Sullygate update 2: “Five administrations have been aware of this”

Mayor Dan Sullivan; Assembly Mike Gutierrez in background

For other news stories
& posts on this topic,
see my bibliography on
all things Sullygate
.

Earlier today I wrote an update that covered several new developments in the Sullygate story.  Then I updated the update after a new article by Sean Cockerham was posted at 1:52 PM at the Anchorage Daily News website.  Now I must update again, as it appears that additional details were added to the story at 5:18 & 6:08 PM.  These details had to do with what former Mayor (now Senator) Mark Begich’s administration knew about the Sullivan “insurance.”

I’ll do this update by first pasting in the entirety of what I wrote about this story in my previous post, & then add additional comments based on the added details.  Clear as mud?

All quotations in this post are to this article (listed as reference #1 in my list references) unless otherwise noted.

What I wrote in my previous update

A new story has just been posted at ADN’s website:

The article discusses Harriet Drummond’s resolution and Assembly Chair Patrick Flynn’s decision to ask for further information from the municipal Department of Law:

Assembly Chairman Flynn said this week that not all the facts were known when the Assembly voted on Feb. 16 to appropriate the $193,000.

“I’ve heard from a couple of my colleagues who said, ‘We’re finding things out in the paper we didn’t know, and we’re getting questions (from the public) about things we didn’t get answers to previously, and we probably need a little bit more information,’” he said.

Flynn said he didn’t know, for example, that Mayor Dan Sullivan is the trustee. The city attorney’s Feb. 2 memo asked the Assembly to appropriate $193,000 “to the trustee of the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust” but did not identify the trustee.

Flynn said the review he requested from Deputy City Attorney Rhonda Westover will describe why the city attorney’s office didn’t find that disclosure was necessary. He said it would also give more detail on how the administration determined the city was obligated to make the payout.

Flynn wants this review completed before making any decision on the resolution:

He said he didn’t expect to support Drummond’s call to hire an outside investigator before the review is completed. Flynn said he wants Westover’s report on a regular Assembly agenda, and that means it likely won’t be ready until early April.

But Drummond says that resolution should be taken up on March 23:

Drummond said her resolution should come up at the Assembly’s March 23rd meeting. It asks the mayor to return the money to the city “until the Assembly is assured by independent legal counsel that payment of $193,000 in public funds is legally appropriate.”

Here’s the part that really gets me:

Dan Sullivan said Tuesday that it wouldn’t possible for him as trustee to give the money back. “The funds have been disbursed…it would be violating my fiduciary responsibility to disburse it in any other means other that what is outlined in the trust.”

Here again we have the conflict of interest between Sullivan the trustee & Sullivan the mayor.  Especially since — still –  he has not produced a copy of the contract.

Sullivan will not list the beneficiaries of the trust, saying that it’s not public information.

Sullivan said all he did was fulfill his duty as fiduciary as trustee to file the paperwork to execute the terms of the trust, which completes an agreement with the city that’s been in place for almost 30 years. Sullivan said he never made it a secret he was the trustee, he paid premiums to the city on behalf of his father, and he disclosed his role to the city attorney’s office as well as the city department of employee relations.

How many times must it be said?  Where’s the contract?  Show us the contract! Nothing has yet been shown to us to indicate that the Assembly or the Commission on Salaries & Emoluments contemplated anyone other than a licensed insurance company — which the Muni is not — to cover George Sullivan’s life insurance.

Drummond is proposing that the Assembly spend up to $10,000 for an independent legal counsel to look at numerous issues surrounding the payout to the Sullivan trust. “Dan Sullivan is on both sides of this issue. He is the mayor of the City of Anchorage and he is the trustee of the trust that he’s asking the city to pay $193,000 to. I think there’s a serious conflict of interest there,” Drummond said.

No kidding.  Ethical confusion much?  Troubling appearance of possible public corruption much?

The investigator would examine whether it’s truly a contractual obligation, whether the mayor could request the money without disclosing a conflict of interest, and how the city’s Commission on Salaries and Emoluments had authority to grant a special life insurance benefit for someone who was no longer in public office, according to Drummond’s resolution.

The commission did so in 1982, after being asked by the Assembly to consider it in gratitude to George Sullivan and with the concern he wouldn’t be able to get private life insurance.

But let me say it one more time:

  • In 1982, neither the Assembly nor the Commission contemplated the Municipality of Anchorage itself acting as a life insurance company.  They intended Sullivan to be included on the MOA’s group insurance plan with Aetna.
  • In 1982, neither the Assembly nor the Commission contemplated the Municipality of Anchorage itself paying off a $193,000 claim from public monies.T hey intended Sullivan to be included on the MOA’s group insurance plan with Aetna.
  • Nor has any evidence yet been presented that the Assembly or Commission since 1982 made any legal contract or legal agreement obligating the Municipality to act as an insurance company, authorizing it to accept premiums as if it were an insurance company, or obligating it to make a payout from public monies.

As has been suggested elsewhere — for example, by Shannyn Moore’s guests on last Saturday’s “Moore Up North” — this matter demands investigation not only by an independent counsel, by also by the Alaska Division of Insurance, which regulates the insurance industry in Alaska.

New detail & my comments thereon

When I came back to look at comments on the story this evening, I discovered new detail that I’m pretty darn sure I hadn’t seen before regarding the Begich administration’s knowledge of the Sullivan faux-insurance.

Sullivan said five administrations have been aware of this, including that of his predecessor as mayor, Mark Begich. Sullivan’s staff distributed e-mails on Wednesday showing Begich administration officials discussed in 2007 how the municipality would liable for paying the $193,000 when George Sullivan died. Sullivan’s spokeswoman said Begich and other previous mayors had the opportunity to challenge its legality or attempt to set up an alternative funding method, but didn’t take action as George Sullivan got older and his health declined.

Begich spokeswoman Julie Hasquet said “it was determined this was a commitment made by previous administrations and there was an obligation to fulfill it.” Hasquet said that ideally, it would have been transitioned into a private insurance policy when George Sullivan left city employment, but that didn’t happen. Dan Sullivan suggested Drummond was playing politics with her call for an outside investigator, but said he had no problem with Flynn’s request for a review by the deputy city attorney.

Let me begin here by focusing on one sentence in particular:

Hasquet said that ideally, it would have been transitioned into a private insurance policy when George Sullivan left city employment, but that didn’t happen.

By private insurance policy, I think she means an individual insurance policy, which according to a February 18, 1982 memo from Susan Lindemuth, then Manager of Records and Benefits, would have cost George Sullivan $961.00 per month in premiums [Ref #2, page 3] — pretty darn pricey. Therefore, the option explored by the Commission on Salaries & Emoluments in 1982 was to continue Sullivan on the Municipality’s group plan, even though he would no longer be a municipal employee.  In fact, according to the minutes for the Commission’s February 24, 1982 meeting,

There was still concern by the Commission whether the insurance company would allow someone who was no longer employed by the Municipality to remain part of the group plan and pay the month premiums out-of-pocket. [Ref #2, page 6 (page 2 of minutes)]

The minutes show that Susan Lindemuth, who at that time was Manager of Records and Benefits, responded to those concerns:

In response to questions by Mr. Lounsbury, Ms. Lindemuth stated there is no problem as far as the insurance company is concerned in continuing George Sullivan in the insurance program after his completion of service with the Municipality and has drawn his last paycheck.  She further stated that the Municipality would just add an amendment to the policy saying George Sullivan is eligible to continue participation. [Ref #2, page 6 (page 2 of minutes)]

With this reassurance, the Commission on Salaries & Emoluments passed its Resolution No. 82-1 , which provided that the Municipality would provide former Mayor George Sullivan “at the same rate and with the same coverage as in existence on January 1, 1982.” [Ref #2, page 9] The rate had earlier been established as being “$86.85 per month or $1,042.20 per year” [Ref #2, page 9] with the coverage being, of course, $193,000.  But very clear from the minutes was the Commission’s intent that the insurance coverage be provided via the Municipality’s group insurance policy with a legitimate, licensed insurance provider.

This intent was further underscored by a memorandum to the Commission from Susan Lindemuth on November 10, 1982, which read in part:

The provisions of Resolution 82-1 of the Salary and Emoluments Commission state that George Sullivan will be allowed to continue his life insurance coverage under the Municipality’s group plan at his expense for the remainder of his life.  The amount of coverage will be that in effect on January 1, 1982 ($193,000) and the premium rate will also be that in effect on January 1, 1982 ($77.20).  The resolution is to take effect January 1, 1983. [Ref #2, page 14]

No explanation was made of the difference between the premium rate Lindemuth gave the Commission on February 18, 1982 — $86.85 per month, or $1,042.20 per year — & the rate given in November of $77.20/month, which calculates to $926.40 annually. The Commission later clarified via a memo from its recording secretary Judy Flitter on November 22, 1982, that George Sullivan would be required to pay the full premiums on his life insurance even if the rates went above the rate in effect on January 1, 1982.

