Anchorage Assembly work session reviews proposal to shift municipal elections to even-year Novembers and extend many local terms

At a Jan. 17 work session the Anchorage Assembly discussed AO 2024-125, an ordinance the presenter said would submit a ballot proposition for the April 1, 2025 election asking voters to move many municipal offices to four-year terms and consider shifting regular municipal elections to November in even-numbered years.

The presenter, who led the session, told members the ordinance has three goals: "to put the question before the voter," to "cut election costs roughly in half," and to "increase voter turnout by up to, and hopefully, 100% from where we are today, so from 30 to 60." He cited municipal and statewide figures for 2018–2024 and said the average municipal election cost in that period was "roughly $682,000," with the 2024 regular election about "$716,000." He also said some general expenses of about "$224,000" were not classified to specific elections and that the total cost for two recent races was about "$1,300,000."

Why it matters: The ordinance, as described to the assembly, aims to reduce the frequency of municipal elections (and associated costs) by moving from the current odd-year schedule to an even-year cycle with longer terms. A council or assembly action to change term lengths for elected offices requires a ballot proposition; the presenter emphasized that the term-length change is the portion that must go before voters, while some date changes could be made administratively.

Key details and constraints: The presenter said the proposal would affect the mayor, assembly seats, service-area supervisory boards and the Anchorage School District. He noted a specific constraint for the school district: it is governed, he said, by two Alaska statutes — one requiring three-year terms and another applying to home-rule municipalities — that could prevent immediate changes to school-board term lengths until state law is changed. The presenter warned that aligning municipal elections with state ballots raises technical issues because the municipality currently uses mail-in voting, drop boxes and absentee procedures that do not match all state methods.

Members asked technical and policy questions. Member Brawley sought implementation detail and asked whether the city’s fiscal-year calendar should be shifted if office terms and swearing-in dates change, noting a mayor who takes office Jan. 1 could inherit a budget they did not shape. Member Mulfield asked whether moving bond questions to November would speed construction timelines; the presenter said administrative staff would need to advise and noted that some authorized bond issuances have not yet been released.

Assembly members debated whether two-year or four-year assembly terms would be preferable. Supporters of four-year terms argued members need more than a year to learn the job and that longer terms preserve institutional knowledge; supporters of two-year terms said shorter terms can make it easier to recruit candidates and keep officials accountable. Members also raised concerns about staggering: if all seats are up at the same time there is a nonzero chance of a near-complete body turnover, which could disrupt constituency continuity and department relationships.

Costs and turnout projections: The presenter reiterated an estimate that shifting to an even-year schedule and lengthening terms could halve election-related costs — he cited an annual saving range of about "$340,000 to $414,000 per year" — and suggested turnout could rise from roughly 30% in municipal cycles toward rates seen in statewide or federal contests (the presenter cited likely ranges such as 42% in gubernatorial years and 61% in presidential years). He acknowledged turnout and many logistical alignments are uncertain and difficult to quantify.

No formal action was taken at the work session. The chair said the item will return on Tuesday for the assembly to consider ballot question deadlines and any formal amendments or votes.

The ordinance and technical materials referenced in the discussion were presented to members in slide form during the session; presenters and members flagged key implementation issues — statutory limits for the school district, differences in mail-in versus in-person ballot methods, the effect on bond timing, and how staggered terms would be preserved — as matters that require further administrative analysis before any final ballot language is set.