially, while Reeves Ramos noted a friendship with Schupp. These connections were initially considered typical of a small community dynamic. However, the attorney-client relationship between Fletcher and Reeves Ramos significantly changes the interpretation of those conflicts.
The situation gives the appearance that Fletcher, acting as legal counsel for Reeves Ramos, may have facilitated a complaint from one of her own campaign volunteers in an attempt to benefit her client and fellow Assembly member.
The underlying legal matter between Reeves Ramos and Shelly Malcott involved allegations that Reeves Ramos, in her previous professional capacity, facilitated fraudulent claims to the State of Alaska. When the client, Malcott, posted criticisms on social media, Reeves Ramos responded legally, claiming fear for her safety. Although the case initially appeared closed, it was later reopened in 2024.
The Assembly’s special meeting Tuesday will address the current ethics findings. However, the additional allegations about Fletcher’s conduct as presiding officer could prompt broader investigations and further complicate her reputation as an expert in government ethics.
What goes around, comes around. What’s good for the goose, is good for the gander. Seems like these age old parables apply to Ms. Fletcher. If I wanted a dirty unethical lawyer, I know who to call.