So the record makes clear that as of November 1982, the Commission on Salaries & Emoluments, which had acted at the behest of the Assembly, both intended & understood that George Sullivan’s life insurance would continue through the MOA’s group plan with the MOA’s insurance provider.

But at some point after that, someone learned that Aetna would not in fact cover Sullivan because he was no longer employed with the Muni.  The Assembly was apparently never informed of this, or not at least that we have so far been informed.  On February 2, 2002, Kate Giard, the city finance director during the Wuerch administration, wrote to the others Wuerch administration officials who were trying to understand the Sullivan “insurance” situation:

Folks,

We had better get together on this issue. We just can’t make payments of this nature from the self insurance or any fund without assembly approval. Mr. Sullivan had an insurance policy, apparently, for the last several years for which he paid premiums. The policy in effect was an illegal commitment unless the Assembly approves it…. [Ref #3, page 12; emphasis added]

But the Wuerch administration did not inform the Assembly.  Nor, apparently, did the Begich administration in 2007.

Which indicates the Mayor’s office through city attorney Dennis Wheeler’s memorandum AM 76-2010 was mistaken — or possibly even committing fraud — when it characterized the “policy in effect” as a “life insurance contract” [Ref #4, page 1].

Nor has anyone yet explained why the so-called “premiums” suddenly went down to $555.84 in November 1995 (per Wheeler’s memo) when the Salaries & Emoluments Commission had specifically stated that the Sullivan’s premiums would be at the same rate as existed on January 1, 1982.

Given that there was no actual insurance company covering Sullivan, just who set the rate of these so-called “premiums”?  Must’ve been someone in the Mystrom administration, which was in office at the time the “premiums” took their sudden nosedive.

Show us the contract. If neither the Muni nor the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust can produce copies of legal contracts signed by people legally empowered to sign them — having been duly authorized by the Anchorage Assembly — then it’s all a fiction. And a fraud upon the taxpayers of Anchorage.

Per today’s ADN article,

Sullivan said five administrations have been aware of this, including that of his predecessor as mayor, Mark Begich.

If that is in fact true, and none of those five administrations informed the Anchorage Assembly that George Sullivan was not, contrary to the Commission’s Resolution 82-1, covered by MOA’s group insurance plan — then I suggest that Dan Sullivan’s & Dennis Wheeler’s purported “contract” is a fiction, and that every one of those administrations may be guilty of malfeasance.

Show us the contract.

Update: The Begich administration emails

Okay, an update on an update on an update… this is endless.

Now the ADN has the Begich administration emails up.  These are probably as the ADN received them from the Municipality; as I did before, I’ve downloaded, placed in chronological order, & added bookmarks to add as a table of contents. Thankfully there were only five pages — made it easy:

The major thing here is an email dated January 23, 2007 from Joanne Hanscom which includes a timeline.

The MOA will have to payout $193,000 to the estate of Mayor George Sullivan upon his death. Mr. Sullivan has continued to pay the monthly premium costs. This cost was based on the amount of the premium at the time of his leaving office, and was to include any changes to that premium.  This is according to Resolution 82-1 that was adopted on January 19, 1982. [Ref #5, page 1]

This is incorrect: Resolution 82-1 did not in fact say anything about changes to the premium, but rather specifically said that Sullivan was to pay the same rate that was in force on January 1, 1982.  A later clarification in November 1982 clarified to say that if the premium went up, Sullivan still had to pay the full amount.  The Commission said nothing about lowering the premiums.

The attachment continues,

There has been no life insurance policy in place since he left municipal employment. [Ref #5, page 1]

A timeline is then given, which fills in some details we didn’t previously have, including:

August 4, 1982 — Letter to Mr. Sullivan from Susan Lindemuth telling him how much he is entitled to ($193,000) and that the annual cost was $1,042,20….

January 9, 1984 – Letter to Susan Lindemuth from James Hickey (Aetna) regarding the group policy number 392680 and George Sullivan. I do not think anyone at MOA informed Aetna that Mr. Sullivan was no longer employed by the municipality.  However, he was kept on the census and Mr. Sullivan kept making the annual premium payments. [Ref #5, page 1]

If that’s correct, it seems that despite what the Commission had been told about amending the group insurance policy to include Sullivan, that MOA did not in fact amend the policy or inform Aetna.  This evident failure took place, by the way, during the Knowles administration.

Now a big chronological jump in the timeline, which continues with two items relating to reductions in the “premium” — which, because it was not being paid to any insurance company, was not of course really a premium.

January 7, 1992 – Letter to Mr. Sullivan from Christine Kendrick, MOA Records and Benefits employee, informing him that his new premium was $833.76 per year.

November 29, 1995 – Letter to Mr. Sullivan from Pamela Barbeau, MOA Records and Benefits employee, informing him that his new premium amount is $555.84 per year. [Ref #5, page 1]

Question question question: Who authorized those so-called “premium” reductions? The first reduction took place during the Fink administration, the second during the Mystrom administration.

The next timeline items bring us into the Wuerth administration, during the time that Wuerth staff were busily trying to figure the whole shebang out:

March 21, 2002 – Letter to Karen Moore from Melissa Deitrick (Aetna) informing the MOA that Aetna does not have an individual policy on Mr. Sullivan and that because of Mr. Sullivan’s age he is not eligible for an individual policy and is not eligible for the group policy because is is not an active employee.  Aetna also recommended that the MOA return all of the premium payments paid to the MOA by Mr. Sullivan.

March 27, 2002 – E-Mail from Kate Giard (CFO) to Cheryl Frasca (OMB) on how the MOA needs to handle this situation. When the unfortunate happens the MOA should get assembly approval and then take the money out of reserves. [Ref #5, pages 1-2]

But the Wuerch officials decided to ignore Aetna’s advice, and the Assembly was not informed.

Were the Sullivans?  What did they know & when did they know it?  Did they have any connection with the decisions of someone in the Fink and/or Mystrom administrations to lower the so-called “premiums”?  Or were the Sullivans as innocent as the pure driven snow?

Which yesterday, as all of us in Anchorage experienced, just got deeper & deeper.  Kinda like some darker-colored stuff we could name.

References

  1. 3/10/2010. “Insurance deal draws increased scrutiny” by Sean Cockerham” (Anchorage Daily News).
  2. Sullygate 1: 1982 Municipality of Anchorage documents relating to former Mayor George M. Sullivan’s life insurance. Contains the same documents provided in a PDF by the Anchorage Daily News, except that I’ve placed them in chronological order & provided bookmarks (table of contents).
  3. Sullygate 2: 2002 Wuerch administration emails relating to former Mayor George M. Sullivan’s life insurance. Contains the same documents provided in a PDF by the Anchorage Daily News, except that I’ve placed them in chronological order (as best I could) & provided bookmarks (table of contents).
  4. Sullygate 4: 2010 Assembly Resolution & memorandum relating to a payout of $193,000 to a trust in the name of former Mayor George M. Sullivan. Contains the same documents provided in a PDF by the Anchorage Daily News, except slightly reordered & provided with bookmarks (table of contents).
  5. Sullygate 4: 2007 Begich administration emails. Contains the same documents provided in a PDF by the Anchorage Daily News, except slightly reordered & provided with bookmarks (table of contents).
Posted in Alaska politics | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Sullygate update 2: “Five administrations have been aware of this”

The Daily Tweets, 2010-03-10: My ceiling is done!

  • Shannyn Moore will have Harriet Drummond on her show today on KUDO re: Sullygate – streamed online at http://www.kuko1080.com/ #
  • Mel’s bibliography on all things Sullygate: keep up with the news on the $193,000 “insurance” payout. http://bit.ly/sullygate #
  • My ceiling is completely done! I can put my furniture back where it belongs! My apartment is MINE again!!! I even got a new toilet seat! #fb #
Posted in The Daily Tweets | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on The Daily Tweets, 2010-03-10: My ceiling is done!

Sullygate update: A bibliography, Shannyn Moore’s guests, & Drummond’s resolution

Mayor Dan Sullivan (center)

For other news stories
& posts on this topic,
see my bibliography on
all things Sullygate
.

Last Friday early early in the morning after staying up most of the night writing it (okay, I’ve caught up on my sleep, but just gotta belabor the point) — I posted my first post about the Sullivan “life insurance” issue —  “Sullygate: If there is a contractual agreement, Mayor Sullivan, show us the contract.”

Since then there have been further developments:

1. Bibliography of all things Sullygate

There have been a bunch more posts & even a couple of new stories about the issue since I wrote my post about it last week.  I was adding new items to the bibliography at the bottom of my original page, but after awhile it seems more sensible to just have the bib as a separate page.  See the complete bibliography, complete with links, on my Sullygate page.  I’ll add to the bibliography as new items come out. If  I’m missing anything, please comment on the bib page & include a link. Or you can send me a private tweet to my Twitter account @yksin or a private message via my Facebook page.

