Monegan's Big Blunder: Asking Palin to autograph Wooten poster

[Guest posted by Nick]

On October 10, 2008, the Legislative Council of Alaska voted to release the report submitted by their investigator Stephen Branchflower. The scope of the investigation was “to investigate the circumstances and events surrounding the termination of former Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan and potential abuses of power and/or improper actions by members of the executive branch.” The investigation began on August 11, 2008 and concluded with the report on October 10, 2008. The report makes four findings.

The most important finding is Finding Number Two. The investigator concluded,

“Governor Palin’s firing of Commissioner Monegan was a proper and lawful exercise of her constitutional and statutory authority to hire and fire executive branch department heads.”

That’s correct. The Governor of any state has the authority to hire and fire her executives for any reason. They are employees that are hired at her will. The Governor did not abuse her authority.

Wow. That’s amazing that the Alaskan Legislature Council felt they needed to spend $100,000 to figure that one out. Can the legislature not read and understand their own Constitution?

So why did the Governor fire Commissioner Monegan?

Commissioner Monegan committed a major blunder on May 15, 2008.

On that day, He submitted to her office a poster-boy photograph of a disreputable Alaskan Trooper for the Governor to sign and present at the Police Memorial Day honoring the Troopers. The Governro declined to sign the poster and refused to attend the Police Memorial Day.

Here is the excerpt from page 39 of the report.

He did what?

You have to be kidding me, right?

Let me read that one again, slowly!

The Commissioner dropped off a color poster photograph of Trooper Wooten. A trooper he claims that he was being pressured to fire. A trooper he claims he was pressured to fire since the first day of his job. A job he felt he was going to lose if he did not fire this trooper.

A trooper who the Commissioner knew the Governor Palin and her husband believed to be an extremely poor representation of an Alaska State Trooper.

A trooper who the Commissioner knew had been repeatedly disciplined for a multitude of serious infractions. Infractions such as:

“the taking of a moose illegally, tasering an 11-year-old stepson of Wooten’s, drinking while driving in the patrol car, having a beer while he was driving his patrol car.” Monegan to Branchflower page 18

And this trooper, is the one he selects to honor on the Police Memorial Day?

I don’t believe the Commissioner was that stupid.

I don’t believe that the Commissioner was that incompetent.

I can only conclude that the Commissioner was deliberately insubordinate. That he was deliberately seeking to antagonize and worry the Governor of the State of Alaska.

So after the Commissioner drops of the photograph, what happens next?

The Governor’s office calls him up and asks him “Why did you send a poster over here that has a picture of Mike Wooten on it?”

Here is the excerpt from the report:

The Commissioner compounds his blunder by trying to plead ignorance. He tries to claim that ‘did not realize that it was a photograph of Trooper Wooten’. He tries to claim that ‘did not know what Trooper Wooten looked like’.

Really? Does this pass the smell test?

If you are really being pressured to fire somebody by your boss. What would you do? Would you not talk to the person who is they have wanted to fire? Would you not have done some shuttle diplomacy to try to defuse the situation? Would you not have least learned enough about the trooper and the case to avoid making such a serious blunder?

Furthermore, Where is the Commissioners ‘mea culpa’? Where is is apology?

Where is the Commissioners concern for the reputation of his department? Where is his selection of an alternative photograph for presentation at the Police Memorial that would not offend his Governor?

Lets wind this back to the beginning.

Shortly after he was hired, on January 4th 2007, the Commissioner had a meeting with the Governor’s husband Todd Palin. At the meeting, Mr. Palin gives the Commissioner an investigative report on Trooper Wooten. The purpose of the meeting is clearly to express Todd Palin’s concerns that the trooper is a threat to the Governor.

Here is how Commissioner Monegan’s take on the meeting:

MR. BRANCHFLOWER: Was there anything mentioned during the course of this meeting with Todd Palin about concerns — security concerns or fear that either he or Governor Palin may have had with respect to Trooper Wooten?

MR. MONEGAN: He did say that there was — Trooper Wooten had supposedly made a statement that had threatened the governor’s father, and that that was part of the allegation, part of the package done in there.

