Alaska Family Council’s keynote speaker for its annual fundraising dinner is Dennis Prager.
Prager is a best-selling author, columnist, and one of America’s most listened-to radio talk show hosts. He also appears regularly on networks such as Fox and CNN.
A highly sought-after public speaker, Prager lectures all over the world, including Europe, Asia, Israel, and Australia. His books include Think a Second Time,Happiness is a Serious Problem, and his most recent, The Rational Bible.
Prager writes a syndicated column that is published in newspapers and online. His writings have appeared in major national and international publications, including Commentary and the Wall Street Journal. In 2011, he co-founded Prager University. Learn more about him at dennisprager.com.
The event is May 21, 6-8:30 pm at the Captain Cook Hotel in Anchorage.
Tickets have been selling briskly and the $1,500 table sponsorships have sold out. The individual tickets may be gone soon, said Jim Minnery, president of Alaska Family Council.
“We’ve never seen anything like this, this early. Our base hasn’t even stepped up yet. People are buying tables who have never before been involved in our organization,” Minnery said. More information about how to get tickets is at this link.
In Alaska, lawyers decide who gets to be a judge. They control the Judicial Council and they use that control to prevent any judicial conservative from being considered for appointment by the governor. There are no dissenting voices on the Alaska Supreme Court. The lawyers won’t allow it.
There’s a simple fix: Repeal the clause of the Constitution which gives the Alaska Bar Association the right to name three members of the Judicial Council. This would give the governor the right to name all six public members of the Council, subject to legislative confirmation.
Such a constitutional amendment will never be proposed by the Alaska Legislature, since it requires a two-thirds vote. The lawyers have enough allies in the legislature to prevent that from ever happening. But delegates to a constitutional convention can propose an amendment by majority vote, and would likely do so if voters give them a chance.
In Alaska, parents don’t control the education of their children. The teacher’s union and the education establishment have a monopoly on public funding. Private and religious schools can’t receive any state support, because the Alaska Constitution forbids it. The Legislature won’t propose an amendment to remove this prohibition. Delegates to a convention could do it, with a simple majority vote.
The United States Supreme Court is about to overturn Roe v. Wade and allow state legislatures to write laws on abortion. But it won’t affect Alaska. In Alaska, the Alaska Supreme Court has taken complete control over the issue of abortion, and the people have no say.
A simple amendment to our Constitution could change that, but there are enough pro-choice state legislators to prevent that from happening. It would take a two-thirds majority, and the votes aren’t there. At a convention a majority could prevail, and give the voters a chance to decide the issue.
If the people call for a constitutional convention this November, it will probably be because they want to protect and perpetuate the Permanent Fund Dividend. Opponents of the Convention will use scare tactics, saying the delegates, and the people, can’t be trusted. Millions of dollars will be spent trying to convince Alaskans that they can’t be trusted.
Who can be trusted?
Should we trust the lawyers to pick our judges? Should we trust the teacher’s union to control the education of our children? Should we trust the Alaska Supreme Court to decide abortion policy? Should we trust the Legislature with the Permanent Fund dividend?
Or should we, instead, trust ourselves?
Fritz Pettyjohn served in the Alaska legislature in the 1980’s, and has practiced law in Alaska since 1974.
One would think that after voters nixed a 2019 proposal to give $4.5 million to the Juneau Arts & Humanities Council to subsidize a new cultural arts center (New JACC), the Juneau Assembly would be chastened enough to rethink and revise the whole concept.
Well, they re-thought it. By combining it with necessary upgrades and modifications to Juneau’s Centennial Hall convention center, the cost of the joint development (now dubbed the Capital Civic Center) has ballooned to an estimated $77 million – almost double what the original combined projects were slated to cost.
To be fair, city officials admit they don’t know what it will really cost. So, after much hand-wringing, the Assembly approved a $2 million expenditure for a partial design that presumably would determine a firm project cost.