2. “Moore Up North” for Saturday, March 10, 2010

Shannyn Moore’s weekly television show “Moore Up North” broadcast on Saturday, March 6 ( taped the prior Thursday, March 4) included as guests former Anchorage mayoral candidate Eric Croft, current Anchorage Assembly Member Harriet Drummond, & state Senator Bill Wielchowski.Discussion of the Sullivan “insurance” payout begins about 4 minutes into Part 3 of the video:

Video of the complete show is now available on Shannyn’s blog. There is further discussion of the Sullivan “insurance” at the tail end of Part 4 & during Part 5.  The rest of the show is worth watching too — parts 2 & 3 especially go into depth about the problem of dismal voter turnout in elections.

3. Drummond’s resolution AR No. 2010–91 calling for independent investigation of Sullivan “insurance”

Assemblymember Harriet Drummond, the sole member of the Anchorage Assembly who voted on February 16 against the $193,000 “insurance” payout, released a resolution yesterday which at this point is scheduled for reading at the Assembly on March 23, 2010.  The resolution calls for investigation by an independent legal counsel into the numerous legal & ethical questions surrounding the $193,000 payout.  The full text of the resolution is already available on several other blogs, but I’m going to go ahead and post it here too (see below).  I’ve also uploaded a PDF copy of the resolution.

4. Mayor Dan Sullivan’s response to release of Drummond’s resolution

Responding to release of the resolution, Mayor Sullivan yesterday told KTUU Channel 2 News,

It’s unfortunate that Ms. Drummond is playing politics with the death of my father. For 28 years, in good faith, we made payments to meet the obligation of this contract. Five administrations have had no problem with this. [3/9/2010. “Assembly member questions legality of insuring late Sullivan” by Mike Ross (KTUU Channel 2 News); emphasis added]

However, Mayor Sullivan and city attorney Dennis Wheeler have so far failed to produce a copy of any contract, or anything indicating that the Anchorage Assembly had authorized the Municipality of Anchorage itself to act as an insurance company.  As explained in my original post on this issue, the 1982 Anchorage Assembly and the Commission on Salaries and Emoluments both intended that George Sullivan would be covered under the Municipality’s group insurance plan — neither Assembly nor Commission contemplated that the Municipality itself would act as an insurance provider or that the Municipality itself would pay a death claim out of public monies.  Mayor Sullivan and city attorney Dennis Wheeler have also failed to produce any paperwork showing that any Assembly from 1982 to the present authorized the Municipality to act as an insurance company on behalf of George Sullivan and his family.

5. Harriet Drummond on the Shannyn Moore radio show

Assemblymember Harriet Drummond was a guest this morning for the first hour of Shannyn Moore’s daily radio show on KUDO 1080 AM discussing the $193,000 payout and Drummond’s resolution. Drummond explained (among other things) that at the February 16 Assembly meeting — at which the payout was authorized — she asked who the head of the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust was, & received no answer.  She did not learn that Mayor Dan Sullivan (George’s son) headed the trust until Sean Cockerham’s Anchorage Daily News story came out last week.

Now it seems that Assembly Chair Patrick Flynn is working with the Mayor’s Office and the municipal Department of Law (Dennis Wheeler) to find more paperwork related, & that the search for paperwork might delay discussion of her resolution. Asked at the end of her guest spot what we the listeners could do about this situation, she said: call the Mayor’s office, call the Department of Law, & tell them to expedite finding those documents.

There is no reason that all relevant documents — for instance, this supposed “contract” that Mayor Sullivan keeps claiming exists — should not be available for Assembly & public examination by March 23.

In fact, that “contract” should have been in the hands of all Assembly members before they took the vote on February 16.

Update: A new item

6. New Sean Cockerham article at the Anchorage Daily News

A new story has just been posted at ADN’s website:

The article discusses Harriet Drummond’s resolution and Assembly Chair Patrick Flynn’s decision to ask for further information from the municipal Department of Law:

Assembly Chairman Flynn said this week that not all the facts were known when the Assembly voted on Feb. 16 to appropriate the $193,000.

“I’ve heard from a couple of my colleagues who said, ‘We’re finding things out in the paper we didn’t know, and we’re getting questions (from the public) about things we didn’t get answers to previously, and we probably need a little bit more information,’” he said.

Flynn said he didn’t know, for example, that Mayor Dan Sullivan is the trustee. The city attorney’s Feb. 2 memo asked the Assembly to appropriate $193,000 “to the trustee of the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust” but did not identify the trustee.

Flynn said the review he requested from Deputy City Attorney Rhonda Westover will describe why the city attorney’s office didn’t find that disclosure was necessary. He said it would also give more detail on how the administration determined the city was obligated to make the payout.

Flynn wants this review completed before making any decision on the resolution:

He said he didn’t expect to support Drummond’s call to hire an outside investigator before the review is completed. Flynn said he wants Westover’s report on a regular Assembly agenda, and that means it likely won’t be ready until early April.

But Drummond says that resolution should be taken up on March 23:

Drummond said her resolution should come up at the Assembly’s March 23rd meeting. It asks the mayor to return the money to the city “until the Assembly is assured by independent legal counsel that payment of $193,000 in public funds is legally appropriate.”

Here’s the part that really gets me:

Dan Sullivan said Tuesday that it wouldn’t possible for him as trustee to give the money back. “The funds have been disbursed…it would be violating my fiduciary responsibility to disburse it in any other means other that what is outlined in the trust.”

Here again we have the conflict of interest between Sullivan the trustee & Sullivan the mayor.  Especially since — still –  he has not produced a copy of the contract.

Sullivan will not list the beneficiaries of the trust, saying that it’s not public information.

Sullivan said all he did was fulfill his duty as fiduciary as trustee to file the paperwork to execute the terms of the trust, which completes an agreement with the city that’s been in place for almost 30 years. Sullivan said he never made it a secret he was the trustee, he paid premiums to the city on behalf of his father, and he disclosed his role to the city attorney’s office as well as the city department of employee relations.

How many times must it be said?  Where’s the contract?  Show us the contract! Nothing has yet been shown to us to indicate that the Assembly or the Commission on Salaries & Emoluments contemplated anyone other than a licensed insurance company — which the Muni is not — to cover George Sullivan’s life insurance.

Drummond is proposing that the Assembly spend up to $10,000 for an independent legal counsel to look at numerous issues surrounding the payout to the Sullivan trust. “Dan Sullivan is on both sides of this issue. He is the mayor of the City of Anchorage and he is the trustee of the trust that he’s asking the city to pay $193,000 to. I think there’s a serious conflict of interest there,” Drummond said.

No kidding.  Ethical confusion much?  Troubling appearance of possible public corruption much?

The investigator would examine whether it’s truly a contractual obligation, whether the mayor could request the money without disclosing a conflict of interest, and how the city’s Commission on Salaries and Emoluments had authority to grant a special life insurance benefit for someone who was no longer in public office, according to Drummond’s resolution.

The commission did so in 1982, after being asked by the Assembly to consider it in gratitude to George Sullivan and with the concern he wouldn’t be able to get private life insurance.

But let me say it one more time:

  • In 1982, neither the Assembly nor the Commission contemplated the Municipality of Anchorage itself acting as a life insurance company.  They intended Sullivan to be included on the MOA’s group insurance plan with Aetna.
  • In 1982, neither the Assembly nor the Commission contemplated the Municipality of Anchorage itself paying off a $193,000 claim from public monies.T hey intended Sullivan to be included on the MOA’s group insurance plan with Aetna.
  • Nor has any evidence yet been presented that the Assembly or Commission since 1982 made any legal contract or legal agreement obligating the Municipality to act as an insurance company, authorizing it to accept premiums as if it were an insurance company, or obligating it to make a payout from public monies.

As has been suggested elsewhere — for example, by Shannyn Moore’s guests on last Saturday’s “Moore Up North” — this matter demands investigation not only by an independent counsel, by also by the Alaska Division of Insurance, which regulates the insurance industry in Alaska.

Drummond’s resolution (released March 9, 2010; for reading at the Assembly on March 23, 2010)

See also the PDF of the resolution, which is better for printing.

Submitted by:  Assembly Member  Drummond
For reading
: March 23, 2010

ANCHORAGE, ALASKA
AR NO. 2010–91

A RESOLUTION OF THE ANCHORAGE MUNICIPAL ASSEMBLY TO AUTHORIZE ENGAGING THE SERVICES OF INDEPENDENT LEGAL COUNSEL TO REVIEW AND REPORT TO THE ASSEMBLY ON THE LEGAL AND CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS, IF ANY, AND THE AUTHORITY OF THE ASSEMBLY, IF ANY, REGARDING PAYMENT OF $193,000 IN MUNICIPAL FUNDS TO THE GEORGE M. SULLIVAN IRREVOCABLE LIFE INSURANCE TRUST, AND PROVIDING FOR AN APPROPRIATION.