But to an ongoing situation, ongoing threats to the governor or to her family, I didn’t perceive it that way, no. Monegan to Branchflower (page 21).

Say what?

Clearly the whole point of this meeting is for Todd Palin to express his security concerns about trooper Wooten. He presented evidence to Commissioner Monegan regarding this trooper and regarding the prior threats he had made to the Governor’s father.

The Commissioners response does not seem appropriate to me. He essentially blew off the Palin’s concerns. He certainly was given pictures of Trooper Wooten on that date. He certainly told Todd Palin he would look into the case. Yet he did so little looking, that he did not even look at the pictures of Trooper Wooten in the file he was handed. He did not take these concerns into account for providing security for the governor?

Commissioner Monegan hands of the report to a subordinate. The subordinate reviews the files against the prior investigations. The subordinate tells the commissioner there is ‘nothing new’ in the files that has not already been investigated. The Commissioner then responds to Todd Palin a few days later. He tells the investigator:

MR. MONEGAN: I did. I called him back, and I advised him that we had made a comparison. There is nothing new, the case is closed and that — and honestly, he responded with more fustration. page 23

So much for looking into it. That was not much of an investigation. Remember, the Palin’s probably have no knowledge of any investigation having been done. They may not even know of any punishment that was meted out. They are getting the ‘stone wall’ treatment.

Not only that, but the Commissioner also issues a counter threat. He tells both Todd Palin and the Governor when she calls a few days later, that if they prosecute for the illegal moose kill, then they will have to prosecute all of the people in involved – including her sister and her father. Wow.

The Commissioner goes on to tell the investigator that:

MR. MONEGAN: Well, I believe that with as much emotion and passion as I heard in both Todd and Sara on this, that especially since the divorce had, in my mind, occurred like a year or two prior, that if I keep telling them things that are going to frustrate them, I may not be long for the job. I think I may have made a comment like that to my wife.

Okay. Now this belief was formed in January of 2007. The Commissioner is not fired until July of 2008, eighteen months later. He claims that he knows that the Governor and her husband have strong distrust towards a trooper in his department. Yet he takes minimal action to address their concerns and to resolve the issue. He doesn’t even bother to look at the troopers picture or to review the file himself. He certainly took no actions against Trooper Wooten and the certainly wasn’t fired during those eighteen months.

I do not find Commissioner Monegan’s statements to be credible.

On the day of his firing, according to the Anchorage Daily News, Commissioner Monegan claims that the firing came “out of the blue.” He claims “If the governor was upset with me for one thing or another, it had never been communicated to me,”

“Out of the blue”? Don’t insult our intelligence Commissioner Monegan.

The investigator interviewed Mr. Kopp – the Commissioner who replaced Monegan. During his interview, Mr. Kopp lists the reasons he recalls the Governor’s office wants to replace Commissioner Monegan from a phone conversation he had with them on July 8th, 2008. Lets go to the report and see what Mr. Kopp claims these reasons were:

MR. KOPP: He said that they had a number of reasons. (page 40)

He said that they were concerned that Monegan was unresponsive to direction from the office of the governor and was letting Audie — he was referring to the AST colonel, Audie Holloway, he was letting Audie run the entire Department of Public Safety.

Okay, that is fairly vague.

He specifically mentioned that Monegan was a poor leader of the Department of Public Safety and that he was absent from duties he should be attending to or was delegating duties that he should have been handling as the commissioner.

Okay.

He said the governor was extremely upset over a recent issue involving Trooper Wooten. Baily said that a police memorial day photograph featuring Trooper Wooten had been presented to the governor by the AST.

AHA. The smoking gun.

And I can’t remember if it was — if ti was the PSEA that advanced the photo — and of course, you know, troopers are all members of — if you are a sergeant or below, you are a member of the PSEA.

The PSEA would be the Public Safety Employees Association. The police union. The people who defended trooper Monegan when the Alaska State Troopers when to discipline him.

So the PSEA and Commissioner Monegan deliberately selected a photograph of Trooper Wooten to send to the governors office for her signature on the Police Memorial Day on May 15, 2008.

