because they would no longer be moot. There was no Open Meetings Act violation; DNR simply listened to public complaints about loose horses. Any information gathered by DNR as a result of those investigations was not conclusive on any issue in dispute before the hearing o hat agency directive to use certain standard in awarding contracts was not regulation when agency had repeatedly required that standard and when standard was consistent with existing regulation). 13 . See Messerli v. Department of Natural Resources, 768 P.2d 1112, 1117-18 (Alaska 1989) (concluding that policy manual was not regulation because definitibns in manual merely conditioned already existing right), overruled on other grounds by Olson v. State, Dep't of Natural Resources, 799 P.2d 289, 292-93 (Alaska 1990) (<HOLDING>). 14 . See Op. at 143-144. 15 . See Op. at 139.
holding that the standard of review under rule 60 is abuse of discretion holding that rational basis test used in messerli was incorrect and employing abuse of discretion standard of review for discretionary acts not requiring formal procedures to allow agencies latitude to act commensurate with their discretion holding failure to exercise discretion is abuse of discretion holding that the appropriate standard of review is abuse of discretion holding that the judge did not abuse his discretion but applied an incorrect standard