Monday, March 08, 2010

E-mail to the Anchorage Assembly regarding Dan Sullivan's $193,000 payout.

Somebody sent this to my e-mail account and I thought it deserved to be seen by everyone in the hopes that it inspires other Anchorage residents to follow suit.

To :
Assemblyman
Patrick Flynn, Assemblyman Bill Starr, Assemblywoman Debbie Ossiander, Assemblyman Matt Claman, Assemblyman Dan Coffey, Assemblywoman Elvi Gray-Jackson, Assemblywoman Sheila Selkregg, Assemblyman Mike Gutierrez, Assemblyman Chris Birch, Assemblywoman Jennifer Johnston

We are told that the Municipality of Anchorage’s revenues are so tight that the rescue program of the Anchorage Fire Department has been reduced or eliminated. The reduced municipal revenues have resulted in positions not being filled as they become vacant. Other public employees may have to be laid off from work.

Despite these hard financial times, the Assembly approved a $193,000 payment requested by the Municipal Attorney and Mayor Sullivan. The $193,000 is to be paid the George M. Sullivan Trust. When asked about the beneficiaries, Suzanne McVicker, will not disclose the information, stating that the information is "confidential."

For us, these circumstances raise some questions we would ask you, as an assembly member, to answer.

1. What authority gives the Salaries and Emoluments Commission, the Assembly, or Mayor, the power to agree to pay any person after their employment ends $193,000, that is not part of a previously agreed upon pension plan?

2. What legal consideration did the Municipality of Anchorage receive after January 10th, 1982 for a contract obligation to pay $193,000 to the George M. Sullivan Trust. ?

3. When did you first learn about the agreement to extend former Mayor George Sullivan’s life insurance?

4. Did anyone see an original agreement or contract and accompanying documents?

5. Do you know when the insurance company informed the city it would not cover former Mayor George Sullivan as an insured in the employee group insurance plan?

6. Who paid the premiums from 1982 to the present? Is there a record of payments made?

7. Into which city account were these premiums paid? Out of which city account was the payment disbursed?

8. Who authorized the city to collect the insurance premium in 2002?

9. If this was a binding, legal agreement, why did the payment require a vote by the Assembly?

10.Since no insurance policy had been issued, and no employment contract provision required the $193,000 payment, what makes AR No. 2010-33 not the grant of a special privilege prohibited by Article 1, Section 15 of the Alaska Constitution?

11. How is AR No. 2010-33 an appropriation of public money for a public purpose as required by Article IX, Section 6 of the Alaska Constitution?

12. Do you think that Municipal Attorney gave you sufficient and accurate information to make an informed decision?

13. Explain your affirmative vote, please.

I don't believe too many people could fault Anchorage resident for asking the questions contained in this e-mail.

You know I think I will send a similar e-mail myself, and if any of you Anchorage residents are so inclined you can find their e-mail addresses here.

9 comments:

  1. Anonymous11:44 AM

    Hate to tell you this, but I tried to send messages (especially to attorney and Assembly person Coffee) and it shows 'error'. Did they block your connection somehow?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous12:13 PM

    Get Vic Fischer to sue the Muni.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I added a working link. Thanks,

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous12:38 PM

    Now this is citizen action at its finest! Great questions which should signal to the recipients that legal action could be forthcoming if answers are not provided.

    It should also shame the Assembly and the Mayor into full disclosure.

    How much easier, though, would it be if the majority of voters simply did their homework before voting these jokers into office?

    Not that you can discover all their faults and foibles, but honestly, this guy's family has history with the city.

    I am so proud of the person who drafted this email and of you for sharing with all of us. It should be an example for us all on how to begin to hold our public officials (aka public servants) accountable to us.

    Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous3:47 PM

    My husband and I wrote the letter Gryphen posted. We have additional
    comments. The term "George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust" is mentioned for the first time in the recent Assembly Memorandum No. 76-2010. I asked my husband about the use of this terminology. Here are his comments:

    The payee of the check for the proceeds appears significant. Resolution AM-82-1
    adopted January 19, 1982 approved providing life insurance to "former Anchorage
    Mayor George M. Sullivan. The party who would receive the death benefit check would be the beneficiary designated on the policy.

    Nothing has been introduced to suggest Mayor Sullivan filled out an application for insurance or designation of beneficiary. Nor has anything been introduced in the documents made public to suggest that George M. Sullivan ever designated the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust as his beneficiary.

    The public documents show no carrier ever issued any insurance policy. So, a beneficiary designation would be academic. The Municipality of Anchorage is not licensed as an insurance company and its charter does not authorize it to be a life insurance company. The appropriate entity to make any payments for any money owed George M. Sullivan would be to George Sullivan’s probate estate, subject to reporting and distribution by the probate court.

    AR No. 2010-33 provides nothing to substantiate the leap of faith in the third whereas clause that " the George M. Sullivan Irrevocable Life Insurance Trust, the appropriate legal entity..."
    Since no one issued an insurance policy, the obligation to make the payment would be on a contract or quasi-contract theory. Either claim would be dubious.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Those are all excellent questions.

    And I am confident none of them will be addressed in any way.

    And Dan Sullivan will take his money. He will demand it. And if he doesn't get it, he'll sue.

    Perhaps litigation is the only way those questions will be answered. If the city refuses to pay and Sullivan sues, he then has to prove why he deserves that money. Because I'm thinking there is no contract, no insurance policy, nothing. Even if there was a memo or something, I'm thinking it violates one of the statues and can be nullified.

    ReplyDelete
  7. CGinWI8:38 PM

    Is there a recall process available in Anchorage?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous3:52 AM

    Dan use the Sarah defense...

    Be the VICTIM!

    Start a DanPac to launder your money!

    Write on your palms, find a "DS baby or a loaf of bread to carry around, foam at the mouth, get a f#ckd up facelift, talk like a cartoon character, declare you are God and the mainstream press will stop writing about you!

    ReplyDelete
  9. I am not an Anchorage resident but were I, there would already be a lawsuit for my "life insurance". This is so bogus and ugly that any self respecting elected official would never dream of doing it.
    No contract? Nothing written but some minutes from decades old meetings and emails? Really?
    Thank you Drummond for facing this theft and voting no. As to the rest of you all I can say is are you really that stupid?

    ReplyDelete

Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.