And I can’t remember which term he used, Mr. Branchflower. But I just remember that the photo ended up on the governor’s desk and was asked for the governor’s signature and –

That is shocking. Just ‘ended up’ there.

Well we already know from earlier testimony how it got to the governors desk. We know that Commissioner Monegan dropped it off.

MR. BRANCHFLOWER: And it turned out to be Trooper Wooten?

Really? You make it sound like an ‘accident’.

MR. KOPP: And it turned out to be Trooper Wooten.

Just ‘turned out’ to be Trooper Wooten.

And Bailey said that — you know, he just remarked to me that this was the trooper that had been threatening to kill members of the governor’s family, you know, and now they’re wanting the governor to sign the picture.

Well at least the governors staff takes the threat seriously.

I asked him if he had talked to Walt Monegan about it, and — and he said that — that they had, and that — that Walt had told him he had no idea what Trooper Wooten looked like, and that it was not an intentional act to upset the governor.

Wow. The Commissioner told the Governor’s office that he did not know what Trooper Wooten looked like. That is just an amazing claim.

Bailey commented that it was incredible that the leadership of DPS would not know the appearance of an employee who had threatened the lives of the governor’s family.

I agree with Mr. Bailey. Commissioner Monegan was not credible in his response. If the Palin’s had not raised the issue with him when he had hired on; if he had not taken the files back with him; if he had not ‘investigated’ the issue; if he had not had two followup conversations with the Palin’s; then perhaps I might have been able to believe the Commissioner.

But given the fact that all of that had happened; and that the Commissioner claims that he felt he was being pressured to fire the trooper; I find it to be extremely unlikely that the Commissioner did not know what Trooper Wooten looked like.

Furthermore, once he was alerted to the fact that it was Trooper Wooten, he does not express much contrition or concern for his act.

The record is clear that Commissioner Monegan deliberately selected and sent that poster photograph to the Governors office to upset her.

MR> BRANCHFLOWER: Now, did — now, you used the term that Bailey said the governor was extremely upset.

MR. KOPP: Uh-huh

So here we have a clear disconnect. Mr. Kopp recognizes that the Governor and the Governor’s office is very upset with Commissioner Monegan. Yet for some reason, Commissioner Monegan claims to be unaware of any loss of confidence in him.

Mr. Kopp goes on to say:

Well, he said that the governor had lost confidence in AST and DPS’s ability to protect her and her family from Wooten, and that Wooten had violated many state laws and agency policies in the past several years and that AST had never taken appropriate action ot terminate his employment.

That is an amazing statement.

The Governor of the state of Alaska has no confidence in the Alaska State Troopers or the Department of Public Safety to protect her and her family.

I can see why.

The investigator then interviews the head of the Governor’s security detail – Alaska State Trooper Gary Wheeler. The investigator says:

When I asked Wheeler, “And did you specifically inquire of them whether they perceived any threats from any individual or were afraid of any individual?” Mr. Wheeler responded “I did. And I got a negative response, meaning that there — they basically said no.” A second meeting about security issues occurred in the Governor’s Anchorage office after Governor Palin was sworn in on December 5, 2006. He testified Governor Palin and Todd Palin entered his office located within the governor’s suite of offices and said he needed to be aware of a possible threat from Trooper Michael Wooten, a name Wheeler had never heard previously. (page 44)

Okay – so now we have a second witness testifying that the Palin’s were concerned about Wooten being a security risk. The first witness, Monegan, tries to downplay his claim. But here we have the Palin’s expressing the concern to their security detail.

Curiously enough, he does not give us any more information about Wooten. That seems to be a very lackadaisical response from the security detail. The Palin’s named a person they thought might be a specific threat to them. The security response, if any, is not talked about by the investigator. Why not?

But specifically, we noticed it through the reduction of not attending formal functions or activities where the governor usually showed up and security normally was there. We just were not — we were told not to be there or that she didn’t need us there.

And in — it would have been the early part of — of ’08 that the – the largest part of the detail was — basically started to go away.

Now that is a very interesting statement. The Governor is starting to back away from using her state security detail. Why?

