Alaska Statutes

Alaska Stat. § 29.26.330 (2026)

Form of recall ballot

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AK-LEGakleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 29.26.330. Form of recall ballot.
A recall ballot must contain
     (1) the grounds for recall as stated in 200 words or less on the recall petition;

     (2) a statement by the official named on the recall petition of 200 words or less, if the statement is filed with the clerk for publication and public inspection at least 20 days before the election;

     (3) the following question: “Shall (name of person) be recalled from the office of (office)? Yes [ ] No [ ]”.




Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1990–1995 · leading case: McCormick v. Smith, 793 P.2d 1042 (Alaska 1990).
McCormick v. Smith, 793 P.2d 1042 (Alaska 1990). “Under AS 29.26.330, the grounds for recall are carried forward to the recall ballot "as stated .”
von Stauffenberg v. Comm. for an Honest & Ethical Sch. Bd., 903 P.2d 1055 (Alaska 1995). “The statutes offer the recall target an opportunity to make a rebuttal statement of 200 words or less which will be placed on the recall ballot alongside the statement of the charges.”
Von Stauffenberg v. COMTE. FOR HON. SC. BD., 903 P.2d 1055 (Alaska 1995). “The statutes offer the recall target an opportunity to make a rebuttal statement of 200 words or less which will be placed on the recall ballot alongside the statement of the charges.”
— Alaska Stat. § 29.26.330(2) — 2 cases
von Stauffenberg v. Comm. for an Honest & Ethical Sch. Bd., 903 P.2d 1055 (Alaska 1995). “The statutes offer the recall target an opportunity to make a rebuttal statement of 200 words or less which will be placed on the recall ballot alongside the statement of the charges.”
Von Stauffenberg v. COMTE. FOR HON. SC. BD., 903 P.2d 1055 (Alaska 1995). “The statutes offer the recall target an opportunity to make a rebuttal statement of 200 words or less which will be placed on the recall ballot alongside the statement of the charges.”
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.