It’s hard to understand.
Somehow the city has been hood-winked into taking responsibility for the New JACC project when it’s been obvious for some time that the plan, as envisioned, is too grandiose to be financially viable. Proponents cobbled together a skimpy pro-forma reflecting a break-even operation but it had more than a few questionable assumptions.
JACC boosters initially insisted the facility would be privately funded. But after years of fundraising, they failed to raise more than 20% of the proposed cost. Their pleas for more money from the city never garnered enough votes from the Assembly or the voters.
Now, they apparently have engineered a dramatic turnaround. With the city proposing to own the project and be financially responsible for its operation, the JACC sponsoring organization, the “Partnership,” will no longer need to fundraise and any revenue shortfalls would be covered by Juneau taxpayers.
Given the additional financial risk assumed by the city, why isn’t the Partnership paying for at least half of the $2 million the city committed to the Capital Civic Center?
This may be a terrific deal for the arts in Juneau but it’s not clear that’s true for Juneau’s taxpayers.
The combined project has been touted as a necessary amenity but it was sold on the premise that it would be more efficient than two large standalone projects. However, it doesn’t appear that any effort has been made to downsize either one – just merely smash them together.
In the process, the two projects are being treated as one but, in reality, the need for each is different. It is well-established that Centennial Hall needs updating. Little has been done on the facility (aside from the $4.5 million in improvements currently underway) and it’s sadly in need of modernization. Voters have been willing to go along with those expenditures, until now. But conflating the need for a renovated Centennial Hall with the proposed need for a brand-new arts and cultural center is, at best, not being honest with tax-paying voters who clearly expressed their unwillingness to financially support the New JACC.
City officials and supporters have hinted that large grants and, possibly, Federal monies are available to fill the funding gap that is widening daily as inflation and supply chain issues dramatically escalate building costs. If so, that would help make the project more palatable to all concerned.
But the project cost is only half the calculation.
Why wasn’t an analysis of revenues and expenses undertaken before committing millions to design? The operating costs of this facility will be many times what the combined operating costs were for the two existing buildings and, without that information, financial feasibility remains a question mark.
Remember, Centennial Hall required an annual $600,000 subsidy before Covid hit. While Juneau (and Alaska, in general) enjoys a mystique and cachet that many other destinations do not, independent travelers will incur high transportation costs and limited lodging options when visiting Juneau. Rosy revenue projections for conventions or cultural events that are based on large numbers of visitors from outside Juneau should be viewed with healthy skepticism.
The only way to gain wide-spread public support is through a financial vetting of the project that reflects no increased subsidies or taxes to pay for it and doesn’t require sacrificing plowed streets in the winter.
Juneau doesn’t need another snow job.
After retiring as the senior vice president in charge of business banking for Key Bank in Alaska, Win Gruening became a regular opinion page columnist for the Juneau Empire. He was born and raised in Juneau and graduated from the U.S. Air Force Academy in 1970. He is involved in various local and statewide organizations.
The NCAA quietly updated its policy for transgender athletes on Wednesday. For college competition, it will use the same model as the U.S. and International Olympic Committees, which have a sport-by-sport policy.
Effective immediately, transgenders who compete as women in women’s college-level sport competitions will be governed by the national governing body of that specific sport. If there is no international federation policy, the IOC policy will be applied.
So far, women who are transitioning their appearance to appear and live as men are not an issue because they typically don’t try to compete in mens categories. But after University of Pennsylvania transgender swimmer Lia Thomas set records in swimming, athletes, parents, coaches, and the public began questioning the NCAA policy.
As of the new policy on Wednesday, biological men who are modifying their appearance to present as women will be required to meet a testosterone standard a month prior to the sport’s championship roster selections.
