By THE ALASKA STORY
June 8, 2026 – A group of Republican Party activists has filed a formal complaint with Alaska Republican Party Chairwoman Carmela Warfield, alleging that District 25 Chairman Steve Johnson abused his authority, improperly blocked party business, and failed to recuse himself from matters involving his wife, Rep. DeLena Johnson.
The complaint, dated June 5 and signed by 11 district members, requests an independent investigation into Johnson’s conduct and asks party leadership to consider his removal if the allegations are substantiated.
Steve Johnson serves as chairman of Republican District 25. His wife, Rep. DeLena Johnson of Palmer, is the House Minority Leader and is seeking reelection. She has been challenged by Michael Bowles, who stepped down as district chair to launch a campaign for House. That allowed Johnson, who was vice chair, to again become chair of the district organization that his wife serves.
The complaint outlines several allegations involving district operations, endorsements, precinct leadership appointments, and meeting procedures.
Among the claims, the signatories allege that Johnson falsely stated during a public meeting that he did not know the identities of precinct leaders because the previous chairman had failed to pass along that information. The complainants argue Johnson would have known the identities of those leaders because he presided over the district convention where they were elected. Johnson has previously served as chair of the district.
The complaint also alleges that Johnson refused to allow consideration of a motion to revisit previous endorsement decisions. According to the filing, party Rules Chair Charlie Franz had advised district members that the matter could be brought forward through a motion for reconsideration. The complainants contend Johnson blocked the motion from being heard.
Several allegations involve parliamentary procedure. The filing claims Johnson repeatedly refused to recognize motions that had been properly seconded and, in at least one instance, ruled a motion out of order because he disagreed with its substance.
The complainants further allege that Johnson declined to seat precinct leaders who were physically present and seeking recognition despite there being no competing candidates for those positions and no existing precinct leadership in the affected precincts.
A central allegation concerns a potential conflict of interest involving candidate endorsements. The complaint alleges Johnson refused to allow consideration of a vetted candidate (Bowles) who intended to challenge Rep. Johnson in an upcoming Republican primary. The signatories contend that Johnson ignored calls to recuse himself from decisions involving his spouse’s political interests and instead remained in the chair while overseeing discussions related to endorsements.
The complaint further alleges that Johnson cited the lack of an approved candidate-vetting tool as a reason to delay endorsement consideration until mid-July, but later supported canceling a July district meeting after the Alaska Republican Party had provided such a tool. The complainants argue those actions effectively prevented endorsement consideration before the August primary election. The group alleges that Johnson used the reasoning not to bring forward an endorsement of Mike is because the new rules for ARP and waiting on vetting tool. Charlie Franz confirmed that was only for the SCC vetting committee (Steve Johnson allegedly knew that) and to ask for reconsideration. So the group believes lied to the members at the meeting.
In their filing, the signatories describe what they characterize as a broader pattern of “gatekeeping and exclusionary conduct” that they say has limited participation by district members and concentrated control over district processes.
The complaint requests an independent review of meeting minutes, attendance records, convention reports, emails, rules communications, and other records. The group also asks the state party to preserve relevant documents and communications while any investigation is underway.
Among the remedies requested are the temporary suspension of Johnson’s duties during an investigation, the seating of precinct leaders who were allegedly denied recognition, reconsideration of endorsement decisions, and the adoption of conflict-of-interest safeguards.
The complaint emphasizes that the allegations are being presented for investigation and review and states that the signatories are prepared to provide sworn statements and supporting documentation.
The Alaska Republican Party had not publicly announced any action regarding the complaint as of publication. Johnson and Rep. Johnson have not publicly responded to the allegations.
The complaint was signed by Joshua Hanson, Hannah Hanson, Dan Kurka, Lonnet Kurka, Pam Melin, Nan Potts, Dana Raphanelio, Kathleen Shoop, Desiree Terry, Tim Terry, and James Ziegler.
2 thoughts on “Family feud: Complaint alleges Rep. DeLena Johnson’s husband abused authority as GOP district chair”
Good that some Matsu Republicans are looking to redirect the valley’s political direction by looking which “Republicans” are actively handing over Matsu to AKDemocrats.
I doubt your chair Warfield and committee will do anything at all.
The small crowd of Valley Republicans will have to create another way to change its local district leaders; which is looking a an impossibility to change Matsu Republicans with True Republicans while most Republican voters are government dependent; no more no less government dependent.
Hopefully the crowd of matsu republicans keep fighting even though time is running out (they got four years) before Matsu republicans realize they look like Anchorage and Juneau.
What would be really helpful to keeping the Matsu Red and Republican is Matsu Republican families pull their kids out of the Matsu school district and start raising and educating their kids Right.
What the heck. The district convention is every two years. District 25’s chair, Michael Bowles, stepped down to run for office, and the vice chair Steve Johnson, needed to move into the chair position, and it sounds like with pretty short notice. Why would he be expected to know the names of the precinct leaders? I am pretty sure the chair of the district I am in does not know the names of all the precinct leaders, nor in our district was there any fanfare or big issue with selecting those leaders, the volunteered, there was a vote to approve if I am recollecting correctly and that was that. I can see ignoring motions to be concerning. Something just seems off to me.