Going Rogue: An American Life (111 page)

Going Rogue

with school Ot a sport could just jump into the ceuck off we’d

go. When we had to
By
somewhete fot a Fitst Family the

state would pay for it; orherwise, I would pay for the kids out of my own pocket. Sometimes we could hop on the state’s prison transport plane, the King Air, and zip somewhere to attend one of the many First Family events we were constantly being invited to. It wasn’t as though they were bumping seats were

empty, and it was usually only Piper displacing forry pounds of air on this old state aircraft. I loved traveling with the kids because they needed me and I needed them. They got to share in some of the joys of public service and to see whar hard work it is. Often constituents were happier to see, say, Todd at an outdoor Alaskana event or Trig at a senior citizens’ event, than they were to see me.

However, a complaint was filed about my kids’ travel. It targeted trips that appeared to have questionable benefits to the state-trips such as Piper’s ceavel to wave the starting at one

year’s Iron Dog race (though apparently her travel to other

Iron Dog races was fine-go figure).

All of my kids’ travel requests had been authorized by the Department of Administration and approved by the ethics supervisors who had worked for previous administrations on both sides of rhe aisle. We had disclosed and announced all of our travel. Nothing was hidden. And here’s the kicker: I had spent less on travel and personal expenses than my last twO predecessors, despite having a much larger family. The Personnel Board investigator for this complaint was a Democrat, and though he had been fair to my administration in the past, the. word was that he was feeling some pressure not to let us off. Still, he admitted that the travel guidelines were vague and circular, and that I had correctly followed the law and the historical precedent established by past governors in • 3 6 5

•

SARAH

PALIN

theit family travel. However, because the ttavel guidelines were so vague, he asked me if I would hold myself ro a future law that could one day be written to establish clearer travel guidelines.
I’m
always in favor of holding myself to a high standard. I agreed. He reviewed my kids’ trips and presented me with a list of the ones he found “questionable” according ro the new (and as yet unbinding) guidelines he established for judging their benefit ro the state. He then offered me two options ro settle the case: r could reimburse the state for the eight or nine trips, or r could present my case ro the Personnel Board and wait for the boatd ro provide clearer guidelines or tell my administration what ro do.

r saw the second option as an utter waste of state time and public resources. The proceedings would be a major distraction and would only prolong a complaint process that was obviously out of COntrol. Besides, it wasn’t fait ro have yet another complaint distract us from doing our job-and distract from the

progress being made for the state.

r signed a settlement that stated clearly that r had not violated any law, travel regulation, or protocol. r agreed ro teimburse the state fot the trips in question, even though they were First Family functions that the kids were invited to-my staff had all of the e
mails and invitations proving this. One of the trips I reimbursed
nevet actually rook place. It was the one listed as “Bristol: Travel ro Attend Valley Petforming Atts
Beauty and the Beast,
Opening Night.” r was ptetty sure she hadn’t attended the play, and latet r confirmed with her that she hadn’t. But r reimbursed the state for it anyway because my Depattment of Law rold me to just sign the settlement and get it over with, even though r knew how the media would spin it.

And spin it they did. The result is that instead of reporting that an independent board of review found me not guilty of any

• 3 66 •