The ruling could affect whether Thomas can continue to compete. Until age 19, Thomas had been competing in the boys and mens swimming competitions. Thomas, who has the burly physique of a man, then switched over to compete as a woman. Thomas would have to have a testosterone level below 10 mol/L for 12 consecutive months prior to a competition and remain below that threshold throughout a period leading up the competition in a female category in any USA Swimming event.
The NCAA women’s swimming and diving championships take place in March.
The NCAA Board of Governors made the decision at its conference, now underway in Indianapolis. The organization did not post the new policy on its front page, but buried it in under its “About” tab, located at the bottom of the page. The full statement is as follows:
“The NCAA Board of Governors on Wednesday voted in support of a sport-by-sport approach to transgender participation that preserves opportunity for transgender student-athletes while balancing fairness, inclusion and safety for all who compete. The new policy, effective immediately, aligns transgender student-athlete participation for college sports with recent policy changes (PDF) from the United States Olympic and Paralympic Committee and International Olympic Committee.
“Like the Olympics, the updated NCAA policy calls for transgender participation for each sport to be determined by the policy for the national governing body of that sport, subject to ongoing review and recommendation by the NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports to the Board of Governors. If there is no NGB policy for a sport, that sport’s international federation policy would be followed. If there is no international federation policy, previously established IOC policy criteria would be followed.
“The Board of Governors urged the divisions to provide flexibility to allow for additional eligibility if a transgender student-athlete loses eligibility based on the policy change provided they meet the newly adopted standards.
“The policy is effective starting with the 2022 winter championships. Transgender student-athletes will need to document sport-specific testosterone levels beginning four weeks before their sport’s championship selections. Starting with the 2022-23 academic year, transgender student-athletes will need documented levels at the beginning of their season and a second documentation six months after the first. They will also need documented testosterone levels four weeks before championship selections. Full implementation would begin with the 2023-24 academic year.
“We are steadfast in our support of transgender student-athletes and the fostering of fairness across college sports,” said John DeGioia, chair of the board and Georgetown president. “It is important that NCAA member schools, conferences and college athletes compete in an inclusive, fair, safe and respectful environment and can move forward with a clear understanding of the new policy.”
“Approximately 80% of U.S. Olympians are either current or former college athletes,” said Mark Emmert, NCAA president. “This policy alignment provides consistency and further strengthens the relationship between college sports and the U.S. Olympics.”
“Additionally, the NCAA’s Office of Inclusion and the Sport Science Institute released the Gender Identity and Student-Athlete Participation Summit Final Report (PDF). The report assists ongoing membership efforts to support inclusion, fairness, and the mental and physical health of transgender and non-binary student-athletes in collegiate sport.”
The Alaska Supreme Court has upheld the election package known as Ballot Measure 2, which involves nonpartisan primaries and ranked-choice general election ballots, and a combined Governor-Lieutenant Governor ticket for the primary. Voters narrowly approved the massive voting changes pushed by dark money from Outside the state in 2020.
The court said it would later explain in full its decision to uphold a September ruling from the lower court.
The ruling casts aside the Alaska Constitution, which specifies how the governor and lieutenant governor shall be elected.
The Alaska Constitution says, “The governor shall be chosen by the qualified voters of the State at a general election. The candidate receiving the greatest number of votes shall be governor.”
The Constitution specifies the “greatest number of votes,” not a ranked-choice scenario for choosing the state’s executive officer.
Supreme Court in rapid time validated the dark money campaign by Scott Kendall, which may provide the Alaska Legislature with more motivation to act on election integrity bill offered by Gov. Mike Dunleavy and read across on Tuesday as House Bill 286.
The ballot measure was opposed by both Republican and Democratic parties in Alaska, which maintain they have a right to keep control over how they operate their party primaries.
The former Rules Committee chair for the Alaska House of Representatives has thrown his name in for House District 10, which is the old House District 24 in Anchorage. Craig Johnson filed for office on Wednesday.
