FREDERICA FREYBERG:

WITH LAWMAKERS AND THE GOVERNOR CALLING FOR THE ELIMINATION OF THE GAB AND THE JOB OF ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WE TALKED WITH KEVIN KENNEDY. WE STARTED BY ASKING HIS REACTION TO THE CALLS TO GET RID OF THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD.

KEVIN KENNEDY:

I THINK IT’S A SHORT-SIGHTED CALL. THE GAB HAS REALLY PROVEN ITSELF OVER THE LAST SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS AS ONE OF THE PREMIERE MODELS FOR NOT ONLY ELECTION ADMINISTRATION, BUT CAMPAIGN FINANCE LOBBYING AND ETHICS. WE PROVIDE ONE-STOP SHOPPING FOR OUR CUSTOMERS. WE HAVE A GREAT GROUP OF SATISFIED CUSTOMERS. WE’RE NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED FOR HOW WELL WE PERFORM. AND WE GOT THE BEST DECISION-MAKERS WITH TRAINED JUDGES. THEY’RE NOT, YOU KNOW, ACCOUNTABLE TO PARTISANS DIRECTLY, LIKE THE OLD ELECTIONS BOARD WAS. AND OTHER STATES’ MODELS REALLY LEAVE A LOT TO BE DESIRED. YOU CAN SEE PROBLEMS IN OTHER STATES WITH A PARTISAN-ELECTED OFFICIAL OR APPOINTED OFFICIAL HANDLING THAT OR EVEN A BIPARTISAN BOARD.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

WHAT IS THE RESPONSE OR REACTION ON THE PART OF THE BOARD TO THOSE CALLS FOR ELIMINATION OF GAB?

KEVIN KENNEDY:

WELL, I THINK THE BOARD — IT’S HARD TO SPEAK DIRECTLY FOR THE BOARD MEMBERS. I THINK THEY’RE FRUSTRATED BECAUSE IT’S AN ATTACK ON THEIR INTEGRITY. THESE ARE FORMER JUDGES WHO ALL HAVE A STELLAR REPUTATION. THEY WERE NOMINATED TO THE GOVERNOR FOR CONSIDERATION ON THE BOARD BY A GROUP OF SITTING APPELLATE JUDGES, AND THEY COME WITH THIS WITH A LARGE DEGREE OF PUBLIC SERVICE. THEY’RE TRAINED DECISION-MAKERS WHO HAVE ESTABLISHED A REPUTATION WHEN THEY SAT ON THE BENCH EITHER AS APPELLATE JUDGES OR TRIAL COURT JUDGES. SO I THINK IT’S A BIT FRUSTRATING TO HAVE THEIR DECISIONS CALLED INTO QUESTION AS PARTISANLY MOTIVATED WHEN IT’S REALLY THEM DOING WHAT THEY DID THROUGHOUT THEIR CAREERS.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

AND SO IF THE JOHN DOE PROBE, FOR EXAMPLE, WAS INTO DEMOCRATS, WOULD THE GAB HAVE AUTHORIZED AND ASSISTED IN THAT?

KEVIN KENNEDY:

ABSOLUTELY. I THINK THE BOARD — AND THE BOARD CHAIR SAID THIS EARLY ON. YOU KNOW, WHEN WE’RE PRESENTED WITH CREDIBLE EVIDENCE OF A VIOLATION OF THE LAW AS THE LAW HAD BEEN INTERPRETED AT THE TIME AND THE BOARD’S POSITION ON THE LAW WAS WELL-STATED AND HAS BEEN OUT THERE SINCE 2008, THE BOARD WOULD HAVE PURSUED ANY CREDIBLE EVIDENCE WHERE THERE WAS REASONABLE SUSPICION TO BELIEVE A VIOLATION OCCURRED.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

AND YET ISN’T THE SUPREME COURT’S RULING SHUTTING DOWN THE JOHN DOE VINDICATION FOR SPEAKER VOS’S POSITION FOR ONE THAT, QUOTE, PROSECUTORS IN THE GAB LED AN ILLEGAL PROBE?

KEVIN KENNEDY:

ABSOLUTELY NOT. ALL IT MEANS IS THAT THE SUPREME COURT HAS REVIEWED THE LAW, REVIEWED AN EXISTING COURT OF APPEALS’ DECISION. HAS LOOKED AT PRIOR INTERPRETATIONS BY THE STATE ELECTIONS BOARD AND THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY BOARD THAT HAVE EXISTED SINCE 2001 AND REAFFIRMED BY THE GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABLITY BOARD IN 2008 AND SAID GIVEN THE TREND IN CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW, WE DON’T BELIEVE THAT’S THE CASE ANYMORE. NOW, THEY DIDN’T SAY IT QUITE AS ELOQUENTLY AS THAT, BUT THAT IS ESSENTIALLY THE BOTTOM LINE WHAT THE SUPREME COURT RULING IS. THE LAW HAS CHANGED. IT’S NOT THE LAW NOW.

FREDERICA FREYBERG:

GIVEN THE MAJORITY GOP CALLS TO DISMANTLE THE GAB, INVESTIGATE THE BOARD AND THE CALL FOR YOUR RESIGNATION, WILL YOU STEP ASIDE?

KEVIN KENNEDY:

I WILL NOT STEP ASIDE. RIGHT NOW I REPORT TO A CITIZEN BOARD. I’VE REPORTED TO A CITIZEN BOARD FOR THE PAST 32 YEARS, EITHER A BIPARTISAN ELECTIONS BOARD OR THIS NONPARTISAN BOARD, AND AT THIS POINT THAT’S THE MECHANISM FOR DECIDING AM I THE BEST ONE FOR THIS JOB IS A CITIZEN BOARD APPOINTED BY THE GOVERNOR. RIGHT NOW I HAVE THE CONFIDENCE OF THE BOARD. EVERY DAY I AUDITION FOR MY JOB. SO IF THAT CHANGES, I’VE ALWAYS OPERATED KNOWING THAT I COULD BE GONE IN A WEEK, BUT I’M NOT GOING TO LEAVE JUST BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE — WANT TO USE ME AS A PARTISAN FOIL.