Backers of plan to move Legislature claim legal victory

A measure that would move the Legislature to the Mat-Su Valley is set for the November ballot, with a few wording changes.

Following a legal battle that went to the Alaska Supreme Court, Lt. Gov. Fran Ulmer recently announced that the summary of Ballot Measure No. 2 will be slightly rewritten in order to address some of the sponsors' concerns that the previous version cast the proposal in a negative light.

The summary of the measure, which voters will read on the ballot, states that the bill would move the Legislature to the Mat-Su Borough and, if facilities are not available, sessions will be in Anchorage until facilities are available. The second portion of the summary, addressing the cost of the move, was the item of contention.

Lt. Gov. Fran Ulmer's version had read, "The bill would repeal the requirement that before the state can spend money to move the legislature, the voters must know the total costs as determined by a commission and approve a bond issue for all bondable costs of the move."

Alaskans for Efficient Government, the plaintiff in the lawsuit, claimed this wording was misleading and negative. The Supreme Court agreed and directed the lieutenant governor to rewrite it to say, "… voters must be informed of the total costs as would be determined by a commission …"

Assistant Attorney General Sarah Felix, who argued the state's case, said she believed the court's concern was that the previous wording might have led voters to believe that such a commission had already been formed, that the costs were known but were being withheld from voters.

"That was not at all our intention," Felix told the Frontiersman this week. She said the state was striving to provide a neutral, impartial summary to let voters know specifically what approval would mean to Alaskans. At the same time, by law, summaries of ballot measures must be limited to 100 words.

While AEG is claiming victory in the case, the lieutenant governor points out that the court shared her concern that voters understand the affects of the measure.

"I am gratified that the high court agreed with my conclusion that the voters should be told that Ballot Measure No. 2 would repeal their right to be informed of the costs of moving legislative sessions," Ulmer said in a press release. "That was a major point in the lawsuit by initiative sponsors, who lost that argument before the Superior and Supreme courts."

She went on to say that the court's suggested changes to the ballot to clarify the measure's intent are "relatively minor" and should be easily accommodated.

"The rewording helps," said Ken Jacobus, the attorney who represents Alaskans for Efficient Government. However, he said the measure is still between a "rock and a hard place."

While the previous wording made it sound as if backers knew how much the move would cost taxpayers and were trying to keep it secret, according to AEG, sponsors have in fact been trying to gather that information and make it public.

AEG has filed a separate lawsuit against Gov. Tony Knowles for what they say is his failure to appoint the FRANK Commission. An acronym for Fiscally Responsible Alaskans Needing Knowledge, the commission by law must be created to study the bondable costs of moving the Legislature or the capital. Voters would then have to approve those costs in a separate, second election.

Passage of Ballot Measure No. 2 would repeal this requirement.

Opponents of the measure say this is an attempt to get voters to approve the plan without having all the facts. But in its complaint against the governor, AEG says it wants voters to have those facts when they head into the polls this November.

The case isn't likely to be settled before the election, however, and is just now headed to the Alaska Supreme Court.