Johnson, a Republican, represented District 24 for 10 years, from 2007 to 2017. He tried for Senate in 2016 but could not prevail over Natasha von Imhof, who became senator. Upon his retirement from the House, Chuck Kopp ran and won that seat. Kopp was replaced by Rep. Tom McKay, but now district lines have been redrawn and there is no incumbent for the District 10 seat.
Running for the Democrats in that seat is Sue Levi, a perpetual Democrat candidate.
Johnson’s professional experience includes working as a legislative aide from 1997-1999 and 2004-2006. He was the general manager of the Alaska Journal of Commerce and Alaska Military Weekly, and was vice president/general manager of KYMG radio.
He said he originally ran for office to help Alaska be a better state for the next generation and that those are his same goals today. Since leaving office, he has focused on his health, including getting knee surgery and exercising. Johnson is a conservative and would return to office as a veteran of the Legislature.
“Why do you suppose such large segments of the American electorate have come to harbor such profound concerns about your cognitive fitness?” NewsMax reporter James Rosen asked President Joe Biden during a press conference today.
“I have no idea,” Biden answered.
In a rambling and incoherent press conference, only the second during the year of his presidency, Biden was asked again about his competency, “From the messy rollout of 5-G this week to the Afghanistan withdrawal, to testing on Covid, what have you done to restore Americans’ faith in the competence of government? And are you satisfied by the view of the competence of your government?”
Biden answered: Look, let’s speak to Afghanistan. I know you would like to focus on that, which is legitimate. We were spending $1 trillion a week … I mean $1 billion a week in Afghanistan for 20 years. Raise your hand if you think anyone was going to be able to unify Afghanistan under one single government? It’s been a graveyard of empires for a solid reason — it is not susceptible to unity, number one. So the question was, do I continue to spend that much money per week in the state of Afghanistan knowing the the idea that being able to succeed other than sending more body bags home is highly, highly unusual.”
“My dad used to have an expression. He’d say, son, if everything is equally important, nothing is important to you. There is no way to get out of Afghanistan after 20 years easily. Not possible. No matter when you did it. I make no apologies for what I did. I have a great concern for the women and men who were blown up on the line at the airport by a terrorist attack against them. But the military will acknowledge and I think you will know lot about foreign policy, the that had I not pulled those troops out — we would be asked to put somewhere between 20,000 to 50,000 more troops back in because the only reason more Americans weren’t being killed and others is because the last president signed an agreement to get out by May 1. And so everything was copacetic. Had we not — copacetic. We would be putting a lot more forces in. Now do I feel badly what’s happening to — as a consequence of the incompetence of the Taliban? Yes, I do.”
But, he said, he also feels badly about what is happening in the Eastern Congo, and a whole range of things around the world, “that we can’t solve every problem, and so I don’t view that as a competence issue.”
He also said the 5-G rollout was not a competence issue. “I don’t view that as somehow a mark of incompetence.”
He doesn’t see his Covid policy as incompetent, either.
“Look, think what we did on Covid, when we were pushing on Astrazeneca to provide more vaccines. Well, guess what, they didn’t have the machinery to be able to do it, so I physically went to Michigan, stood there in a factory with the head of Astrazeneca and said, ‘We’ll provide the machinery for you. This is what we’ll do. We’ll help you do it so you can produce this vaccine more rapidly.’ I think that’s pretty hands-on stuff.
“I think you have to look at things the way we used to look at it on balance. What is the trajectory of the country? Is it moving in the right direction now? I don’t know how we can say it’s not. I understand the overwhelming frustration, fear, and concern with regard to inflation and Covid. I get it. But the idea, if I gold you when we started — I tell you what I’ll do in the first year, create six million jobs, I’m going to get unemployment down to 3.9%, I’m going to generate and name it all, you’d look at me like I’m nuts. Maybe I’m wrong.”
Reporter Peter Doocy asked Biden why he is trying so hard to pull the country so far to the left.
“I’m not,” Biden responded.