WHEREAS, pursuant to Assembly Memorandum No. AM 76-2010, the Assembly was requested by and on behalf of the Mayor to appropriate One Hundred Ninety Three Thousand Dollars ($193,000.00) from the Areawide General Fund (Fund 101) for disbursement to the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust; and

WHEREAS, Assembly Memorandum No. AM 76-2010 declared that disbursement would be made under a life insurance contract; and

WHEREAS, Assembly Memorandum No. AM 76-2010 did not disclose that the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust was administered by the Mayor in his private capacity as the son of George M. Sullivan and Trustee of the life insurance trust; and

WHEREAS, Assembly Memorandum No. AM 76-2010 did not disclose that no life insurance policy was in place and no written life insurance contract existed; and

WHEREAS, AR 2010-33 was passed and approved by the Assembly, on February 16, 2010, authorizing disbursement subject to receipt of proper documentation from the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust; and

WHEREAS, the full circumstances purporting to legally obligate the Municipality to make a payout of $193,000.00 in public funds are more complicated than provided in the summary under AM 76-2010; and

WHEREAS, the payout of $193,000.00 in public funds for life insurance without a life insurance policy in place has raised many concerns in the mind of the public and one or more Assembly Members, including these questions:

  • What is the legal basis for asserting the existence of a life insurance policy or contract?
  • What is the legal basis for asserting a contractual obligation in the absence of a written contract?
  • What is the legal authority of the Salary and Emoluments Commission to authorize an employee benefit after employment has terminated?
  • Were the legal requirements, procedures and process under Charter Section 5.08 (c) properly followed?
  • What, if any, is the extent of a municipal obligation to make payment of $193,000 in life insurance without a life insurance policy?
  • What is the current Assembly’s authority to approve or disapprove a life insurance payment in the absence of a life insurance policy?
  • Is this disbursement recognized in the FY 2010 General Government Operating Budget?
  • What process should be used under the Ethics Code to ensure that an elected public official does not sit on both sides of a municipal transaction?
  • Under what public purpose are public funds being disbursed as life insurance? and

WHEREAS, the current Mayor is also actively serving as Trustee of the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust, creating a situation in which he serves on both sides of a significant financial transaction involving public funds; and

WHEREAS, as Mayor, the incumbent is required to represent and act in the Municipality’s best interests; and

WHEREAS, as Trustee of the George M. Sullivan Life Insurance Trust, the Trustee has a fiduciary duty to the Trust to represent and act in the best interests of the Trust and its beneficiaries;

NOW, THEREFORE, the Anchorage Assembly resolves:

  1. Because the events surrounding the creation and administration of a special benefit for the Honorable George M. Sullivan occurred after he was no longer in office and over the course of several mayoral successions without a full and public review before the Assembly, the Assembly authorizes an independent legal review to include the following:
  • The authority of the Salary and Emoluments Commission, after the mayor or other elected official has left elected office, to authorize a special life insurance benefit;
  • Whether a special life insurance benefit was legally effectuated for George M. Sullivan, when, and by whom or under what actions;
  • The authority of the Anchorage Assembly to approve an appropriation of public funds for this purpose.
  • The legal obligations and risks to the Municipality concerning the special life insurance benefit (prior to payment);
  • The authority of the Mayor to request an appropriation when the Mayor also currently serves as Trustee of the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust, without disclosure of the potential for conflict of interest;
  • The public purpose under which disbursement of public funds is allowed as life insurance proceeds, without a fair market life insurance policy or premium payments.
  1. The services of independent legal counsel shall be selected by the Internal Auditor, the Municipal Clerk and Assembly Counsel under a small procurement contract not to exceed [$5,000 – $10,000], and an appropriation of [$ 10,000] for this purpose is approved.
  2. Until the Assembly is assured by independent legal counsel that payment of $193,000.00 in public funds is legally appropriate, the Mayor, in his private capacity as Trustee for the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Trust, is respectfully requested to return any funds disbursed under AR 2010-33 to a special account to be held by the Municipality.

PASSED AND APPROVED by the Anchorage Assembly this ______day of ____________, 2010.

______________________________

Chair

ATTEST:

____________________________

Municipal Clerk

Posted in Alaska politics | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Sullygate update: A bibliography, Shannyn Moore’s guests, & Drummond’s resolution

The Daily Tweets, 2010-03-08: Race leaders

Iditarod 2010 ceremonial start

Don’t know if they still are, but as of this afternoon these dogs, along with their musher Paul Gebhardt, were leading the Iditarod in Rainy Pass.

Posted in The Daily Tweets | Tagged , | Comments Off on The Daily Tweets, 2010-03-08: Race leaders

Iditarod dogs (& a few humans too)

Iditarod 2010 ceremonial start

Almost every Saturday I go downtown to write at Side Street Espresso, my favorite cafe. Side Street is located on G Street between 4th & 5th Avenues, which makes it pretty convenient to the ceremonial start of each year’s Iditarod sled dog race in Anchorage. Thus, the block Side Street is located on is one of the staging areas for the race. Made some extra business for George & Deb, so they got extra help, including these two women running a hot coffee/hot chocolate booth right outside the cafe. (There were a lot of folks inside too.)

Iditarod 2010 ceremonial start

Thanks to Side Street’s location, it was easy to enjoy some of the excitement of the race without missing out on the writing. I simply looked out the window now & then & picked up my camera if something interesting was going on. Of course I also caught some pics on the way up the street when I first arrived downtown — including the topmost photo of this post of one dog still hanging out in the dog box on a musher’s truck.  And after arrival, I took two or three breaks from writing to go outside & catch some pics.  Like this one, of one of Martin Buser’s dogs –

Iditarod 2010 ceremonial start

I took a lot of photos that I’m not including here. Those that I decided to include especially focused on those most incredible athletes: the dogs. (Some of them I cropped to focus better on the dogs.)

Iditarod 2010 ceremonial start

My spot by the window inside Side Street put me near the truck of musher Paul Gebhardt (bib #12), so I especially got a lot of pics of his dogs. His truck is the one on the right in this photo, which I took from inside Side Street:

Iditarod 2010 ceremonial start

Here’s a photo of his dogs I took on one of my trips outside –

Iditarod 2010 ceremonial start

I got a big kick out of this dog, who was pretty restless & amused him/herself for several minutes by stepping back & forth across the chain they were tied to. I guess that wasn’t interesting enough, so s/he crawled under it a few times too.

Iditarod 2010 ceremonial start

At one point they all had a good howl.

Iditarod 2010 ceremonial start

I figure that all these critters, humans & dogs alike, have taken off from their restart in Willow by now, on their way to Skwentna. [Later correction: the Willow restart isn’t until Sunday at 2:00 PM.]  I wish all of them the best on their trip to Nome. Meanwhile, enjoy this slideshow. You can also catch a bunch of fine Iditarod pics at Alaska Commons.  [Update: And see Jeanne Devon’s great account & numerous pics at The Mudflats.)

(After you start the slideshow, you can view them fullscreen by clicking on the little gizmo that looks like four arrows pointing to the four corners of the screen.  All photos can also be viewed in several sizes in my Flickr photostream.)

Posted in Journal | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Iditarod dogs (& a few humans too)

The Daily Tweets, 2010-03-06: Iditarod!

Iditarod 2010 ceremonial start

  • Good writing day today at Side Street & downtown @kaladibrothers Also saw some of the Iditarod teams staging on G St outside Side Street #fb #
  • @Metafrantic I vote give some time to your own writing. Maybe b/c that’s what I’m doing too (except my writing, not yours) #
  • @Inked_Tigress What channel is that on? in reply to Inked_Tigress #
  • Cliff Groh: excellent post on why Ben Stevens and Don Young haven’t been prosecuted in AK federal corruption probe http://bit.ly/9VZvyF #
  • All the holes in my ceiling have now been covered over. All that’s left to do is to popcorn ‘em (put on the acoustic texture). Yeah! #fb #
Posted in The Daily Tweets | Tagged , , | Comments Off on The Daily Tweets, 2010-03-06: Iditarod!

Credit the Sully Trust, Debit the Public Trust

For other news stories
& posts on this topic,
see my bibliography on
all things Sullygate

A Trustworthy Friend sent this to me after “reading your blog in bed at 4 this morning.” Guess I wasn’t the only person whose sleep last night was sullied by this. Caveat: see the notes below about satire.

A  check to the Sully Trust

For background, see my last night’s post: Sullygate: If there is a contractual agreement, Mayor Sullivan, show us the contract. See also The Mudflats on Mayor Dan Sullivan for background on some of the various financial decisions — including cuts to the Anchorage Fire Department — that Dan Sullivan has made as mayor. Gotta save the Muni money… except when it comes to SullyTrust. Or embarking on witchhunt audits.

