Complaint lodged against Kohring

MAT-SU -- Valley legislators are again in the focus of those watching action in the state's capital this week, with the first-ever ethics complaint filed by Alaska citizens, challenging legislators' observance of the Open Meetings Act.

Rep. Vic Kohring, R-Wasilla, is the subject of the complaint. Complainants Roberta Highland and Larry LaGrone, of Homer and Wasilla, respectively, objected to actions by Kohring during a meeting of the House Special Committee on Oil and Gas Feb. 23.

The complaints, if they are found to be valid, will be the first of their kind in the state, since the committee was created in 1993. Ethics Committee Administrator Joyce Anderson said all complaints remain confidential unless they are found to have violated the Alaska Legislative Ethics code, so she couldn't confirm whether other complaints have raised allegations of OMA violations. She also couldn't speak to what was contained in the complaints filed by LaGrone and Highland, unless a public opinion is issued in the case.

LaGrone said he tuned in through his computer to listen to the Oil and Gas Committee discuss House Bill 395, a bill pertaining to coal-bed methane development, on Tuesday, Feb. 23. About halfway through the meeting, he said, Kohring asked for an at ease and, with other Republican members of the committee, stepped out of the meeting room, saying it was to discuss the timing of moving the bill forward.

"They had the decision when they walked back in," LaGrone said. "It's on tape, right there [on Gavel to Gavel's Web site]. It's just blatantly, in your face, saying 'We can do whatever we want.' I figured he ought to know we don't like the way he does business."

LaGrone said he lives in Kohring's district and has only in the past year begun regularly listening to legislative proceedings.

"[I started] when he got my attention back there on HB 69," LaGrone said. "I think that whole thing was underhanded."

Kohring downplayed the action Wednesday, saying he "chalked it up to being stressed out."

According to Gavel to Gavel's audio files, about 40 minutes into the meeting, Kohring said he was taking "… just a real brief at ease, here for about 10 minutes -- I'm going to call for just a small meeting of the members of the committee here outside of the room, here. We're going to discuss the issue of the timing of this legislation here, as far as when it'd be appropriate to move it."

Kohring's at ease lasted just over three minutes, during which time he said he, Rep. Norm Rokeberg, R-Anchorage, and Rep. Jim Holm, R-Fairbanks, went down the hall and to another meeting room, where they sat down, then immediately returned. When they returned, Rep. Harry Crawford, D-Anchorage, was the first to raise a question.

"Mr. Chairman, I'd like to know what that was about," Crawford said.

"We just felt the need -- I suppose we could have done it right here -- but we just felt the need to discuss the timing of moving this legislation, whether it should be today or Tuesday or next week … I'm going to just have to make a decision as the chairman of this committee, given all of that, as to whether or not we move this bill forward or not today, and I'd made an announcement at the onset of the meeting that I think it'd be prudent to hold it over yet and that is an announcement that stands, so we will hold that legislation over at least until Thursday," Kohring said, according to a tape of the meeting.

Rep. Beth Kerttula, D-Juneau, objected belatedly to the actions, and said she believes that, unless it was an executive session, it shouldn't have happened at all.

"I think the chairman wanted to exercise his sore back muscles by moving around in the hallway," Rokeberg said in response to Kerttula's comment. "We weren't trying to hide from anybody. Please don't jump to conclusions otherwise."

Kohring said Wednesday that Rokeberg had only been joking, and the recess wasn't related to ailing back muscles, although they did feel better after the brief walk. He said in hindsight, he wishes he hadn't done what he did.

"It didn't serve any useful purpose to go through that exercise," Kohring said. "I was not trying to violate the spirit of the Open Meetings Act … I thought it would be a good idea to hear people in a more quiet environment, so we sat down in a room -- there was no locked door."

Kohring said a few members of the public, including a reporter, followed them into the conference room. He said they didn't even sit down before revelation hit.

"We didn't actually discuss anything," Kohring said. "I realized maybe we shouldn't even be talking."

Kohring said he hopes the ethics committee understands his actions.

LaGrone said he saw Kohring's actions as flaunting the public process, especially because he interrupted a public hearing to have the private meeting.

"Why are we having the input if they're not going to listen to anybody?" LaGrone asked. He said he recognizes that nothing more than a letter of apology may come of the complaint, but if it makes legislators think twice, it'll be worth it. "I'm hoping maybe they'll quit doing this stuff."

Contact Rindi White at rindi.white@frontiersman.com.

About ethics complaints

An ethics complaint can be filed against a member of the Legislature, a legislative employee or a public member of the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics by anyone who believes the ethics law has been violated.

Joyce Anderson, committee administrator, explained that the first step after a complaint is filed, is to arrange a meeting of the five public members of the committee and the minority and majority member of the body represented in the complaint. Since Kohring is a member of the House, in this complaint Reps. Norm Rokeberg, R-Anchorage, and Mary Kapsner, D-Juneau, will take part in the discussion. The task, Anderson said, is for the committee to decide whether or not, if the allegations against Kohring are true, the action taken would have constituted a violation of the ethics code.

If the committee decides a violation is possible, the matter goes into investigation, generally by Anderson, although it can be contracted out, she said.

Anderson estimated it'll take two to three weeks to coordinate the schedules of the five public members, who are scattered across the state and have full-time jobs, and the two representatives. If the case moves to investigation, she said, the discovery process may take weeks or months. When the results of the investigation, should it go that far, have returned, the committee meets again and makes a public ruling.

Anderson said the committee has the ability to recommend actions to remedy the violation, which can range from a letter of apology to more stringent measures. The sanctions must be approved by the body represented in the complaint -- by the House, in this case.