I want to hire a Legislator to work with me in real estate development. It’s not politically correct but I’m serious. Legislators I’ve known over the last three decades are smart, hard working. The benefit to my clients is my employee will have superior knowledge of the state and know how to do a tough job. Anyone who can help manage this state should be pretty good at helping us develop a condo project or restaurant.

Am I a special interest? You bet. My clients are as special as they come. I put up buildings, find homes and finance both. Will this work be a conflict of interest for my new employee? I don’t see one. But every time a Legislator goes to work, some partisan declares a conflict, potential conflict or the appearance of a conflict.

She will disclose income received as the law requires. She will file the Alaska Public Offices Commission reports. Since she will not own 51% of the company, she won’t have to disclose my clients or income. Some may consider that hiding the source of income. But, it complies precisely with the law. If the law changed to require employer disclosure, I don’t know how long I could afford a Legislator/employee. If competitors knew my clients and income, wouldn’t they try to steal them? It’s happened before.

But, I’m worried about this conflict thing. When I have a client that’s putting up a building and they need a building permit from the Municipality of Anchorage, if my employee goes to the city for plan approval and gets the permit, is she lobbying the Municipality? Will she be thrown out of the Legislature for doing the work required by her job?

A warehouse I am contemplating putting up requires an on site septic since running the sewer line would cost $100,000 and buckle the project. If my employee, working with my engineers, gets the permit from the State Department of Environmental Conservation, is that a conflict? A Legislator dealing with a state employee? Approval of a septic system is pretty straightforward. I don’t see room for graft or conflict. But, I worry.

I could switch the employee to mortgage banking. A new client is a first time homebuyer. I hope he doesn’t want to use Alaska Housing Finance Corporation’s first time homebuyer program. Somebody could declare a conflict. I better keep her in commercial where she’ll be safe - unless the warehouse guy wants to use the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority’s commercial loan. But, that’s ok; my other markets usually beat their rate and terms.

Man, this is complicated. Maybe I could turn over my marketing campaign to her to make my team well known, well respected. But what happens if the news media does an attack piece on my Legislator/employee who opposed the new mortgage licensing law just as I did? Will the media go over the line and damn my endeavors by accusing me of rewarding that vote with a job? Not true but what does that matter with the media?

The safest course is to let this Legislator/employee go back to her $50,000 a year job as a Legislator, now including per diem during the off-season. Just because she’s got a family to feed doesn’t mean she’ll accept a “consulting” job from one of those other special interests, you know, the bad guys. I do not want to see her in ethical conflicts. Maybe we could double the current salary so that she could be paid well for making billion dollar decisions.

I do not like that answer either and neither did the authors of our state Constitution. We need citizen legislators with a job and outside income, not folks paid big bucks by the state or the bad guys. With jobs in the private sector, citizen Legislators are connected to us, more likely to understand our needs and desires for our children’s and Alaska’s future.

I want to hire a good Legislator because he or she could make a great employee. I’ll risk the charges of conflict and being labeled a special interest. After all, as Alaskans, we’re all special and with only a one day special session, they need the work.