Update about satire: Just to be clear: the picture above is not of a real check or of real notes by anyone actually involved with the Sullivan “life insurance.” The picture is satire. I had already identified it as such in the tags on the post, but I think it’s better to say it here too.

(My previous post was not satire.)

Further update: a mini-essay about satire. This follows on a friend’s concern that the satire here detracts from my previous, more serious post about the Sullivan “life insurance” policy.  But I decided to keep this post up anyway; this note is to explain why.

I’ll take assistance from Wikipedia’s article on satire, which explains,

A very common, almost defining feature of satire is its strong vein of irony or sarcasm, but parody, burlesque, exaggeration, juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. The essential point, however, is that “in satire, irony is militant.”

The ironies in the above picture are very militant indeed, & to my mind especially illustrate how the (current) Sullivan administration’s conduct in this matter has eroded the public trust. Particularly because it involves public funds being diverted to pay out a supposed “life insurance” claim — with the Municipality of Anchorage somehow having been turned into an insurance firm — when simultaneously budget cuts are being applied elsewhere to services that many Anchorage residents deem vital.  Anchorage Fire Department backcountry rescues, for example, or People Mover bus services in  Eagle River & Peters Creek.

My use of my anonymous (except to me) Trustworthy Friend’s satirical picture does not mean that I take every aspect of it as being literally or factually “true.”  But the satire illustrates that greater truth contained in the title I chose for this post: the George Sullivan Trust gained $193,000 of public funds, at the expense of the public trust in either the Mayor or the Assembly.  One only needs to read through the (as of this writing) 263 comments on Sean Cockerham’s Anchorage Daily News article for proof.

That’s a problem.   Not just in Anchorage, but statewide, nationwide, worldwide: there is distrust between everyday people & the social institutions that we depend upon, regardless of what kind of institutions they are — government, corporations, religious organizations, you name it.  I’d like to think that at least at the local level we could work together to restore trust & work together for the betterment of our community so that it serves all of us well.  But it ain’t happening right now.  And if nothing else, I think that the militant irony of satire helps to point that out.

Posted in Alaska politics | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Credit the Sully Trust, Debit the Public Trust

Sullygate: If there is a contractual agreement, Mayor Sullivan, show us the contract

Mayor Dan Sullivan (center)

Crossposted at
Celtic Diva’s
Blue Oasis

Alaska Dispatch
Alaska Commons


For other news stories
& posts on this topic,
see my bibliography on
all things Sullygate
.

Damn, I hate when I want to do my own writing, but along comes some political situation poking its thumb in my eye so hard I have no choice but to remove it.  Well, nothing for it but to roll up my sleeves & go at it.

It’s a long story.  But it is kind of interesting.  Please read on.

At issue is a putative insurance payout of $193,000 from the Anchorage municipal treasury to a trust — the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust — led by George M. Sullivan’s son, Anchorage Mayor Dan Sullivan, which was approved by the Anchorage Assembly by a 9-1 vote on February 16.  The thing is fishy enough that over the past two weeks it’s been the subject of a story apiece in the Anchorage Daily Planet [Ref #1] & the Anchorage Press [Ref #2] & no less than three stories in the Anchorage Daily News (two by Sean Cockerham [Ref #3, 4], one from the Associated Press [Ref #5]).  There’s also been commentary in the blogs Progressive Alaska [Ref #6], The Mudflats [Ref #7], & Immoral Minority [Ref #8].  I’m sure we’ll see more — the one I’m writing right now, f’r instance.  Haven’t read ‘em? — there’s a complete list of references with links at the bottom of this post.  As is my habit when writing posts like these.

The most comprehensive reporting on the putative insurance payout comes from Sean Cockerham, who in my book continues to rank at the top of the Anchorage Daily News‘ dwindling reporting staff — at the top statewide, for that matter.  As mentioned, he wrote two stories on the putative insurance payout, a brief one called “Benefits for a former official” [Ref #3] and a longer, more comprehensive one called “City life insurance payout for former mayor raises questions — $193,000: Assembly honors ‘82 deal that puts city money into George Sullivan’s trust” [Ref #4].  The latter is especially essential reading if you’re at all interested in this matter.

[Correction 3/8/10: David Hulen of the ADN, who was editor on Sean Cockerham’s stories, wrote to tell me that both stories were posted at the same time, with the shorter story as a sidebar to the longer one. For some reason the timestamps on the stories as they appeared on ADN’s website made it appear that one was posted two or three hours before the other.]

I’ll use some of its opening paragraphs to set the stage:

The Anchorage Assembly has agreed to pay $193,000 to meet the obligation for a one-of-a-kind life insurance deal the city made 28 years ago after Mayor George Sullivan left office.

Sullivan died last year at the age of 87. The assembly voted Feb. 16 to pay the money to his life insurance trust. The trustee is Sullivan’s son, Dan Sullivan, the current mayor of Anchorage.

He told The Anchorage Daily News it’s an odd coincidence he’s dealing with this both as mayor and trustee. He’s not saying who will get the money as beneficiary of the trust.

In 1982, the assembly agreed the city would continue life insurance to George Sullivan for the rest of his life at the same rate he had been paying as mayor. Until his death, George Sullivan had paid the city $19,663 in premiums, which were deposited into a city account.

The current Sullivan administration recommended to the assembly that the insurance be paid, with City Attorney Dennis Wheeler describing it in a Feb. 2 memo as a contractual obligation.

Several Assembly members said they felt they had no choice but to pay it.

“I don’t believe it was an appropriate thing to do when it was done … But what do you do? You’ve got to honor your commitments,” said Assemblyman Dan Coffey.

The one Assembly member to vote against it, Harriet Drummond, said the payment, and the arrangement that led to it, made no sense. “The municipality is not an insurance company,” she said. “This whole situation is incredibly bizarre to me.” [Ref #4]

No kidding.

Now, three times so far I’ve called this a putative insurance payout.  That’s because, like Harriet Drummond, I don’t buy that the Municipality of Anchorage is an insurance company.  And as I’ve read through the over 230 comments left at the ADN website on that story, I’ve gotten pretty weary of those repeating the meme that Dan Coffey used in that passage above: the $193,000 payout honors a “commitment”.  Or an “obligation.”  Or, as Mayor Sullivan himself told Sean Cockerham, repeating City Attorney Dennis Wheeler’s claim,

It was simply honoring a contractual agreement. [Ref #4]

Really?  Then show us the contract.

But they can’t. Because, as Cockerham reported,

there’s no evidence a written contract was ever drawn up spelling out the terms of the arrangement. [Ref #4]

Now here’s where I get geeky.  The Anchorage Daily News was kind enough to provide PDFs of Muni documents that are pretty darn helpful in understanding this story.  But for some reason they didn’t put them in chronological order, or give them a table of contents, or anything.  And, well, I find chronological order & tables of contents to be kinda helpful.  So, being the publication specialisty geek that I am, I spent some time this evening downloading the PDFs & rearranging them. And adding bookmarks as tables of contents so they’re easier to navigate.  I’ll be referring to them frequently from here on out, so here they are:

[Update 3/8/10: David Hulen of the ADN told me that ADN posted the PDFs exactly as they were provided to ADN by the Municipality as a result of public records requests.]

Let’s start at the beginning.  Mayor George Sullivan ended his last term in 1981.  Assembly Resolution AR-30, dated January 19, 1982, resolved

That the Commission on Salaries and Emoluments be requested to consider directing that life insurance coverage be provided to former Mayor George M. Sullivan for the remainder of his life at the same rate and with the same coverage as in existence on January 1, 1982. [Ref #9, page 1]

But what was the same rate and the same coverage? In a memorandum dated February 18, 1982, Susan Lindemuth, Manager of Records and Benefits, wrote in a memo,

When he left office, Mr. Sullivan’s life was insured for $193,000. The figures I am quoting are based on a continuation of that level of insurance.

If the Municipality continues Mr. Sullivan’s coverage as a member of the group, it will cost the Municipality $86.85 per month or $1,042.20 per year…. This premium could be paid either by the Municipality or Mr. Sullivan.

