Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 16.05.280 (2026)
Removal of board members
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 16.05.280. Removal of board members.
The governor may only remove a board member for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or misconduct in office, or because the member while serving on the board is convicted of a misdemeanor for violating a statute or regulation related to fish or game or of a felony, and shall do so by delivering to the member a written copy of the charges and giving the member an opportunity to be heard in person or through counsel at a public hearing before the governor or a designee upon at least 10 days' notice by registered mail. The member may confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses. Upon removal, the governor or a designee shall file in the proper state office the findings and a complete statement of all charges made against the member.
The governor may only remove a board member for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or misconduct in office, or because the member while serving on the board is convicted of a misdemeanor for violating a statute or regulation related to fish or game or of a felony, and shall do so by delivering to the member a written copy of the charges and giving the member an opportunity to be heard in person or through counsel at a public hearing before the governor or a designee upon at least 10 days' notice by registered mail. The member may confront and cross-examine adverse witnesses. Upon removal, the governor or a designee shall file in the proper state office the findings and a complete statement of all charges made against the member.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1
case, 1995–1995 · leading case: Peninsula Mktg. Ass'n v. Rosier, 890 P.2d 567 (Alaska 1995).
Peninsula Mktg. Ass'n v. Rosier, 890 P.2d 567 (Alaska 1995). “221; AS 16.05.280. These protective measures were instituted to ensure that fisheries decisions are made by knowledgeable persons based on their independent judgment, rather than immediate political pressure.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.