Biden also said Russia President Vladimir Putin will probably invade Ukraine, and doesn’t think the United States or Europe can do anything about it.
“Do I think he’ll test the West, test the United States and NATO, as significantly as he can? Yes, I think he will,” Biden said. “But I think he will pay a serious, and dear price for it that he doesn’t think now will cost him what it’s going to cost him. And I think he will regret having done it.”
When the reporter asked to clarify if an invasion is likely, Biden answered, “My guess is he will move in. He has to do something. I probably shouldn’t go any further. But I think it will hurt him badly.” He suggested Putin might be able to get away with “a minor incursion.”
This weekend, my heart swelled with gratitude for the life Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. helped make possible for me and my family.
His work paved the way for my father, the youngest child of an impoverished widow in the D.R. Congo, to attend an Ivy League college, pursue a successful career in international banking, and create economic advancement opportunities for thousands in developing countries through his work in microfinance.
Dr. King established love as the animating principle that sustained his nonviolent struggle for racial justice. It was the panacea that made possible his dream’s fulfillment. “Love is the greatest force in the universe,” he said, “[t]he heartbeat of the moral cosmos.”
Love, he believed, would empower our loyalties to “transcend our race.”
There is a beautiful simplicity to Dr. King’s life message, one that stands in stark contrast to the divisive emails Assembly Member Chris Constant sent non-profit leaders, the media, and Municipal employees this past weekend. Mr. Constant felt the commemoration of Dr. King’s legacy of love and racial unity was an appropriate time to racialize a legal dispute between the Municipality’s legislative and executive branches.
Apparently, Mr. Constant remains livid over Mayor Bronson’s termination of Mr. Clifford Armstrong III, the Chief Equity Officer appointed by the previous administration, and his subsequent appointment of Mr. Uluao “Junior” Aumavae to fill the position.
So, when Mr. Constant was extended a friendly invitation to join Mr. Aumavae and Mayor Bronson for a celebration of MLK Day, he responded by informing everyone on the email chain, including Mr. Aumavae, that he did not recognize Mr. Aumavae as the Municipality’s Chief Equity Officer and invited everyone to raise their “voice[s] for [j]ustice.” I am happy to oblige because I believe his emails made a mockery of Dr. King’s legacy and were demeaning of Mr. Aumavae.
Mr. Constant engaged in the tired tactic of race-baiting when he wrongfully described Mr. Aumavae’s appointment as a “cynical act to divide a community.” Mr. Aumavae’s appointment was intended to unite our community, not divide it. As a member of the black community, I recommended Mayor Bronson appoint Mr. Aumavae to his post, not only because of his sterling qualifications but also to honor the values of diversity, inclusivity, and equal opportunity Mayor Bronson and our city hold dear.
It boggles the mind that Mr. Constant refuses to celebrate Mr. Aumavae’s appointment to the highest government office in Alaska a member of the Samoan community has ever held. Does he honestly believe his exploitative conduct promotes equity?
Mr. Constant also accused Mayor Bronson of failing to advance equity in this administration. Curiously, Mr. Berkowitz’s administration did not submit a federally required Affirmative Action Plan to the Assembly in 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, or 2019; nor were any African Americans hired to serve in the office of Mayor Berkowitz.
Yet, I suspect neither Mr. Constant nor his predecessors accused Mr. Berkowitz of failing to pursue equity. Simply put, Mr. Constant’s rhetoric does not match his record.
At best, his criticism reflects a lack of self-awareness; at worst, it is naked hypocrisy. Mayor Bronson has appointed numerous women, three African Americans (including perhaps the Municipality’s first black Chief Human Resources Officer), an Alaska Native, and a Samoan to senior executive positions in his administration. Show me Mr. Constant’s commitment to equity by what he has said and I will show you Mayor Bronson’s commitment by what he has done.