Mr. Sullivan is eligible to convert his insurance to an individual policy.  At his age, continued coverage would cost Mr. Sullivan $961.00 per month…. [Ref #9, page 2]

But big question: would the insurance company go with the plan? Minutes for the February 24, 1982 meeting of the Commission on Salaries & Emoluments state,

There was still concern by the Commission whether the insurance company would allow someone who was no longer employed by the Municipality to remain part of the group plan and pay the month premiums out-of-pocket. [Ref #9, page 6 (page 2 of minutes)]

After a short recess, Susan Lindemuth responded to those concerns:

In response to questions by Mr. Lounsbury, Ms. Lindemuth stated there is no problem as far as the insurance company is concerned in continuing George Sullivan in the insurance program after his completion of service with the Municipality and has drawn his last paycheck.  She further stated that the Municipality would just add an amendment to the policy saying George Sullivan is eligible to continue participation. [Ref #9, page 6 (page 2 of minutes)]

The Commission ultimately passed its Resolution 82-1, which provided life insurance coverage to Sullivan at the the same rate — presumably the “$86.85 per month or $1,042.20 per year” cited in Susan Lindemuth’s February 18 memo — and the same coverage as on January 1, 1982 ($193,000). Sullivan would bear the full cost of providing the insurance coverage — i.e., he’d pay the premiums. [Ref #9, page 9]

Several months later, on November 10, 1982, minutes of the Salary & Emoluments Commission show that there were already problems with the resolution as passed:

Chairman Millsap stated that attached to the Agenda was a status report on the life insurance coverage for Mr. Sullivan. [included in Ref #9 on page 14] He stated the letter was very self-explanatory and that everything had been taken care of.

Ms. [sic] Lounsbury stated he was questioning the last sentence — “to the extent that the premium amount exceeds that paid by Mr. Sullivan, the mayor’s office benefits account will be charged for the difference.”

Ms. Gotham stated that is not what this commission said.

Mr. Lounsbury continued by saying that Mr. Sullivan is to pay what the premium is.  The commission didn’t set any certain amount, they just said you pay the premium.

Chairman Millsap requested the Recording Secretary obtain clarification from Susan Lindemuth. [Ref #9, page 12; emphasis in original]

Susan Lindemuth replied with a memorandum on November 17, 1982:

Judy Flitter has asked that I clarify the last sentence in paragraph two of my November 10 memo.

When planning for the implementation of Resolution 82-1, the meaning of “at the rate in effect as of January 1, 1982″ was questioned.  Municipal Attorney Jerry Wertzbaugher interpreted it to mean that Mr. Sullivan would not be required to pay for increases in life insurance premium payments subsequent to January 1, 1982.  To the extent that those rates will increase… the Municipality will have to pick up the difference. [Ref #9, page 15]

This, of course, went contrary to Section 2 of Resolution 82-1, which established that Sullivan would bear the full cost of the premiums — as Judy Flitter, who provided staff support to the Commission, subsequently pointed out in a memorandum on November 22, 1982 –

The decision from the Salary and Emoluments Commission was to allow former Mayor George Sullivan to retain the policy but to pay any premiums himself.  They did not intent [sic] for any monies to be taken from the current Mayor’s budget.  The statement from the commission is: The bill is to be sent to Mr. Sullivan for the difference per thousand per month. [Ref #9, page 16]

So problem solved: in spite of the “at the same rate” provision of Section 1 of the resolution, Sullivan had to pay the full premiums himself.

But turns out that wasn’t the biggest problem with resolution.  In fact, it appears that Susan Lindemuth’s reassurances to the Commission on February 24 that “there is no problem as far as the insurance company is concerned in continuing George Sullivan in the insurance program after his completion of service with the Municipality” was incorrect. Though nothing in the record we have so far tells us exactly when this problem was discovered.

But wait, you might ask. Didn’t Sean Cockerham’s ADN story tell us when it was discovered?  Here’s the relevant passage:

Twenty years later, in 2002, Deputy Employee Relations director Karen Moore was baffled when Dan Sullivan, who was on the Assembly at the time, came to the city to make that year’s premium payment, according to e-mails from the time. She asked the city’s insurance carrier about a policy for Sullivan. The company didn’t know about it either. The premiums paid by Sullivan and his family had been deposited into a city account, not given to Aetna.

Top officials in the administration of George Wuerch, who was mayor in 2002, spent months trying to figure out the history of the deal and what to do about it, according to the e-mails, released to the Daily News this week.

The city’s life insurance carrier, Aetna, told the city in 2002 that it had no policy on Sullivan and wouldn’t cover him anyway because its agreement was only for active city employees, according to the e-mails. Aetna made clear it wasn’t liable for Sullivan, who was 78 years old by that time. The insurance company’s legal department recommended the city just return the premiums to the Sullivan family. [Ref #4]

But here’s the thing: the real point of discovery that Aetna wouldn’t cover Sullivan wasn’t 2002, when the Wuerth administration came up against the problem.  The real point of discovery was sometime between 1982 and 2002.  Someone — we don’t yet know who — made a decision to place the premiums in a city account, presumably because the insurance company would not take them, because Sullivan was not on their rolls.

As of January 30, 2002, Susan Lindemuth was apparently under the impression that Sullivan was still covered by Aetna under the Municipality’s group plan, or at least so she said. In an email to Karen Moore, she wrote,

He was covered as part of the MOA group and therefore, part of that “risk”. There was no separate policy with Aetna or any other insurance carrier for him…and no separate “premium” was paid to any outside party. [Ref #10, page 4]

As the life insurance rates changed over the years, he was informed and paid the appropriate premium amount…or the kids paid on his behalf.

We had a split funded agreement with Aetna…so we paid the “retention” monthly and funded the life insurance claims when incurred. His coverage amount ($93,000 [sic]) was included in the volume reported to Aetna. [Ref #10, page 4]

But Lynda Gable of Aetna — identified in one email by Karen Moore as “long time account executive for Aetna’s MOA coverage” [Ref #10, p. 9] — who received a copy of Susan Lindemuth’s email, informed Karen Moore –

This means Muni kept those dollars on hand in the claims funds. I don’t know if intent was to have them handle a death claim directly, but Aetna never received any premiums. The insurance fund was the reserves that Muni held and those funds were never submitted to Aetna nor included in any of our premiums from a risk standpoint to the best of my knowledge. How much insurance is he supposed to have??? [Ref #10, page 4]

Later that day (January 30), Karen Moore told David Otto –

Lynda [Gable] tells me they [Aetna] would have denied payment when it became evident that he [George Sullivan] was not an active employee. Susan [Lindemuth] indicated that premiums received from Mayor Sullivan were deposited into the insurance fund. I suspect she intended to have the MOA pay any death claim from the 603 account, rather than have Aetna pay the claim and then reimbursing Aetna. [Ref #10, p. 9]

– implying that she believed Susan Lindemuth knew Sullivan wasn’t covered by Aetna & that someone, perhaps Lindemuth, had already decided on an alternate way to pay Sullivan’s eventual death claim: from MOA funds.

Here’s the thing: no one had authority to find alternative methods to provide Sullivan with life insurance except the Assembly and and Salaries & Emoluments Commission. As soon as anyone learned — Susan Lindemuth? somebody else? — that Aetna wouldn’t cover him, that person should have informed the Commission & the Assembly so that they could decide what to do, because they were the only people who were legally empowered.

Remember: it was an Assembly decision to ask the Commission if it would provide Sullivan with life insurance in the first place; & it was the Commission’s decision to actually provide it. But the Commission based its decision on the understanding that Sullivan could be included in the group insurance plan. It did not contemplate having the Municipality itself act as an insurance provider.  It did not contemplate having the the Municipality itself pay a death claim. Whoever decided between 1982 and 2002 during the Knowles, Fink, or Mystrom administrations to take that route — without apparently  passing the word along to the relevant people in the Wuerch adminstration  — took upon themselves authority that did not belong to them — that belonged only to the Assembly & the Commission. It was not legal.

At least, that’s my best guess. I’d like to know what an attorney independent of the Mayor’s office would say.

If I’m right, the Wuerch administration, by formalizing the “MOA is now an insurance company” arrangement — assuming one could call the flurry of emails in early 2002 “formal” — also took upon itself authority that it did not have: it did not inform the Assembly. It did not inform the Commission. It was not legal.

At least that’s my best guess, once again.

But guess I’m right. By February 4, 2002, several high-level people in Wuerch’s administration were coming to an agreement that an option Karen Moore had presented — to set up a sub-fund for the premiums and pay out the difference upon Sullivan’s death “and with Assembly approval” [Ref #4, page 9] — was the best option. One member of that group, Kate Giard, the city finance director, wrote to the others:

Folks,

We had better get together on this issue. We just can’t make payments of this nature from the self insurance or any fund without assembly approval. Mr. Sullivan had an insurance policy, apparently, for the last several years for which he paid premiums. The policy in effect was an illegal commitment unless the Assembly approves it…. [Ref #9, page 12; emphasis added]

An illegal commitment unless the Assembly approves it. But the Assembly in 2002 did not approve it. Sean Cockerham:

It didn’t go to the 2002 Assembly for approval, and there’s no evidence a written contract was ever drawn up spelling out the terms of the arrangement. [Ref #4]

To the best of my knowledge, based upon the record that has been disclosed so far, the Assembly was not even made aware that there was an issue.