Think back to the earlier statement by the Mr. Bailey of the Governor’s office. The Governor has lost all faith in the ability of the Alaska State Troopers and the Department of Public Safety to protect her. Now we have the chief of her security detail admitting that their protective services were cut way back. Officer Wheeler goes on to testify:

… that Todd Palin spent at least 50 percent of his time in Governor Palin’s office. Although he did not have his own office, he would routinely use the governor’s office, sitting at the conference table that had a phone on it. I asked Officer Wheeler whether he had an opinion about Todd Palin’s level of involvement in the day-to-day affairs of the Governor’s office:

Based on that statement, it appears that the governor’s husband is providing security for the governor.

MR.WHEELER: I — I thnk that he — that he had a significant influence, in that he was always interacting with the — the employees there. That any time I needed to get information to the governor, I would always go through Todd, because he was the only one I could — could talk with, either via the cell phone or in person.

This statement confirms the first impression. The security detail has to go through Todd to have any contact with the governor. Clearly Todd Palin is providing security for the governor from the Alaskan State Troopers.

.. if the governor was required to leave and go to Juneau or something, that Todd was always the one that would call me and let me know where they were and that they’d be five or ten minutes out.

That is amazing that the Governor of the state of Alaska can not get a security force that she trusts.

The investigator attached an email that Governor Palin sent to Commissioner Monegan on February 7, 2007. It is marked as Exhibit number 1 in his deposition. In the email, the Governor says:

Walt – you mentioned wanting to testify on a bill re: police officers kiilling someone, then facing 99 yrs.

You are absolutely free to speak your mind on this.

When asked about it, just to let you know, I’m also going to speak my mind on it. For police officers to violate the public trust is a grave, grave violation – in my opinion. We have too many examples lately of cops and troopers who violate the public trust and DPS has come across as merely turning a blind eye or protecting that officers, seemingly “for the good of the brotherhood.” The murder and rapse in rural AK (Alaska) by officers are still fresh in Alaska’s mind.
In sharing a few personal examples with you including the trooper who used to be realted to me-the one who illegally killed the cow moose out of season, without a tag – he’s still bragging about it in my home town and after another cop confessed to witnessing the kill, this trooper was “investigated” for over a year and merely given a slap on the writs… though he’s out there arresting people today for the same crime!. This is the same trooper who shot his 11-yr-old stepson with a taser gun, was seen drinking in his patrol car, was pulled over for drunk driving but let off by a co-worker & brags about this incident to this day… he threatened to kill his estranged wife’s parent, refused to be transferred to rural Alaska and continued to disparage natives in words and tone, he continues to harass and intimidate his ex. – even after being slapped iwth a restraining order that was lifted when his supervisors intervened… he threatens to always be able to come out on top because he’s ‘got the bade”, etc. etc. etc.) This trooper is still out on the street, inf act he’s been promoted. It was a joke, the whole year long “investigation” of him – in fact those who passed along the serious information about him to Julia Grimes and Tandesky were threatened with legal action from th trooper’s union for speaking about it. (This is the same trooper who’s out there today telling people the new administration is going to destroy the trooper organization, and that he’d “never work for that b****, Palin”.)

Anyway – just a personal example of what I’ve personally seen out there and had to live with for two years – and this is what people in the Valley are putting up with (those many residents who know of this trooper time-bomb who’s supposed to be “protecting” them). I’ve heard too many stories from others across this state who believe DPS has been overly protective of their own, to the detriment of DPS, to the chagrin of the public and it all leads to the erosion of faith Alaskans should have in their law enforcement officials.

Just my opinion – I know you know I’ve experienced a lot of fustration with this issue. I know Todd’s even expressed to you a lot of concern about our family’s safety after this trooper threatened to kill a family member – so you need to know that if I am a suppoerter of whatever we can do to build trust back into DPS. Then there are many other Alaskands in the same boate we are and may look upon this new cop bill as a good thing.

Thanks for letting me share my concerns with you, Sarah {page 114 – any typos are mine}

There certainly seems to be a lot of friction between Commissioner Monegan and Governor Palin with regard to this bill. The Governor is clearly and validly dissatisfied with the performance of the Alaskan State Troopers. There certainly is no request to fire anybody although there is a lot of frustration about the failure of the Department of Public Safety to take a compliant seriously.

