A decision on whether contributions supporting the Stand for Salmon campaign are transparent or should be considered "dark money," whose origins are unknown to voters, will have to wait.
The Alaska Public Offices Commission on Wednesday punted the question back to staff for an investigation that could take weeks, possibly concluding near the eve of the Nov. 6 election.
"The commission takes the allegations in the complaint seriously, but concludes that the issues raised would benefit from the more thorough and considered investigation that the commission's normal procedures provide," the five-member commission said.
Stand for Alaska — Vote No on One, the industry-led group opposed to the ballot measure to increase salmon protections, asserted in a complaint filed last month that three groups on the other side were violating multiple disclosure laws.
One assertion is that the Stand for Salmon supporters receive money from nonprofit groups outside Alaska for which the "true source" of the contribution is not known, such as more than $200,000 from the New Venture Fund of Washington, D.C.
Conservation groups named in the complaint — Stand for Salmon, Yes for Salmon — Vote Yes on One, and The Alaska Center — have said they value transparency and communicated closely with APOC staff to ensure they followed the law.
Ryan Schryver, head of the Stand for Salmon campaign, said the complaint seeks to distract voters from the need for increased protections for fish and fishermen.
"Our preferred scenario would be the commission would have ruled on this and put it to bed, because we're confident they'll throw out these outrageous claims," he said.
Stand for Alaska had requested an expedited decision. That led to a quickly assembled hearing last week before the commission.
The commission had been expected to decide the matter Wednesday.
Instead, staff now have 30 days to investigate, weigh the facts and make a recommendation, said Tom Lucas, APOC's campaign disclosure coordinator.
It would then be up to the commission to decide the issue.
[Why a Boston billionaire and global resource companies are fueling Alaska's salmon-initiative debate]
Matt Singer, an attorney representing Stand for Alaska, said his side is pleased a thorough investigation will be done.
"My experience is that people usually hide things for a reason. We look forward to an investigation to find out what is really going on with this scheme," he said.
The timeline could delay a decision until early November, just before the general election when voters will consider the Stand for Salmon measure, known officially as Ballot Measure 1.
APOC employees will "make every effort" to provide a recommendation to commissioners as quickly as possible, Lucas said.