Letter to the editor

Assembly continues to erode public trust with latest election brochure vote

The Mat-Su Borough Assembly missed a golden opportunity at its Nov. 18 meeting to improve borough code and make things right with regard to the borough election brochure controversy, but instead chose to ensure further erosion of public trust.

In that meeting, the Assembly voted 5-2 (with Assembly member and sponsor Tim Hale and Assembly member Stephanie Nowers in support) to reject a proposal that would have removed its ability to modify future borough election brochures. As the Mat-Su Sentinel reported, District 4 Assembly member Maxwell Sumner said, “The Assembly creates policy, and the administration is supposed to execute it. Really, to me, there’s a check and balance, and you just removed that check and balance from the Assembly.”

I would argue that as the public was never involved in the initial discussion to alter the taxpayer-funded election brochure, there was no check or balance when it comes to a document that is mailed to some 100,000 voters. The Assembly violated the trust of the community by excluding public comment on that initial insertion of a partisan memorial.

Assembly members Dee McKee, Ron Bernier, Sumner, Bill Gamble and Dmitri Fonov further eroded that trust Nov. 18 by declining to discuss the new proposal on the official record before voting it down.

The Sentinel also quoted District 6 Assembly member Fonov as saying, “It’s nonsense that we would give the final word to the clerk, who works for us.” I question why Mr. Fonov is interested in having the “final word” about borough election brochures.

Other boroughs in the the state — such as the Kenai Peninsula and Fairbanks North Star boroughs — have code that directs the borough clerk to simply compile the voter guide, with the assembly's role limited to approving the language of ballot propositions. The clerk is bound by a code of ethics and has a nonpartisan role. Last year the Assembly embraced partisan roles with their party affiliations listed in the election brochure and on the ballot.

In the same Sentinel story on the Nov. 18 meeting, Fonov also was quoted as saying, “I have not seen one voter who came or I talked to who said that because Charlie Kirk’s name (was) in there, that they were somehow influenced.”

I would ask Fonov if his statement was the intent of his proposal to put a memorial for prominent, partisan figure in the borough election brochure. Is he challenging those who felt influenced in their vote to speak up?

Belle Merritt,

Palmer