The Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly voted down Ordinance 2025-10, which would have rewritten absentee voting procedures to require absentee ballots be received by the close of polls on Election Day and to change witness-signature requirements.

The measure, sponsored by Assemblymember Aimee Haney, also attempted several other changes including requiring printed names next to signatures and (initially) limiting the number of ballots a private witness could attest to. The ordinance failed on a 2-7 final vote after amendments and multiple substitute motions.

Supporters of the ordinance, including Haney, said the changes were intended to increase confidence in election results and speed the canvass. Haney described the proposed changes as accommodating voters with different signature styles and said changing the deadline aligned the borough with a majority of states that require absentee ballots be received by Election Day.

Opponents — a mix of local voters, civic groups and former election workers — told the assembly the proposal would impose new, unnecessary barriers that would disproportionately affect rural residents, the elderly, homebound voters and service members.

Deborah Ryan, a longtime local election worker, told the assembly: "I do not support ordinance 20 25 dash 10. These proposed changes are unnecessary, cumbersome, and places an undue burden on voters and North Star Borough staff." Linda Witt, co‑president of the League of Women Voters of the Tanana Valley, urged the assembly to "vote no on this ordinance because it creates unnecessary barriers to voting."

Speakers also raised practical concerns about local mail service. Multiple commenters said requiring ballots to be received by Election Day would force voters to mail their ballots many days earlier than they do now, increasing the chance that valid votes would be excluded because of postal delays. Others, including some community members, said the standard for military and overseas voters would be manageable because many service members have access to electronic submission through base channels.

Assemblymember Haney amended the ordinance during debate to remove a section that would have limited how many absentee ballots a private witness may attest to, and the assembly also debated and amended the time and postmark language. The final motion to adopt the ordinance failed 2-7.

The ordinance touched off some of the most sustained public testimony of the meeting, with more than two dozen community members calling in or attending to share their views. The record shows a split between those prioritizing faster, earlier final results and those prioritizing broader access for voters who rely on the mail or are unable to use electronic filing.

What happens next: With the ordinance defeated, the borough’s current absentee rules remain unchanged: ballots postmarked on or before Election Day and received within the existing seven‑day window remain eligible under current borough code. Assemblymembers and staff indicated they expect continuing debate and that any future reforms would require more technical drafting and public outreach.