I am disappointed and disheartened by Mr. Constant’s insensitive and opportunistic emails that risked provoking racial discord on a day intended to celebrate racial progress and promote racial unity. As we approach Black History Month, I request that Mr. Constant allow Anchorage’s black community to enjoy the celebration in peace. Why not let the court judge the merits of our respective arguments, while we focus our attention on other important matters of Municipal government?
Notwithstanding our differences, I invite Mr. Constant’s collaboration in this administration’s future pursuits of racial justice and equal opportunity. Like Dr. King, I have an “audacious faith” in our city’s ability to build a better tomorrow if we heed his counsel to run when we cannot fly, walk when we cannot run, or crawl when we cannot walk. Our shared objective is to keep pressing forward, even if progress is sometimes slow, until all of us fully inhabit what Dr. King described as “the city of freedom.” We shall overcome with or without Mr. Constant. Personally, I hope it is with him.
Niki Tshibaka is the Human Resources director for the Municipality of Anchorage.
“Walking Alaska’s Toughest Beat” is the motto of the Alaska Correctional Officers’ Association, the union that represents the uniformed security staff of the Alaska Department of Corrections.
The Department of Corrections was in my portfolio for most of my time with State Labor Relations. I got it almost immediately after I began with the State of Alaska in 1987, and I quickly learned that I got it because I was the “new guy,” and nobody else wanted it. I covered DOC until I became director in 2003.
I advised their supervisors and managers, I represented the State in adjudicating grievances, and I negotiated most of their labor agreements.
In the early days, the correctional officers were a part of the General Government Unit, the 8,000-odd member bargaining unit that represents all State employees who aren’t something else. The relationship between the correctional officers and the State was contentious on good days.
The correctional officers were prohibited from striking and had access to interest arbitration to resolve their contract formation disputes. In the 1980s, the Alaska Public Employees Association represented them, and in the early 1990s the Alaska State Employees Association represented them.
Both used them as their “storm troopers” by taking correctional officers negotiations to impasse and arbitration and then using the arbitration award as a template for an agreement for the rest of the bargaining unit.
We got them under a voluntary agreement just before we went to arbitration with the rest of the general government unit in 1990 or so, when they were represented by ASEA. We began encouraging correctional officers leadership personalities to form a separate unit for the correctional officers. We maybe thought about helping them do that, but it would have been illegal, so, of course, we didn’t.
They were successful in forming their own bargaining unit composed solely of correctional officers and in the beginning represented by the Public Safety Employees’ Association, the union that also represented State Troopers. PSEA represented them well, but the relationship wasn’t happy and the correctional officers went off on their own as an independent association in the early 2000s. They were and remain the only State employee union that is local, independent, and not a part of the AFL-CIO. We got along with them pretty well but we did them no favors. I rearranged the career plans of quite a number of their members by sustaining dismissals in arbitration.
The last dismissal arbitration I ever did on behalf of the State was a correctional officer in Nome for excessive force. I won. Full disclosure; since I retired, I’ve represented the union in several arbitrations. When they’re right, they’re right, and with State management as it has been in recent years, they’re often right. I only half-jokingly said that I had made the State’s labor relations policy: “We can work this out if you don’t involve Art in it.”
I also had the State Troopers in my portfolio for much of my career. The Troopers might argue about who has the toughest beat, but I’d say it is a toss-up. Troopers are much more likely to have to confront someone with a weapon in his hand, but they have one too, and the correctional officers don’t.
But to the tough part, Troopers get to do good things and deal with good people, although sometimes in bad circumstances. About the only thing a correctional officer has to look forward to in his/her 12-hour shift is quitting time. We’ve made heroes of healthcare workers and first responders in the Covid Scamdemic, but these workers know the people they’re dealing with are sick; the correctional officers take whomever the police drop off at the sally port.
It is a hard thing to work the balance, even if you know the world of criminal justice pretty well. The cop and correctional officer position is always that a civilian can’t substitute his/her judgment for the law enforcement officer who is facing a threat. I don’t buy that view without qualification. The civilians have a voice too, but that voice has its limits; if you haven’t had to make the split second decision to use force, you really aren’t qualified to judge somebody else’s decision to use force.