The bill in question is the Sonya Ivanoff Act, SB45. The Governor signed the Act on April 27, 2007. The bill was sponsored by Senator Donny Olson (D). The act mandates the maximum sentence for first-degree murder when committed by an on-duty peace officer. Sonya Ivanoff, 19, was murdered in 2003 by a Nome police officer Matthew Owens. The officer received a 101 year sentence for the murder of Sonya Ivanoff and for tampering with evidence.

Commissioner Monegan testified against the bill in the senate. Here is part of his testimony from that hearing:

SENATOR STEVENS said is sounds like there were several incidents prior to the murder in which girls were taken into the police car. “How can we do a better job to make sure that people like this are not in uniform?”

COMMISSIONER MONEGAN said he agrees and assumes Nome has now looked at their screening process. He spoke of a case of an officer having pornography on his computer where there was nothing in his background that would have disclosed it… link

Clearly there were other instances of police abuse in Alaska. While the Commissioner Monegan states that Nome has looked at its screening process for hiring officers in the first place, he does not speak to the issue of disciplining and removing rogue officers once they have been hired.

The letter once again tells us that Commissioner Monegan was alerted to the fact that the Governor is concerned about the safety of her family with regard to an Alaskan State Trooper.

Later on in the investigation, the investigator then relates an incident in August of 2007 Trooper Monegan and that AST Safety Bear at the 2007 State Fair. Commissioner Monegan receives a call from the governors office. The Governor was planning on attending the opening day of the fair and had her office call to ask that Trooper Wooten not be assigned to work at the fair on that day. Trooper Wooten was on light duty. He had volunteered to work as the AST Safety Bear on that day. So what is the Comissioners response to this call:

MR. MONEGAN I figured they had spies, honestly. {page 125}

Okay. Clearly he is not taking the issue of the Governors safety seriously. The Governor’s office must know what his attitude is towards them by now. At least he did ask for Wooten to be reassigned, but not because he respected the Governor’s concern for her safety, but because:

MR. MONEGAN I think the main reasons obviously was that I was concerned about my health at this juncture.

WHAT?

The man was concerned for his job and not for the safety of the Governor? They did not ask him to fire the trooper. They merely asked that he not be allowed to work the state fair on the same day that she was there. That was an eminently reasonable request – particularly coming from somone who was concerned about her safety and that of her family.

The Commissioners response is inappropriate.

The investigator also covers the union negotiations that occurred in March of 2008 with Commissioner Monegan. Commissioner Kreitzer was negotiating the new contracts. Commissioner Monegan alleges that the reason that the Public Safety Employees Association only receives a 5% raise and not the 5.5% raise.

… And amongst senior command, meaning myself, John Glass, and Audie Holloway, we actually speculated amongst ourselves that there has to be a connection, why the troopers are different than the other unions. Because the SU actually includes trooper command, the lieutenants and higher.

MR. BRANCHFLOWER: There has to be a connection with what?

MR. MONEGAN: Mike Wooten.

So now we have a motive for Mr. Monegan’s behavior with the photograph. He believes that the police officers were denied an 0.5% pay raise because of the Wooten issue. Yet, He has absolutely no facts or basis to back up this belief.

So finally we get back to the Police Memorial day celebration on May 15th. Commissioner Monegan’s testimony starts on page 154 of the report. Lets see if they give us any more details about what happened.

Commissioner Monegan starts of by saying:

Everybody was kind of happy that she was going to show up. The governor is a very popular lady. And so we were looking forward to it. And then literally, the last day, she canceled. But prior to that, still in that euphoria that she was going to show up, I took it upon myself to actually take one of the glossy posters that we had made of a trooper holding a flag, and I dropped it off at the governor’s office.

Gosh, he is still pretending to be clueless as to why the governor canceled?

The investigator asks:

MR. BRANCHFLOWER: Now, so it was you who dropped of this photograph that was to be used somehow in conjunction with the celebration?

and he answers:

MR. MONEGAN: Yeah. In fact, it was a poster that we had used this photograph, we made it into a poster. And we actually used it the year before, as well.

