Weak disclosure regulation allows state officials to pretend they don't know how much spouses make

It is standard practice for the Alaska Public Offices Commission to allow legislators and other state officials to hide information about family income that by law is supposed to be public.

It is past time for that standard practice to change. It makes a mockery of the law, which requires the disclosure of all sources of income over $1,000.

The APOC allows public officials to keep details about the income of their spouses and other family members secret, though state regulations say the information must be provided “under oath and penalty of perjury” and the public official could be subject to penalties described in at least five sections of state law.

This key requirement in the state financial disclosure law can be ignored if a public official gets his or her spouse to write a letter claiming the public official doesn’t have any idea how much the spouse makes.

It is only a minority of officials who use this scam, though it is a tactic that fools no one.

The APOC handling of a complaint against Rep. Lance Pruitt shows how the APOC makes it easy to evade the law.

(This is one element of a much broader APOC financial disclosure case, which had been set for review Wednesday, but has been delayed.)

In 2019 and 2020, Pruitt refused to list the clients of PS Strategies, the company owned by his wife, Mary Ann Pruitt, on his financial disclosure form. She is listed as the director, president, secretary, shareholder and treasurer of the company.

In addition to private clients, Gov. Mike Dunleavy hired Mary Ann for contract public relations work in 2019, paying her $15,400 a month.

In 2020, Lance Pruitt reported that his wife’s income was between $200,000 and $500,00 the preceding year, but he only listed the state as a client. Lance refused to reveal his wife’s other clients, claiming that he has no idea who they are and how much they pay her.

The law requires Lance and others in his position to make a “good faith effort” to obtain the information from his or her spouse.

The APOC considers a letter to the spouse asking for the information and a denial letter a “good faith effort.”

I wrote about this before regarding former Rep. Craig Johnson, now on the state personnel board, and his wife, Nancy Johnson, a long-time employee of KTUU. Year after year, the company said Nancy was prohibited from disclosing her salary to Craig. In 2020, Nancy wrote a one-sentence letter to her husband, saying she couldn’t tell him how much she earned.

In Pruitt’s case, he wrote this letter to his wife with the salutation, “Dear Sir/Madam.”

It was almost as if Lance didn’t know his wife was the director, president, secretary, shareholder, treasurer and sole owner of the company that provides most of his family income.

It was almost as if he didn’t make an effort or act in good faith.

“I am a representative in the Alaska Legislature,” he revealed to his wife.

“In addition to disclosing my own financial information, I am also required by law to disclose financial information relating to my spouse, Mary Ann Pruitt (“Mary Ann”). As you know, Mary Ann is a marketing consultant at your company, PS Strategies.”

Lance told Mary Ann he is required by law to submit the information “under oath and penalty of perjury” and he might be subject to various penalties.

But the idea that he might break the law and be penalized didn’t sway his wife.

One of Mary Ann’s employees wrote a letter back to Lance at his home address, also Mary Ann’s home address, to say, “Regrettably, PS Strategies is unable to comply with your request.”

“PS Strategies understands that, as a legislative branch filer you are required by law to provide the information you have requested from the company. Nonetheless, PS Strategies is unable to provide you with that information,” Vice President Will Caynor wrote.

The letter didn’t say if Mary Ann was OK with Lance paying a big fine or some other penalty. Because there is no penalty.

The letter from Lance and the refusal from Mary Ann’s employee counts as a “good faith effort” by the APOC, so Lance is excused from following the law.

While the Pruitt case is not be be heard Wednesday, the executive director of the Alaska Public Interest Research Group plans to call for APOC action to recognize that allowing officials to evade the law with claims of spousal ignorance, requiring no real evidence, is a terrible policy.

The meeting is Wednesday at 9:30 a.m.

Veri di Suvero, executive director of AKPIRG, said, “public officials continue to claim, with much incredulity, that a firewall exists with their spouses when it comes to sources of income.”

It’s time to fix the APOC regulations with a good faith effort.

Your contributions help support independent analysis and political commentary by Alaska reporter and author Dermot Cole. Thank you for reading and for your support. Either click here to use PayPal or send checks to: Dermot Cole, Box 10673, Fairbanks, AK 99710-0673.