City council rights a wrong

Admitting a mistake is never easy. But making it right, ultimately, is all that matters. At Monday night's fortnightly meeting of the Wasilla City Council, a long overdue correction was made when councilors publicly accounted for their secret ballots filled out at the July 25 meeting. In so doing, the council shielded city taxpayers from a potentially expensive lawsuit over its violation of the state's Open Meetings Act.

The action was put in motion when councilor Diana Straub expressed a need for the council to meet the requirements of state law in the way it filled a vacant council seat. Fellow councilor Mark Ewing concurred.

Councilors Ron Cox and Howard O'Neil disagreed, and went on record as stating they did not believe a violation existed. But the fact that no one present stood in the way of a correction, says all that needs to be said about the need for one.

Although they had to be dragged, kicking and screaming, to a proper solution, we applaud the City Council for doing the right thing by the people they were elected to represent.

The professional manner in which the people's business was conducted was also a refreshing change of pace. Mayor Dianne M. Keller kept the council focused and on task, and she set the tone for the mostly civil debate, even reining in councilor Verdie Bowen when he attempted to bring an audience member into the council's debate, which was clearly out of order.

Residents of Wasilla should be comforted in the knowledge that their interests were protected Monday night. But they should not rest too easily.

As is the case with any turning of the wheels of democracy, the vigilance of the governed is essential. Most potentially damaging is the questionable legal advice city taxpayers are subsidizing.

It's puzzling enough that the $165 an hour "service" is paid to an out-of-town attorney when there are plenty of competent lawyers in the Valley. When that attorney is deficient in knowledge of municipal law and the public's right to know, residents should be truly concerned.

Outside of that, many questions remain. And the biggest ones should be asked of councilor-who-would-be-mayor Straub.

Why, for example, would she make such a public spectacle about filling out her ballot incorrectly, but not correct it when the city clerk gave her the opportunity to Monday night?

Her oversight in the original balloting cost Marty Metiva a council seat. Since then, she has been vocal about the need for the council to reconsider that vote. When reconsideration was finally given, she stood by her July 25 ballot, giving her two weeks of righteous hand-wringing a decidedly disingenuous appearance.

How the dust ultimately settles on the whole affair will be decided by voters. In seven weeks, it is they who will mete out the final accountability to the players in this local drama.