State election regulators are investigating whether Gov. Sarah Palin violated state law when she said in front of TV cameras last summer that she would vote no on a controversial ballot measure that sought stricter limits on water pollution discharges from mines.

Ballot Measure 4, the "Clean Water" initiative, failed at the polls in August after one of the most expensive campaign advertising battles in Alaska history, costing more than $7 million total. The measure was sponsored by Alaskans who oppose developing the massive copper and gold Pebble prospect in Southwest Alaska. Its biggest opponent was the state's mining companies, which collectively spent more $6 million fighting it.

Six days before the election last August, someone asked Palin during a press conference for her opinion on Measure 4. She responded: "Let me take my governor's hat off just for a minute here and tell you, personally Prop 4, I vote no on that."

Palin went on to say that she trusts state regulators to make sure that Alaska mines operate safely.

The supporters of Measure 4 said they were outraged. A governor can't just take her hat off during an official state event and take a private position on a ballot measure, they said. Her comments violated state law and may have been a decisive blow that killed the initiative's chances, according to Brian Kraft, a sport lodge owner and Pebble opponent. He raised the issue against Palin in a more wide-ranging complaint about the state's taking sides on Measure 4.

On Friday, the Alaska Public Offices Commission held a hearing on the Palin issue. The five-member commission has 11 days to issue a decision in writing.

APOC needs to consider whether it even has the authority to regulate statements made by public officials regarding ballot measures in their personal time or while doing state work, said Mary Ann Lundquist, the state's senior assistant attorney general, in her brief defending the governor.

State law says that a governor cannot spend money or "provide anything of value" to influence the outcome of a ballot measure unless the Legislature has appropriated money for that purpose.

Palin's one minute of sharing her opinion on Measure 4 after someone asked her what she thought about it does not meet that criteria; also, Palin's right to express her own opinion is enshrined in the state's Constitution, Lundquist said.

Kraft's attorney, Scott Kendall, disagreed, saying that Palin's statements provided Measure 4 opponents with "valuable aid" -- free publicity -- just before the vote, prompting a flurry of ads featuring her picture and saying "Gov. Sarah Palin Personally Opposes Measure 4."

There wouldn't have been anything wrong with Palin expressing her views on Measure 4 if she had done it on her own time, Kraft said Friday.

If Palin had come out in favor of Measure 4, the mining industry would have cried foul just like its supporters have, he said.

To this day, local pollsters and groups who lobbied for and against Measure 4 disagree about whether Palin's comments had a significant impact on the election's outcome.

David Dittman, an Anchorage pollster, said Friday that he ran a poll about 10 days before the election -- before Palin made her comments -- that showed the initiative would fail by a margin of 8 to 13 percentage points.

But one of the initiative's sponsors, Art Hackney, an Anchorage political consultant, said the sponsors' Cromer Group poll that ended six days before the election showed that the ballot measure would pass by 20 percentage points.

He said he believes Palin's comments swung the election. The proposed law lost by 13 percentage points.