Colver files suit against borough

MAT-SU -- In what seems to be an attempt to give assembly members a voice in the recall application process, Mat-Su Borough assembly member Jim Colver on Monday launched a lawsuit against borough clerk Sandra Dillon.

The suit is against Dillon in her official capacity as a clerk and calls for a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction to prevent her from certifying a recall application filed against Colver this month by Cheryl Turner. Turner is married to Jim Turner, the assembly member Colver defeated in the 2000 election.

Three of the 10 required signatures on the application petition come from Jim Turner's family members and two are from employees at his business, Hatcher Pass Gateway Center, according to Colver.

Colver said Wednesday he is not targeting Dillon. The situation is simply that she is the one person who has the power to allow or disallow recall petitions to move forward.

"The clerk is kind of in the position where she merely processes," Colver said.

Dillon said she has no qualms about going through the case, but will continue to evaluate the petition application against Kelly Lankford Ladere -- and any others that may come in. It's all about the process, Dillon said.

"Everybody has the right to use the process that they feel that they need to use, and this is the one Jim chose," Dillon said. "I'm a process person -- I'm always in favor of the process."

In the complaint, Colver alleges that the recall petition is "legally and factually deficient and does not comply with the requirements of Alaska Statute . . ."

"What we are doing is challenging the validity and legality of the [recall] petition," Colver said Wednesday.

Dillon has not yet released the petition, but Colver, in his complaint, said Dillon called him Oct. 14 to notify him she intended to move forward with the certification process.

In a memorandum in support of a motion for a temporary restraining order, Colver's attorney, Scott Sterling, said the reasons for recall listed in the recall application are not sufficient for recall.

The recall application claims Colver violated the law when he went into executive session to discuss matters that were later found to be in violation of the Open Meetings Act. The application also claims Colver withheld, or allowed to be withheld, an appraisal of the assets of Hatcher Pass Development Corp. That act, the application stated, resulted in a violation of the Public Records Act.

The charges are similar to those launched against the borough by Friends of Hatcher Pass earlier this year. Palmer Superior Court Judge Eric Smith found the borough violated the Open Meetings Act and the Public Records Act, but found the borough subsequently cured those violations.

But what Colver's case gets at seems to go beyond the question of whether the recall application should be deemed valid or not.

"Thus the fundamental and irreconcilable tension between the enormous political advantage of being able to initiate the recall process regardless of truth, and the tiny option of being able to submit a rebuttal statement of 200 words or less on a ballot," Sterling wrote in his memo calling for a temporary restraining order.

In other words, Colver said, he's being called on to defend himself or lose his office because of things no one has proven to be true.

"It's almost like you're guilty and have to prove yourself to be [innocent]," Colver said. "Mere allegations are enough -- and I don't know if that serves the public good or not."

Sterling, in his memo, suggested that in order to guarantee fairness, Alaska recall law should allow for a pre-certification notice and hearing before the petition is certified and released by the clerk.

"No such notice and hearing is provided for by Alaska recall law," Sterling wrote, "and that omission constitutes a violation of Mr. Colver's right of due process under the Alaska Constitution."

As of Wednesday, the case had been assigned to Anchorage Superior Court Judge Peter Michalski, but no hearing dates have been set. Dillon said she has consulted her attorney in the matter, Tom Klinkner, and a rebuttal will be filed in the next few days.