EAdIElection Administration Index

No matching sections in corpus.

The statute codifies a right to judicial review with clear standing ('any person aggrieved'), defined venue ('superior court'), and implicit timeline context (the 40-day window). However, the criterion asks for standing, timeline, AND venue to be defined. The section provides standing and venue clearly but does not establish a general procedural timeline for filing the review action—only a postponement rule if review occurs within 40 days before the election. This is a partial satisfaction of the accountability structure.

“Any person aggrieved by a determination of precinct boundaries by the director may bring a civil action to have the determination reviewed in the superior court.”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: This section addresses decision-making procedures for an election board but does not establish the board's existence, core mandate, or constitutional grounding. It presupposes the board already exists and merely prescribes majority-rule voting. No language here grounds the commission in the constitution or even statute; it is a procedural rule that assumes institutional scaffolding already in place elsewhere. COMM.1 requires constitutional (or at minimum statutory) establishment of the commission itself—not procedural details about how it votes.

The Redistricting Planning Committee is statutorily composed of five members appointed by four separate institutional actors: the senate president (legislative), the house speaker (legislative), the chief justice (judicial), and the governor (executive, two appointments). No single branch controls composition; the governor holds only 40% of appointments, and the combined legislative and judicial branches hold 60%. This structure protects against unilateral capture and meets the multi-branch appointment requirement.

“One member shall be appointed by the president of the senate, one member shall be appointed by the speaker of the house of representatives, one member shall be appointed by the chief justice of the Alaska Supreme Court, and two members shall be appointed by the governor.”

The statute establishes fixed five-year terms for all commissioners, explicitly mandates staggered expiration cycles across political parties, and limits tenure to one full term (with narrow exception for unexpired-term fillers). The statute also imposes strict separation-of-office requirements during tenure (no elective candidacy, party office, lobbying, or political contributions except presidential). These provisions collectively ground term protection in statute with meaningful safeguards against mid-term removal and single-party domination.

“Members of the commission serve staggered terms of five years, or until a successor is appointed and qualifies. The terms of no two members who are members of the same political party or political group may expire in consecutive years. A member may not serve more than one term.”

The statute mandates balanced composition of the state ballot counting review board by requiring the director to appoint an equal number of persons (two each) from the governor's party and the second-largest party statewide. This statutory requirement prevents single-party capture of the board's composition and ensures structural political balance regardless of which party controls the directorship.

“The director shall appoint two persons from the political party of which the governor is a member and two persons from the political party that received the second largest number of votes statewide in the preceding gubernatorial election to participate in the state ballot counting review.”

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Alaska Stat. § 15.13.068 is a substantive campaign finance rule governing foreign contributions and expenditures. It contains no provision establishing an election authority budget, funding line, or budgetary independence structure. The criterion requires statutory protection of election authority funding from mid-cycle executive reallocation; this section addresses only foreign-influence restrictions on contributors.

No matching sections in corpus.

No section in the FTS-surfaced candidates satisfies this criterion. Best signal: Section 15.13.068 prohibits foreign-influenced corporations and foreign nationals from making contributions and expenditures in connection with elections, but this addresses campaign finance regulation of candidates and political committees, not the funding of the election authority itself or election administration vendors. The criterion FUND.3 requires statutory prohibition on foreign-source funding of the election administration agency and vendors; this section does not address that structural safeguard.

No matching sections in corpus.

The statute mandates that the director provide comprehensive training for election officials (both full-time staff and board members/temporary employees) before each primary election in even-numbered years, with a written plan filed by March 1. This establishes a statutorily-required training program with defined frequency (biennial, before primary elections) and scope (comprehensive coverage of multiple categories of election workers).

“The director shall, before each primary election in even-numbered years, provide for a comprehensive training program for election officials, both the full-time members of the staff of the division of elections and those who are appointed as members of election boards under AS 15.10.120 — 15.10.140 and other temporary election employees.”

No matching sections in corpus.

The statute establishes that the director has approval authority and references Federal EAC certification as a consideration, but it delegates the substantive certification criteria to the Federal Election Commission rather than codifying them in Alaska statute. The statute provides minimal procedural structure (no codified timeline, no explicit public-comment requirement, no independent evaluators beyond the director, and no standards beyond deference to federal criteria and AS 15.15.032(c)). This is a framework provision, not a complete codification of the certification process.

“The director may approve a voting machine or vote tally system for use in an election in the state upon consideration of factors relevant to the administration of state elections, including whether the Federal Election Commission has certified the voting machine or vote tally system to be in compliance with the voting system standards approved by the Federal Election Commission as required by 42 U.S.C. 15481(a)(5) (Help America Vote Act of 2002).”

No matching sections in corpus.

No matching sections in corpus.