Based on Election Day returns, the number of uncounted absentee and early ballots, and what is known about these voters, Alan Gross has no realistic path to victory.

Some 62,000 votes will be counted and announced on Tuesday, Nov. 10, after 5 pm. The votes will be announced in two batches, one at 5 pm, and one much later in the evening, when election officials finish their work for the day.
 
Assuming there are approximately 147,600 ballots, and 25% are from registered Republicans, and another 25% are from registered Democrats, Gross would need to win more than 90% of remaining ballots cast by registered Undeclared, non-partisan, and third party voters.
 
This figure does not take into account the third-party candidate John Wayne Howe – who took approximately 5% of the vote on election day.
 
When all ballots are counted, the MRAK crystal ball predicts that Dan Sullivan will beat Gross decisively:
 
Current Vote Totals:
 
·Dan Sullivan: 118,978 (62.22%)
·Al Gross: 61,362 (32.09%)
·John Wayne Howe: 10,532 (5.51%)
 
Senator Sullivan leads Al Gross by a resounding 57,616 votes.
 
Based on information from the Alaska Division of Elections on Nov. 6, of the 131,536 uncounted absentee and early ballots:
o   34,257 ballots cast by registered Republicans
o   30,063 ballots cast by registered Democrats
o   67,216 ballots cast by registered Undeclared, Nonpartisan, and others.
 
If all registered Republicans vote for Dan Sullivan:
 
· Dan Sullivan will have: 153,235
· Gross would need to receive over 97% of the remaining 97,279 ballots from registered Democrats, undeclared, nonpartisan and other ballots.
 
Election Projection:

If Sullivan receives 20% of remaining ballots and John Wayne Howe receives 3% of undeclared, nonpartisan and other ballots (67,216 ballots):
 
13,443 for Sullivan 166,678 vote total
51.66%, a win by +7.3%

81,820 for Gross
143,182 vote total – 44.36%

10,532 for Howe
12,906 vote total – 3.99%
 
(+7.3%) win for Sullivan.

The Division of Elections will count some 62,000 ballots today, which is day seven since the election ended on Nov. 3 at 8 pm.

On election night, 36,268 were counted, which means that by the end of today, over 98,000 ballots will have been counted in two counting sessions.

Comparing that to the 15 days of counting in 2016 when 123,246 ballots had been counted, the division will be at about 80 percent of that number. 2016 was a record year for ballots that came in from outside their precincts (by-mail, online, fax, early, in person, special needs and questioned). This year is a record year for absentee ballots.

Results will be released at 5 pm, and then again later in the evening. The Nome region is not expected to be counted because the U.S. Mail had not yet delivered the voter registers from the villages in the area.

The estimated ballots cast in this election is now believed to be over 150,000. The deadline for them to arrive is Nov. 13 (overseas ballots have until Nov. 18 to arrive).

By SCOTT LEVESQUE

The acting mayor of Anchorage shall not be recalled — at least not this acting mayor, and not by this petition request.

The Anchorage Municipal Clerk’s Office denied two petitions on Monday — one to recall Acting Mayor Austin Quinn-Davidson, and another to remove Assembly member Kameron Perez-Verdia.

The denial was at the recommendation of the Municipal Attorney’s Office.

Municipal Attorney Kate Vogel stated to the petitioners that the recall petition “does not satisfy the legal standards required for recall, and we, therefore, recommend that the application for recall petition be denied.” 

Vogel explained, “The allegation that an assembly member voted yes on an ordinance, without more, is nothing more than a statement of political disagreement with the elected official’s legislative decisions. But this is not a valid basis for recall in Alaska.”

A recall is permitted only under three substantive statutory grounds: Misconduct in office, incompetence, or failure to perform prescribed duties. All three present the public with a broad scope for potential recall efforts. 

The Municipal Attorney’s Office is using a narrow and subjective review process to determine a petition’s validity and David Nees, one of the recall organizers, is dumbfounded:

“We’re really frustrated with it [the decision]. She [Vogel] is tightly interpreting a law that is supposed to be loosely interpreted so the general public, not attorney-types or full-time politicians, can participate in the process without being tangled in red tape and regulations.” 

Delays from the Clerk and Municipal Attorney on the recall petitions have become standard since Sept. 2, when the first denial was issued after 30 days of review

Alaska State Statues, Section 29.26.290., states the Clerk’s Office must, within 10 days after the date a petition is filed: (1) certify on the petition whether it is sufficient; and (2) if the petition is insufficient, identify the insufficiency and notify the contact person by certified mail.

In August, the Municipal Clerk’s Office declared it would take 30 days, not 10 days stated in the statute, to certify a sufficient or insufficient recall petition. The Muni has also stated it has no certain deadline it must meet in terms of responding to an application for a recall petition.

Thus far, the only recall petition approved by the Clerk’s Office is a watered-down version, rewritten by the Municipality Attorney. That petition is to remove Assembly Chairman Felix Rivera.

Additionally, the sponsors of that petition request were initially informed they would not be allowed to hire signature collectors, although they have since determined on their own that they have a legal right to do so.

The Anchorage Clerk’s Office has denied four separate recall petitions — for Quinn-Davidson and Perez-Verdia and two recall petition requests against Assembly member Meg Zalatel, at the Municipality Attorney’s recommendation. Rivera’s is the only recall that is able to move forward at this writing.

As for the recent recall rejections from the Clerk’s Office, David Nees sees a long legal battle ahead:

“Yes, we are going to court. These decisions make no sense, and unfortunately, our only two options are to rewrite a recall petition, which we’ve already done, or head to court. We’ll go with the latter. It’s just so sad. The municipality keeps taking a narrow approach to the recall process, including how you can collect signatures. Personally, it’s against the fundamental groundwork of the state constitution.”

A prior attempt to recall Assembly member Zalatel — the first recall to be filed — is now awaiting review by Judge Kevin Saxby, after an appeal was filed by citizen Russell Biggs.