Legislators should close legal loophole

Sometimes the best decisions are to take no action.

Our Mat-Su Borough Assembly proves the truth in this by its debate and final resolve — to not act — on a proposal that would have changed the borough’s rules on spending public money advocating for ballot initiatives. An idea put forward by Assemblyman Vern Halter would have had the borough spend $9,000 to advocate in favor of a pair of bond questions on the Oct. 4 ballot. One asks for $215 million for multiple school projects spread out over five years, the other for $31 million for borough road projects.

In the end, the assembly — including Halter, who changed his mind — voted to not put public money behind the questions. But that it could even be considered is a red flag, one we hope our representatives to the state Legislature will notice.

In many states, spending public money to sway the electorate one way or another on any ballot issue is illegal. It’s a move those states have made to ensure fair practices and protect where tax dollars are being spent by groups like local governments and school districts. For example, in Colorado, a school district with a bond question on its ballot is allowed to give out factual information about the bond and what it would accomplish, but cannot advocate one way or the other to sway the vote.

In Alaska, those decisions are left up to those public entities. The Mat-Su Borough already has an ordinance in effect that prohibits spending money in support or against a ballot question. But the assembly can, if it chooses, change its own ordinance to do what Halter had first proposed.

While we favor autonomy in government at the local level, this is one example where state lawmakers need to close a loophole in election law to protect the integrity of elections throughout the Last Frontier. It’s inappropriate for a public entity like a borough, city or state university system to spend public dollars to sway public opinion. Quite simply, it’s the public’s opinion that counts, not theirs, and they get that orders from the ballot box.

“It’s not fair to the taxpayers to use their money to influence opinion one way or the other,” Assemblyman Mark Ewing said.

We agree.

Ewing goes on to use the example of what would happen if a group didn’t like a decision the assembly made, so it petitioned a question onto the ballot. In that case, the assembly could be put in a position to spend public money to fight against its own residents.

Once that Pandora’s box is opened, it’s difficult to close. The temptation for local governments to spend tax dollars to influence public policy is too great. Come January when the Legislature convenes, we challenge our Valley delegation to produce solid, simple changes in the law that will close this loophole.