Rulings may take months

ALASKA -- The Alaska Public Offices Commission will meet Dec. 4 and 6, but APOC officials aren't expecting to see the 22 complaints launched during the primary and general election addressed at that meeting.

Many who file complaints with the office expect them to be resolved before the election is over, but Christina Ellingson, who works in APOC's campaign disclosures office, said that's simply not the case. Investigations on the 22 complaints launched during the election season are still ongoing, Ellingson said, and it's not likely they'll be completed in time to be included in the commission's packet for the December meeting.

"Everything has to be in to be mailed out to the commissioners by the 22nd of this month," Ellingson said. She added that, because the commission is a quasi-judicial board, an investigation must be complete before it is heard. "Would you want to go before a judge unprepared?"

Part of the problem may be that candidates seem to use APOC complaints as a campaign tactic. In the 1994 gubernatorial election, Ellingson said, 12 or 15 complaints were filed. In 1998, 15 were filed. This year, that number jumped considerably, with 22 complaints filed.

"During an election, a lot of complaints get filed, and not all of them are bona fide," Ellingson said.

Although the decisions made by APOC have a lasting impact, some of the complaints may serve purposes beyond simply making sure a candidate is running a solid campaign. Ellingson suggested some may be filed to create roadblocks or distractions for a particular candidate, in order to get them off their campaign track.

Whatever the intent of the complaint, each is dealt with as a serious matter, Ellingson said. The increasing caseload puts extra pressure on a relatively small state office whose employee count hasn't changed much since 1974, when Alaska Senators Chancy Croft, Terry Miller, Jalmar Kerttula, Bob Palmer and Bill Ray sponsored a campaign disclosure bill that involved the creation of this volunteer board. A full-time investigator was added to the staff in 1997, in preparation for a logjam of filings after a campaign finance reform bill took effect, Ellingson said, but that investigator position could be cut by the incoming administration.

"What happens when that occurs is those duties fall to primary staff members who'll have to absorb [those duties] in addition," Ellingson said.

Budget cuts, she said, can further slow the process. One of the first things to be cut during budget reductions has been travel funding for the commission, Ellingson said. While it may seem like a frivolity, the travel budget allows the commissioners to meet and make decisions regarding complaints filed.

APOC commissoners are paid $50 for each day they meet. Travel to the meetings is paid and, if necessary, lodging is paid. Since commissioners are appointed from around the state, the travel budget can vary. Presently, two of the commissioners reside in Juneau, while a third lives in Anchorage. Although the commission held a video teleconference meeting in September, Ellingson said members were not satisfied with the outcome.

"They feel people have a right to face their judges," Ellingson said.

But that may be a compromise commissioners get used to if budgets continue to be lean.

"We have to factor all of this into the budget when we [meet]," Ellingson said, "and it can be very costly."

As a result, the commission has reduced the number of meetings to three to four times a year.

And that, Ellingson said, serves to further slow an already lengthy process.

When asked the status of the 22 complaints, Ellingson said the question is akin to asking a police investigator about the status of six different murder investigations. One may be open-and-shut, while another may take months, even years, to decide.

One complaint dealt with by the office started in 1994 and continued through 1997, Ellingson said. Some cases are resolved by the commission, while others go on through court appeals.

"There's a lot that goes into it -- it's not just cut and dried," Ellingson said. "People take what we do here very seriously -- it could, conceivably, destroy someone's career."