But there was at least one Assembly member who had to have known there was a problem: the former mayor’s son, Dan Sullivan — who was the guy, after all, who brought the whole deal to the Wuerch administration’s attention in the first place when he came in to pay the life insurance premium in January 2002. [Ref #4]

Now, I’m not supposing that Dan Sullivan was privy to all the emails going on back & forth between the various members of the Wuerch administration about the situation, but I find it difficult to believe that he, an Assembly member, was entirely ignorant of what was going on next door in the executive branch on an issue that was of vital interest to him & his politically connected father. Surely Karen Moore didn’t keep him in the blind that they were trying to work out a problem regarding the insurance, or about what their solution was. At the very latest, he would have learned in 2009, when he became mayor, & his father died shortly thereafter. At that point he & his administration had access to all the relevant documents — & would certainly have been looking at them after his father’s death. He had to have known that the solution Wuerch staffers had come up 8 years before wasn’t — y’know — a legal commitment. At least not yet.

Okay, so jump ahead to just a couple of weeks ago, February 16, 2010: the Assembly approved it. Making it, finally at last — eight years after Kate Giard wrote that bolded sentence — a legal commitment.

But recall why they did so:

Assembly Chairman Patrick Flynn said he believes the Sullivan estate could have sued the city for breach of contract if it did not pay, although Flynn said he doesn’t think that anyone on the Assembly requested a legal analysis before appropriating the money. [Ref #4]

Why would they think there was a contract when there wasn’t one?

Perhaps it could be because of the memorandum of February 2, 2010 prepared by the MOA Department of Law, approved by Municipal Attorney Dennis Wheeler, and submitted by Mayor Dan Sullivan to accompany the resolution asking for the payout:

This resolution requests appropriation of One Hundred Ninety Three Thousand Dollars ($193,000.00) from the Areawide General Fund (Fund 101) to the Employee Relations Department 2009 Operating Budget Fund (Fund 101) for disbursement under a life insurance contract to the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust. [Ref #11, page 1; emphasis added]

Again: what contract? As I think I’ve clearly established by now, there wasn’t one. Not only was there not a contract, but the entire deal was, as Kate Giard wrote in 2002, an illegal commitment unless the Assembly approved it.

The strategy was, clearly, mislead the Assembly into believing there was a contract in order to push them towards voting in favor of the disbursement.  By voting yes, they made the commitment legal.  And simultaneously — conveniently for the Mayor-Slash-Trustee — authorizing the payout.  Had they known the full story, they may well have voted differently.

Or maybe they wouldn’t have. But they should have been told.

There’s some other misdirection in the memorandum, too. For example,

In March 2002, Aetna informed the Municipality that Mayor George M. Sullivan was not eligible for group life insurance plan because he was no longer an employee…. [Ref #11, page 1]

Technically true: early 2002 was when the Wuerch administration was “informed” by Aetna. But the phrasing is ambigous, making it easy for readers (that is, the Assembly) to believe that up until then, Aetna had him covered.  Or that Aetna wasn’t completely flabbergasted when Karen Moore asked them about him.

Besides, as I think I’ve established, there are clear signs that someone at the Muni knew before 2002 that Aetna wouldn’t cover George Sullivan; and the 2002 email correspondents knew it. Remember what Lynda Gable of Aetna wrote to Karen Moore –

The insurance fund was the reserves that Muni held and those funds were never submitted to Aetna… [Ref #10, page 4]

Remember what Karen Moore wrote to David Otto –

Lynda [Gable] tells me they [Aetna] would have denied payment when it became evident that he [George Sullivan] was not an active employee. Susan [Lindemuth] indicated that premiums received from Mayor Sullivan were deposited into the insurance fund. I suspect she intended to have the MOA pay any death claim from the 603 account, rather than have Aetna pay the claim and then reimbursing Aetna. [Ref #10, p. 9]

Then remember that Dennis Wheeler and the Department of Law had access to this email record when they wrote the memorandum. In fact, they had to have it, because it was the email record that instructed them what the Wuerch administration had decided about how to handle the death payment after George Sullivan’s death.

So why were they so cagey in making it sound as if Aetna simply changed its coverage in March 2002?  Well, one would hardly want to bring the truth to the Assembly’s attention, because otherwise its members might question this –

To meet the directive from the Salaries & Emoluments Commission, the Municipality added Mayor George M. Sullivan to the MOA group life insurance plan with Aetna. The amount of insurance purchased by Mayor George M. Sullivan was $193,000; the annual premium has varied, from a high of $1,042.20 in 1982 to $555.84 since November 1995. [Ref #10, p. 9]

But since Aetna didn’t cover Sullivan since some unknown date prior to 2002 — who set those premiums? And why were those premiums so much lower than what they were in 1982? Remember that the Salaries & Emoluments Commission originally charged that Sullivan’s coverage would be at the same rate and the same coverage as it was on January 1, 1982; and that Susan Lindemuth had informed the Commission that the rate was “$86.85 per month or $1,042.20 per year”. Who decided in November 1995 (that would be during the Mystrom administration) to “vary” the annual premium by subtracting $486.36 from the 1982 rate? I can guarantee you it wasn’t Aetna.

A total of $19,662.84 in premiums was received by the Municipality and deposited into Fund 603 prior to 2002, and then into the 735 Fund thereafter. [Ref #10, p. 9]

One wonders how much higher that total would have been had someone-who-is-not-Aetna not “varied” the annual premium to such a low amount.

Clearly something rather shady was going on for quite awhile with this life insurance policy, spanning the administrations of three Anchorage mayors — Tony Knowles, Tom Fink, Rick Mystrom — even before it got to Wuerch’s.

This was done by somebody. It’d would be nice to know by whom. But it’s easy to know for whom. As recorded in the minutes of the Commission on Salaries & Emoluments on February 24, 1982,

Ms. Gotham said she felt this was not a benefit to George Sullivan but was rather a benefit to the Sullivan family upon his death. She did not feel this was a responsibility of the Municipality. Therefore she was opposed. [Ref #9, p. 3]

Cheers for Ms. Gotham.

And cheers for Harriet Drummond, who, alone among the 10 Assembly members voting on the putative insurance payout on February 16, voted no.

“If there were enough (Assembly members) who realized this was stupidity and voted no, then Anchorage’s taxpayers would still have $200,000 in the bank,” Drummond said later. “And the Sullivan estate could have gotten the $20,000 in premiums back. Maybe that was the appropriate thing to do. But it was certainly not appropriate for the city to be acting as an insurance company, which it is not.” [Ref #4]

Assemblymember Harriet Drummond

Update 8 Mar 2010

More stories/blog posts have been written since I posted my story on March 5.  Most important in terms of the questions it asks is Phil Munger’s March 5 post, “Did Wheeler Commit Fraud and Extortion at the February 16th 2010 Anchorage Assembly Meeting?” On Sunday, Phil posted a poll which asks “ Should Fast Sully Return the Dough?“  Also on Sunday, The Mudflats posted a letter written by Anchorage resident Thomas Van Pelt to the Assembly and Mayor Sullivan questioning the appropriateness of the payout.

I’ve added these & other posts to a secondary bibliography below my main reference list, & will continue adding to that list as further posts come to my attention.

References

  1. 3/2/2010. City to pay life insurance claim for former mayor” by Kirsten Adams (Anchorage Daily Planet).
  2. 3/3/2010. “An insurance anomaly” by Brendan Joel Kelley (Anchorage Press).
  3. 3/3/2010. “Benefits for a former official” by Sean Cockerham (Anchorage Daily News).
  4. 3/3/2010. “City life insurance payout for former mayor raises questions — $193,000: Assembly honors ‘82 deal that puts city money into George Sullivan’s trust” by Sean Cockerham (Anchorage Daily News).
  5. 3/4/2010. “Anchorage pays $193,000 for late mayor’s insurance” by the Associated Press (Anchorage Daily News). Also at the Juneau Empire.
  6. 3/4/2010. “Two Banally Retentive Grifters Again Make the News” by Phil Munger (Progressive Alaska).
  7. 3/4/2010. “Payday for Mayor/Trustee Hybrid Dan Sullivan” by AK Muckraker (The Mudflats).
  8. 3/4/2010. “Anchorage Mayor Dan Sullivan learned much from his idol Sarah Palin” by Gryphen (Immoral Minority).
  9. Sullygate 1: 1982 Municipality of Anchorage documents relating to former Mayor George M. Sullivan’s life insurance. Contains the same documents provided in a PDF by the Anchorage Daily News, except that I’ve placed them in chronological order & provided bookmarks (table of contents).
  10. Sullygate 2: 2002 Wuerch administration emails relating to former Mayor George M. Sullivan’s life insurance. Contains the same documents provided in a PDF by the Anchorage Daily News, except that I’ve placed them in chronological order (as best I could) & provided bookmarks (table of contents).
  11. Sullygate 3: 2010 Assembly Resolution & memorandum relating to a payout of $193,000 to a trust in the name of former Mayor George M. Sullivan. Contains the same documents provided in a PDF by the Anchorage Daily News, except slightly reordered & provided with bookmarks (table of contents).

