Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Signature Match topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Voters and commissioners press for better outreach after 450 ballots fail signature matches
Summary
Public commenters and several commissioners urged more voter education and procedural review after the commission rejected 450 ballots for no signature match; staff said cured ballots were counted but that many voters did not cure their ballots.
During public comment at the April 23 meeting of the Anchorage Election Commission, residents and commissioners focused on the commission’s largest reject category: 450 ballots listed as having no signature match on the ballot return envelope.
Public commenter Joel Borgquist told the commission that many voters whose ballots were uncured appeared to be valid and were surprised to learn their ballots were challenged. "There's 450 people who, for all the information that I've been able to see, are probably all valid and were thrown out for no fault of their own," Borgquist said, urging the commission to examine whether cure notices reached voters and whether outreach could be improved.
Another commenter, Theo Ransom, noted that some voters with nerve pain or other conditions cannot sign as they once did, and that first‑time or younger voters may have signatures on state ID that no longer resemble current signatures. "I observed three people with nerve pain that could not sign the way they signed in years past," Ransom said.
Commissioners acknowledged the problem and repeatedly praised clerk staff for careful processing. Commissioner Lehman said he was "actually quite impressed with your ability to do that, follow the law," while Commissioner Courtney thanked staff and emphasized the difficulty of mail‑in signature comparison work.
Clerk staff said the office attempted to contact voters and that cured ballots were counted; uncured ballots remained rejected. Commissioners discussed practical fixes such as clearer signature prompts on envelopes (for example, a red arrow or different ink to draw attention to the signature line) and further public education about updating reference signatures with the state roll. Several commissioners also said they would raise broader policy or outreach questions with the Anchorage Assembly.
The exchange highlighted a procedural tension common to mail‑in systems: the legal obligation to compare signatures and the public interest in maximizing voter participation. The commission did not change signature‑match rules at the meeting but directed staff to explore printing options for envelopes and to continue outreach and cure processes.
The commission will forward the signed canvass report to the assembly for certification and staff will prepare any referral packages for prosecutorial review where the commission specifically requested them.