So we have a 15×17 poster (Exhibit 7) of an Alaska State Trooper holding a US flag and saluting it. The picture is taken from the angle of looking through the arm over the shoulder of a saluting trooper in the foreground. The poster was intended to be distributed to all the detachments and posts across the state.

He walks back to his car and immediately gets a call from the Kris Perry. Commissioner Monegan’s recollection is:

Walt, what are you thinking? Why did you send a poster over here that has a picture of Mike Wooten on it?

The investigator asks him what his reaction was and he responds:

MR. MONEGAN: I didn’t know. I don’t. I didn’t know what — I didn’t know who these troopers were.

He is not credible.

I was trying to explain the fact that I wasn’t trying to antagonize anybody. This is an event. He is a trooper. I didn’t know he was, you know, the guy in the poster. And that to me, this whole thing talked about the hypersensitivity of at least the governor and maybe her staff to Trooper Wooten.

Commissioner Monegan. You need to stop digging. The hole is deep enough.

MR MONEGAN: You know, I — in fact, I remember turning to John Glass, and I said, what are the odds? Because I didn’t know it was Wooten. I asked John, I said, is this Wooten? And he looked at it, and he said, I don’t think so, but let me find out.

So he ran off to talk to somebody else. Actually, the guys who had taken the photo. And they said, yeah, it is. So we didn’t recognize Mike Wooten out of that picture.

Indeed, what are the odds. The odds of this happening accidentally are slim to none.

It is an interesting claim. Neither he nor Glass claim to know what Wooten looked like. Yet the staff at the Governors officer recognized him immediately. It certainly does not give credibility to their claim that they were being pressed to fire Wooten. If they had been, they would have certainly known what he looked like.

The week before he was fired, there was a meeting between Audie Holloway, the head of the Alaska State Troopers and Bob Cockrell, the head of Governor Palin’s security detail. Mr. Monegan relates:

… And he says it didn’t go well between him an Bob, and Bob left in a huff. And he said, you may be hearing about it.

Bob Cockrell’s testimony of that meeting is:

Q: it sounds like it was a pretty tense conversation?

A: It was a tense conversation because I got the feeling that he did not want to help her at all and I’m saying, hey, all I’m asking you for is one guy here. Usually , we used to do it with four and five guys. Now, I got – all I’m asking for is Dave and they won’t even give me that. So, I just said, you know what, you guys – you do what you want to do. I passed it on to the Chief of Staff and I said if need be, I’ll just go by myself and they gave me Dave.

Oh my. The AST and the DPS were giving the Governor grief about assigning troopers to her security detail! Why did they not want to provide the protection?

A I just said I want to use Sergeant Dave Jones. They tell me no because it would cost three hours of overtime. And, I had thought starting July, the first week of July, and they were already worried about three hours’ overtime, was a little much.

Good grief. Commissioner Monegan and Holloway were denying the governor troopers for her security over 3 hours of overtime? That is outrageous.

Then on July 11th, 2008, Commissioner Monegan is called in to a meeting at the governors office. He meets with Mike Nitch – Palin’s Chief of Staff. He tells Monegan “Walt, the governor appreciates and respects your expertise and your interest in rural issues. And for that reason, she is going – we are offering you the job to be director of the Alcohol Beverage Control Board”

MR. MONEGAN” I said, this is out of the blue. I didn’t know the governor was angry at me for anything. So what brought this up? Was it Wooten? Was it the plane? Was it the security detail? What was it?

Commissioner Monegan is clearly lying here. He lists three recent reasons where he had angered the governor and their staff.

He didn’t bring up the issue of the 0.5% difference in the pay raise.

Or the fact that he clearly retaliated against the governor for this disagreement by 1) sending her a photograph of a trooper he knew she thought was unfit to wear the uniform and 2) by denying her troopers for her security detail over petty amounts of overtime.

Clearly he should have been fired.

Does the former Commissioner really expect us to believe that he was not aware that the Governor was upset with him?

Does the State of Alaska intend to provide adequate security and protection for its Governors?