The following letter is being sent today to the Alaska AG.
Attorney General Michael C. Geraghty
P.O. Box 110300
Juneau, AK 99811-0300
Re: Ethics Complaint against Sarah Palin AN 2011101972
AGO File No. AN2011101972
Dear Mr. Geraghty:
I am in receipt of a letter from your predecessor dated July 29, 2011 which denied the Ethics Complaint previously filed. I am also in possession of the documents sent by the office of John Burns with a cover letter of August 17, 2011 in response to my Freedom of Information Act request. As a result of those documents it is my understanding that Sarah Palin has waived confidentiality of any information regarding this matter.
Now that you are the new Attorney General of Alaska, and given the settlement of the Ethics Claim made against Frank Bailey, I am asking for re-consideration of the ethics claim filed against Sarah Palin in your file No. AN 2011101972, and the request for rehearing sent on September 7, 2011, pertaining to the same matter. https://malialitman.wordpress.com/2011/09/07/request-for-rehearing-on-ethics-complaint-to-attorney-general-new-evidence/
As set forth in these complaints, Sarah Palin violated the Ethics Code of Alaska. The undisputed facts are:
1. Sarah Palin violated the express provisions of AS 39.52.180 (a). It is clear that AS 39.52.180 (a) originally espressly excluded legislative bills. In 2007, during Palin’s term as Governor, the statute was amended to expressly INCLUDE legislation. After the amendment AS 39.52.180 (a) stated:
“ (a) A public officer who leaves state service may not, for two years after leaving state service, represent, advise, or assist a person for compensation regarding a matter that was under consideration by the administrative unit served by that public officer, and in which the officer participated personally and substantially through the exercise of official action. For the purposes of this subsection, “matter” includes a case, proceeding, application, contract, [OR] determination, [BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE] proposal or consideration of a legislative bill [BILLS], a resolution, -[RESOLUTIONS AND] constitutional amendment [AMENDMENTS], or other legislative measure, [MEASURES;] or …”
2. It was during Sarah Palin’s term as Governor that she signed into law the Tax Credit Legislation that allowed a film company to receive a tax credit for a film made in Alaska, provided the film featured a resident of Alaska.
3. Within two years of resigning as Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin was the Executive Producer, and starred in Sarah Palin’s Alaska. As a result Sarah Palin made $2,000,000.00. The people of Alaska were harmed by the tax credit issued to Jean Worldwide for $1,200,000.00.
4. Sarah Palin’s Alaska should never have qualified for the tax credit. https://malialitman.wordpress.com/2011/05/13/the-alaska-attorney-general-needs-to-hear-from-you/
5. Documents previously provided indicate that during the short time that Sarah Palin served as Governor, she traveled on state time, using state funds, to meet with film companies in California. Obviously she was contemplating the making of a film for personal gain, before she left office. Obviously if she had been involved as Governor in the making of this film, she would not have been allowed to receive compensation. By enacting this law and resigning from office, Sarah Palin was able to profit from Senate Bill 230 as an actor and Executive Producer of Sarah Palin’s Alaska. This is precisely the type of conduct that AS 39.52.180 (a) was intended to prevent.
6. The Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development (DCCED) regulations governing the Film Office and the film incentive program were drafted, issued for public comment and became effective on June 18, 2009. Sarah Palin announced her resignation as Governor, just two weeks later, on July 3, 2009. Until now many people failed to understand the timing of Palin’s resignation. It appears that we now know the reason for her sudden resignation.
7. It now appears that Sarah Palin and her daughter Bristol, are each planning to appear, or have appeared in additional films that have applied for tax credits, taking further advantage of Bill 230. Helping Hands is the Company that has applied for the tax credit for the film featuring Bristol Palin. Jean Worldwide has also applied for an additional tax credit but the documents that have been provided to me as a result of my Freedom of Information Request to the film office have been redacted so I am unable to confirm if Sarah Palin will be featured in this film or if she might be the Executive Producer of this film. I suspect that is the case given the fact that it is the same company, Jean Worldwide, and based on the report that Palin will be featured in a television show to be known as “Big Hair.”
Bristol Palin will be featured in a film, for which a tax credit has also been requested. That company applying for that tax credit is Helping Hand, and it appears they have applied for such a tax credit.
I incorporate all the facts and assertions in my Ethics Complaint of June 2, 2011 that has been identified by your office as AGO File No. AN2011101972, and the motion for rehearing that was filed in August of 2011.
Now that the Attorney General has entered into a settlement with Frank Bailey for profiting from the disclosures he made in Blind Allegiance, it would be a gross miscarriage of justice to make Mr. Baily accountable for his ethics violation, and not Sarah Palin. Further, Mr. Baily’s use of e-mails in his book did not harm to tax payers of Alaska, but the making of Sarah Palin’s Alaska harmed Alaskans $1,200,000.00. By law you can rule on this ethics violation yourself, or you may appoint a bipartisan committee. Either way the result should be the same.
If any additional information or documents are required I would be happy to provide them. Thank you.