Additional stories  (posts I missed first time around, or posted after my story was written)

  1. 3/4/2010. “Sullivan’s Insurance Folly” by Ryan Knight (The Back Porch).
  2. 3/4/2010. “Assembly members have no room to talk” by Dan Fagan (The Alaska Standard). Supports the Sullivan “insurance” payout.
  3. 3/5/2010. “Credit the Sully Trust, Debit the Public Trust” by Melissa S. Green (Henkimaa). Satire from A Trustworthy Friend.
  4. 3/5/2010. “Anchorage Edition: March 5, 2010″ (KSKA-FM). KSKA & KAKM’s weekly review with commentators of the week’s news, politics and public affairs included discussion of the Sullivan “insurance” payout.
  5. 3/5/2010. “Mammoth Oyster Roundup!” by AK Muckraker (The Mudflats). Summary of news stories, including two items about the Sullivan “insurance” payout.
  6. 3/5/2010. “Did Wheeler Commit Fraud and Extortion at the February 16th 2010 Anchorage Assembly Meeting?” by Phil Munger (Progressive Alaska).
  7. 3/6/2010. “Dan Sullivan Offers to Donate $193,000 to Kids’ Cancer Research if Sarah Palin Shaves Her Head” by Phil Munger (Progressive Alaska).
  8. 3/7/2010. “It is time for Anchorage residents to stand up and demand that Mayor Dan Sullivan show us a contract or give us back our $193,000!” by Gryphen (Immoral Minority).
  9. 3/7/2010. “Mayor Dan Sullivan – You’ve Got Mail!” by Thomas Van Pelt (posted at The Mudflats).
  10. 3/7/2010. “New PA Poll – Should Fast Sully Return the Dough?” by Phil Munger (Progressive Alaska).
  11. 3/7/2010. “E-mail to the Anchorage Assembly regarding Dan Sullivan’s $193,000 payout” by an Anchorage resident,  name not given (Immoral Minority).

Update 3/10/2010: I’m now maintaining this continuing bibliography on my Sullygate page, so go there for links to later stories.

Posted in Alaska politics | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Sullygate: If there is a contractual agreement, Mayor Sullivan, show us the contract

The Daily Tweets, 2010-03-04: Sullygate

Mayor Dan Sullivan; Assembly Mike Gutierrez in background

For other news stories
& posts on this topic,
see my bibliography on
all things Sullygate
.

Here’s Dan Sullivan, described today at Mudflats as “Mayor/Trustee Hybrid” of Anchorage. I’m pretty ticked about what I called “insurance-gate” in my tweets… but now I’m gonna call it Sullygate. For he hath sullied our fine democracy. (Again.) I’m writing a full post about this due out late tonight.

  • Congrats to @crossedgenres & @SciInMyFi: the really cool “Science in My Fiction” blog got a short writeup on io9! http://bit.ly/afIpmH #
  • The latest example of how representative democracy has fallen apart: Anchorage mayors & “insurance-gate”. http://bit.ly/cBgO5g #
  • Commentary on Anchorage mayor “insurance-gate” by Progressive Alaska’s Phil Munger: Sully’s another banal grifter. http://bit.ly/bj2pox #
  • The Mudflats on Mayor/Trustee Hybrid Dan Sullivan & Anchorage “insurance-gate”. Great analysis, Jeanne! http://bit.ly/cKeCeS #
  • A earlier article on Anchorage mayoral insurance-gate. http://bit.ly/94r9N1 #
  • Yesterday in ADN: Did commission have legal authority to grant benefits to an elected official once out of office? http://bit.ly/9BWkV0 #
  • Briefer article today at ADN about insurance-gate. If there’s a contractual arrangement, show us the contract! http://bit.ly/bDzAgB #
  • Anchorage Press article on Anchorage’s insurance-gate. http://bit.ly/amViHs #
Posted in Alaska politics, The Daily Tweets | Tagged , | Comments Off on The Daily Tweets, 2010-03-04: Sullygate

Storyminded

Waiting for the movie to begin (046/365)

Cold and Long Dark

Okay, well this photo is of me at one of my local movie theaters reading one of my favorite novels, C.J. Cherryh’s Cyteen, while waiting for “The Golden Compass” to begin. So one could say I was awash in storymind in a way — in other people’s stories.

But mostly when I talk storymind I’m talking about that weird space in my own mind when I’m deepstewing in my own creative juices, & I hope I can get all the stuff I’m thinking down on paper (or virtual paper — wherever my wordprocessing happens to take place) before I lose track of it all.

I have a piece I need & promised to write about the ongoing Sheraton Anchorage hotel boycott, & it will get written. But storymind’s where it’s at tonight, sorry folks.

Part of what prompts it is this really cool new blog that my friends over at Crossed Genres started up a few days ago.  It’s called Science in My Fiction — a blog guaranteed to get readers participating in storymind.  Fits right in, too, with stuff I was saying the other day about extrapolating from the present into the future, one of the tools for worldbuilding in science fiction.  I was talking then about extrapolating from the current political situation vis-a-vis corporations.  Science in My Fiction is talking about — oh but hey, let me just quote from Kay Holt’s inaugural post over there:

Lately there’s been an alarming trend away from the logical path. A lot of cultural progress has been undermined by zealous ignorance, and recapturing lost momentum can be the work of generations. Fortunately, storytellers have a shortcut at their disposal.

Extrapolation is the wave of the future. While there’s value in reinterpreting, revamping, and remixing old stories, the impact of those expires faster after each pass through the cultural recycler. In fact, they’ve become ironic; some old stories now fuel the social destruction they originally opposed. People need something to look forward to. Extrapolation can always deliver those goods.

Today’s storytellers have another underused asset within easy reach; science. Yes, science and arts are commonly taught and applied with as much distance between them as possible. That’s not just proof of a failing education system, it’s also a casual disregard of history. Da Vinci had it right; creation and investigation belong together. It’s time to put that concept back into practice. [emphases added]

So there you have it, yeah: extrapolating into the future by means of science — or, as Science in My Fiction succinctly explains:

The purpose of the Science in My Fiction blog is to get science fiction and fantasy writers and fans thinking ahead of science again. Playful bloggers will take a look at recent scientific developments and extrapolate potential futures from them.

Playful, yes! Check out that first blog post: there’s already a bunch of humans — playful as dolphins — riffing off Kay’s extrapolative speculations about dolphin sapience.  Bounce those ideas around in your melon.  And join in!

Dolphin anatomy

Anatomy of a dolphin. From Wikimedia Commons; used per GNU Free Documention License.

But that’s not all that’s got my storymind in high gear.  I spent lunchtime today reading back over some of the 13,500 words I wrote last November 28 in my headlong hurry to catch up with my NaNoWriMo 2009 writing, because it was in that day’s writing that the kernel of a story idea emerged, which I’m planning to cause the further emergence of tonight.  Further extrapolation, if you will, arising out of some of the  what-ifs I already had going in the story universe of Long Dark, which zinged into a whole buncha new what-ifs:

  • Ships heading out of Sol System on their way between stars to another solar system, where the events of Cold will eventually take place.  How will the residents of these ships keep themselves from going stark raving nutters in their decades-long journey through the Long Dark?
  • Well, obviously, some of them will go nutters.  Even in the relatively peaceful society of the Consensus, wherein each & every person holds equivalent power in every decision that affects her or his life, there will still be the occasional anger or fear or delusion leading to craziness or crime. But what does one do with a criminal — not just a criminal, but an actual murderer — in the closed biosphere of a star-traveling tin can?  Just how does the criminal justice system in my ideal little society operate?
  • And wow, we’ve got a murder victim here — a dead body!  What do we do with it?  Do we put it out an airlock like so many SF stories do — the outer space equivalent of “burial at sea”?  Or wait — we’re talking about a closed ecological life support system (CELSS) here — if you dump a body into outer space, even a human body, you’re wasting valuable biological resources that are not all that damn easy to replace when you’re trucking along at one-tenth the speed of light far from the abundance of home.  You need that body. So… how do you bury it?  And recycle it? And deal with the emotional & spiritual repercussions of burying your dead in your own — say it — your own spaceship’s waste management system?
  • And who is the murder victim?  Could it be — no, not possibly — but yes, it is.  Jyoti, one of Long Dark’s central characters, she who is the most beloved of Esti Gusev, another central character.  Wow. Am I actually gonna pull a Joss Whedon & kill off such an important character?  Not an easy thing for a softie like me to do, but… yes.  I am.
  • But why?  What is the motivation of this creep who kills her?  Could it have anything to do with Lord Shiva? In fact, yes.

Diving in right now.  Working title: Asura.

Lord Shiva

Statue of Lord Shiva in Bangalore, India. Photo by Deepak Gupta. From Wikimedia Commons. Used per Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 Germany.

Posted in Cold, Long Dark | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Storyminded