At minimum, any civilian involved in a use of force decision should have a comprehensive knowledge of the correctional and law enforcement environment. I did quite a few force cases. I won some and I lost some; won more than I lost but not by a wide margin, and the reality was that the arbitrator who was making the decision had little knowledge of the environment. Unfortunately, people with a J.D. from Harvard don’t usually know much about jails.
Which brings me to what I really want to talk about. On Nov. 22, 2017, three inmates at Anchorage Correctional Center were to be transferred from one area of the jail to another by a prisoner transport officer in a Corrections van. The transfer was caused by the misbehavior of the inmates in assaulting another inmate, so these guys were on the radar as aggressive inmates.
When the van arrived on the other side of the facility, something happened and the inmates became aggressive as the transport officer attempted to disembark the inmates to the sally port. A group of correctional officers converged and one of them discharged pepper spray at one of the inmates, which made incidental contact with the other two inmates. The correctional officers closed the van door to restrain the inmates. Surveillance video reveals that the inmates remained in the closed van between seven and seventeen minutes.
The incident deescalated and the inmates were brought into the facility. At least one showered to remove the pepper spray. Two others may not have had the opportunity to shower and change clothes. One of the inmates filed an inmate grievance. Correction’s Human Resources investigated it, the “internal affairs” unit investigated it, and neither found merit in the inmate’s complaint. Just for the record, inmates complain a lot.
Enter the Ombudsman’s Office.
Confession: I never had much use for the Ombudsman’s Office. It was always political types doing political things for the politicians they worked for. I had enough trouble hiring people with investigatory and analytical skills in real jobs; these were jobs for somebody who knew somebody. The events at issue took place during the Gov. Bill Walker Administration, but by the time the Ombudsman got involved, the Walker Administration was gone. The Ombudsman is a Walker appointee with a five-year term.
Somehow in the last few months the Ombudsman’s interest in this case was rekindled. Three or four years after the event transpired, the Ombudsman’s office asked Corrections to respond to allegations of wrongdoing regarding events that took place before the current Corrections managers were even in office.
I’ve read the public version of the report in some detail, and I do know how to read these things, and the DOC didn’t cover itself in glory, but after the passage time involved, it would be difficult to respond. There is a legal doctrine of “latches” which says that the passage of time is a defense because time makes you unable to adequately defend yourself.
We get a magnum opus from the Ombudsman about how Corrections should manage itself. Nobody in the Ombudsman’s Office has a clue how the DOC should manage itself. I’m willing to bet that nobody who participated in this investigation had ever been behind a door they didn’t have the key to before they did this inquiry.
Of course, Pravda — excuse me, the Anchorage Daily News — made the Ombudsman’s report front page news.
This is a rerun of an old communist-Democrat play. They and the ADN scammed up the National Guard scandal to bludgeon Gov. Sean Parnell. Somewhere in there they ginned up a scandal about Corrections systematically abusing Native inmates and the Gov. Bill Walker regime put a self-serving social worker in charge to try to make political points. Well that guys made enough political points to get an appointment in Colorado, where they thoroughly hate him.
If I’d gotten this case, and in my time I probably would have, I would have investigated it with Department of Administration employees and I might have put some paper in a couple of officers’ files. I only know what I can glean from an investigatory report made by people who didn’t know what they were looking at. Maybe the use of force was justified, maybe it was just an act of intimidation.
I don’t know, and neither does the Ombudsman, but I assume the Walker people will try to use it the same way they used the National Guard scandal, because that was the whole purpose of it.
Art Chance is a retired Director of Labor Relations for the State of Alaska, formerly of Juneau and now living in Anchorage. He is the author of the book, “Red on Blue, Establishing a Republican Governance,” available at Amazon.
