The Daily Alaska empire., 1933-08-21
UNFAIR TO COMMISSION.

 In an adjoining column there is reprinted an editorial article recently appearing in the Anchorage Times relative to the action of the Pioneers Home Building Commission in selecting Sitka as the site of the Home in which that board IS directly accused of two grevous shortcomings It entered upon it's duties with the minds of it's members already made up, and that ''the manner in which the socalled Commission went about it's work smack ed of joke in the beginning"
 As the Times said four of the five members of the Commission, named by the Legislature last Spring have resided in Southeast Alaska for a number of years Yet that is not cause for 1t to impute dishonorabe action on their part. Four of them have resided in other parts of Alaska during their long residence in the Territory And all five have personal knowledge of all parts of Alaska through actual visitations to them and through personal contacts with residents of all sections. Insofar as personal qualifications are concerned, from standpoint of knowledge of conditions and personal acquaintance the Legislature could have selected more competent board than the five men = all popularly elected public officials chosen by it. Of course. Anchorage is disappointed over the outcome. Naturally, The Times voices that feeling But it doesn't represent the true Alaskan spirit in charging that the Commission did not go about its task with open mind We believe upon reflection that both Anchorage and the Times will agree that this is unjust, and unworthy of that fine community and of the excellent newspaper that speaks for it.
 There is equally ground for criticism of the manner in which the Commission performed it's duty To quote the charge of lack of performance:
 For one member of the Commission to
 go about the country taking evidence for the
 whole of a board of body of men, who acord-
 ing to all precedent, should be present
 to personally listen to and nterrogate any
 citizens sufficiently interested to appear be-
 he
 dicrous lengths the board method of doing
 things can be carried. AS to the delibera-
 tions of the board on the evidence taken
 down. the general public has yet to hear.
 The Times has correctly set out the method fol- lowed One member, the Chairman, held the hear ings interrogated the witnesses who appeared, made up the record with the aid of stenographers, and submitted it to the individual members of the Commission If the city of Anchorage, or the Times, finds fault with that method, it's criticism should be directed against the Legislature and not against the Commission, which merely followed out the instructions of the Legislature detailed by law.
 The creation of the Commission its duties and how they shall be performed set forth in full in Chapter 121 of the Session Laws of Alaska, 1883 Section two of that law designates the Highway Engineer as Chairman the Auditor, Treasurer Con- missioner of Education and Attorney General of the territory as memperS
 The procedure of the Commission is then fixed in section five as follows:
 The said Commission shall immediately
 organize and authorize the Chairman to
 hold hearings at Juneau, Sitka Anchorage.
 and such other places may seem de-
 sirable for the purpose of determining the
 most appropriate location for the said
 Pioneers Home, giving due consideration to
 climatic conditions accessibility from all
 parts of the Territory, cost of construction
 and maintenance. The substance of the
 testimony received at such hearings shall be
 reduced to writing and from the data so
 gathered the Commission shall be empowered
 to make a decision to the location of the
 said Home. The decision of the Commission
 when announced in conformity herewith
 shall be final
 That is just what the Commission did, as il admitted by its Anchorage critics The Chairman MT Hesse held hearings at various places including those specifically mentioned in the law, prepared complete stenographic record and furnished complete set to each member of the Commission so that each could study it individually and arrive at decision unbiased and unprejudiced by any discussion or argument that might have been of fered by any other member of the Commission After each member had read and dgested the recorc for himself, general meeting held at which the record was discussed and vote taken by secre ballot with the result that Sitka received four of the five votes.
 That the Legislature did not intend for tht whole Commission to conduct hearings in widely separated towns desiring them is further demon strated by the language of section six of the ac which appropriated not to exceed $2.500 flor the purpose of paying the transportation, and othel