The Alaska Public Offices Commission heard testimony Friday involving a complaint against five Haines individuals for a series of 17 ads featuring state Rep. Bill Thomas, R-Haines, that appeared last summer in the Chilkat Valley News.
The five-member commission is expected to act on the matter in the coming weeks.
Complainant Linda Kellen, an Anchorage activist who describes herself as a government watchdog, told the commission that statements included in the ads, such as “working for all of us,” “he works for the people” and “a great team” published during a political campaign made them more than thank-you ads.
“Several of these ads are not just thanking Bill Thomas but thanking him on behalf of the entire community. No reasonable person would look at these ads in terms of the timing, the place and the people involved and see them as anything other than campaign advertising,” Kellen said.
Kellen brought complaints against Thomas, deputy campaign treasurers Jim Studley, Gregg Richmond and Doug Olerud, and campaign treasurer Joyce Thomas, Thomas’ wife. Studley arranged the series of ads.
In a report to the commission, APOC staff, however, said only two of the ads that contained the word “vote” amounted to political speech regulated by the commission. They also said the ads didn’t meet the requirements of “proper independent expenditures.” As those ads weren’t truly independent and were coordinated by individuals listed as campaign officials, they were prohibited, according to staff.
They recommended Thomas be fined $50 and publish a “remedial ad” essentially correcting the two ads. They also recommended Studley and Howsers, who paid for the two ads, “attend a training session on independent expenditures.”
The report said that the other thank-you ads were not communications regulated by APOC “because even though you might say they indirectly identified candidate (by thanking a person for service in a role other than candidate) they were not made for the purpose of influencing an election under (sections of state law).
“Staff is reluctant to regulate “thank-you” ads due to First Amendment considerations. While Representative Thomas is indeed a candidate, all speech which includes a reference to him is not necessarily campaign speech… A thank-you note is no more campaign speech than a newspaper ad taken out by Representative Thomas’ wife (also a campaign treasurer) wishing him a happy birthday,” the staff report said.
Kellen said comparing the ads to one wishing Thomas a “happy birthday” wasn’t comparable. “A birthday happens one time a year and doesn’t continue on for six months with leading language and high-powered imagery.”
If the commission adopts the APOC staff’s recommendations, the case will have a far-reaching, negative effect on political races throughout Alaska, strengthening the advantage incumbents already hold over challengers, she said. Because the ads were paid for by owners of major stores here, they were “truly intimidating,” Kellen said.
She predicted such ads would become common in races statewide.
Commission staff reported that Studley “thought of the idea to run thank-you ads following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in ‘Citizens United.’ Mr. Studley’s original understanding was that Citizens United held that businesses could now give contributions to candidates. However, he wanted to play it safe with any action, and to run his ads separately from the Rep. Thomas campaign.”
The staff reported that Thomas was informed that the thank-you ads would run but was not involved in the creation of the ads and was not consulted or asked about whether to run the ads.
“Despite being named as deputy treasurers, it appears that neither James Studley, Doug Olerud nor Gregg Richmond was actively involved with the Rep. Thomas re-election campaign,” the report said. “Rep. Thomas had only one active campaign worker, Robert Venables, who assisted him with developing and producing his campaign ads,” the staff report said.