Janecek makes observations about MEA

Spectrum by Michael Janecek

Regarding Mr. Fred Agree's Spectrum article, wherein he voices his observations of and his objections to the outcome of the 2001 Matanuska Electric Association board of directors election and the Superior Court's ruling of Feb. 22, 2002, he seems unhappy with me and wants to hold another hearing in the free press.

Mr. Agree states that there is some evil conspiracy to stage a hostile takeover of the board by IBEW and other groups. Some believe that it takes a conspirator to see jihads everywhere he looks.

I have been vilified by MEA management and board members in the press and in correspondence to co-op members. I have remained mostly quiet due to advice from counsel. Now I will respond to the recent series of inflammatory letters from the above correspondents.

Mr. Agree did not request a copy of my disclosure, but he knew it intimately. Who gave it to him? No one on the board had even seen my disclosure when they voted not to seat me. So, Mr. Agree, are you a member of the co-op yet?

Some of my supporters are union members. My supporters also include lawyers, teachers, plumbers, construction foremen and laborers, small business owners, etc.

Some of my supporters are current employees of MEA, hence my refusal to divulge my contributors. Is this a group of conspirators? Perhaps the only thing they have in common is that they have expressed their desire (through financial assistance and votes) to have a reasoned, moderate and independent voice representing them on the board.

The campaign disclosure reporting hole that I mistakenly fell into was specifically pointed out by Judge Cutler as needing to be fixed so that "others would not fall into the same hole."

The campaign disclosure rules state that candidates must report "paid advertising made on the candidate's behalf" and the group paying for the ads (see MEA Bylaws Article IV, Section 11(c) and (f)). I am not a group.

The board members who voted to disallow my seating knew full well that

if the magnifying glass were pointed at their own situations, not a single one of them would have been qualified to be seated. Some of them have never filed a disclosure, not to mention the ones whose disclosures failed to report their group-sponsored ads, as specifically required in the bylaws. (See Waterman vs. MEA Case No. 3PA-01-0548 CI.)

Why are the management and some board members fighting my valid election? That is the crucial question. They have racked up yet another ungodly legal expense -- paid from our co-op's wallet, by the way. Why are they subverting the democratic process? What are they so afraid of that they would go to such ends? After all, my presence would still be in the minority (those board members who are not being directed by management.)

I won't bother trying to rebut each wild "charge" of Mr. Agree's Spectrum article. But as to the claim that campaign disclosure needs to be done so that members know who is backing candidates, the best thing that can come of this whole mess is that groups paying for candidates' ads must also be required to provide full disclosure, including contributors, as is required by APOC.

By the way, isn't that a peculiar loophole? Was it schemed by the very board members and management who are currently seated?

And speaking of conspiracy … what is with the shell corporation called Northland Electric? It has some current and past MEA board members and management as its principals. Was that a setup for some private gain? Would a deregulated MEA make an attractive item for a buyout, from, say, an Enron used-to-be?

I, too, want to see MEA guided by non-special interests. Oh, the questions that need answers!

Michael Janecek is a Meadow Lakes resident who was elected to the MEA board last year.