More signatures needed for recall

MAT-SU -- Calling it a near-infringement of their constitutional rights, the group working to recall Mat-Su Sen. Scott Ogan is preparing to hit the streets to obtain about 300 additional signatures for its recall effort after receiving an e-mail from the Alaska Division of Elections that its target amount was too low.

Recall organizers said in September, when they began discussing the plan, they were told they needed to obtain 10 percent of 10,187, or 1,019 signatures from people who voted in Senate District H. The group wrapped up its efforts this week, double-checking each of the more than 1,400 signatures it had obtained against a Division of Elections list. They were shooting for a comfortable margin above 1,019, organizer Bill Marks said, and had a margin of about 50 extra votes -- or so they thought.

Monday, the group worked to get everything together and sent out e-mails and made phone calls notifying supporters and members of the press they planned to drop the signatures off at the division office in Anchorage Tuesday afternoon. Robin McLean, who has acted as a liaison between the group and the division, said she had a lengthy conversation with Tom Godkin, the division's elections supervisor, shortly after 8 a.m. Tuesday, and let him know once again of the group's plans to drop the nearly 1,100 signatures off at 1:30 that afternoon. McLean said she asked numerous questions to make sure the recall group had everything needed before turning in the petitions.

During that conversation, McLean said she also asked for written confirmation of the number of signatures needed to begin printing recall petition booklets. She said she told Godkin she planned to leave for Anchorage around 10 a.m., and hoped to have the confirmation at that point.

McLean checked her e-mail several times that morning, hoping to see a response before she left. In the meantime, she said, she had called members of the recall committee to give them the green light. Marks said people were planning to drive to Anchorage from Willow and elsewhere in the Upper Susitna Valley -- himself included. When McLean checked her e-mail one last time at 10:13 a.m., many of the group were already on their way.

In McLean's mailbox at 10:13 was a letter from Godkin -- one she said she could barely believe -- stating the petition application must have at least 1,273 signatures from qualified voters in District H.

"After all that, he sends an e-mail that maybe I don't even check," McLean said. "We came about five minutes from having our constitutional right to do this infringed upon by an error, at best."

Laura Glazier, director of the division, said the original 1,019 number was apparently 10 percent of the number of votes cast in the District H election. The proper number, she said, is 10 percent of the times counted -- or ballots cast -- in the district race, which was 12,730 voters.

Glazier said she never personally worked the math, although she did look at the recall group's Web site, www.oganissogone.org, and read previous articles relating to the recall effort. She said she doesn't know how the error went unnoticed, and denied any implications that the delay was politically motivated.

Glazier said she got a flurry of phone calls from people involved with the recall effort, some of whom alleged that the numbers were changed upon recommendation of the Alaska Attorney General Gregg Renkes or Lt. Gov. Loren Leman.

"I've never even met him," Glazier said of Renkes, and she said she didn't receive any phone calls from Leman, either. "There's nobody calling me," Glazier said. The answer, she said, was much more simply explained.

"I feel terrible. The timing was bad -- I don't know how we had the ongoing miscommunication so long," Glazier said. "But I know it's a mistake -- and it's that simple. We're going to do the best we can and say we're sorry, and go on."

Glazier said she mailed a letter of apology, and has spoken with several involved in the recall effort. She said she believes the division acted correctly in notifying the recall group, despite the late date.

"I tried to see if there was a different way to interpret [the statute]," Glazier said. "But it's better to have somebody be mad at me than to just make a change in the law."

Marks said he's still skeptical, mostly due to the timing of the e-mail reply. If it hadn't been for the delay in responding between 8:30 and 10:30 a.m., he said, he'd be able to take the news for what Glazier said it was -- a mistake. Although he said he's not a subscriber to conspiracy theories, he said he believes the division may be under pressure from beyond Renkes and Leman.

"I don't believe any lawmaker wants to see it happen," Marks said, pointing out that the recall process had never before been initiated on an Alaska legislator. "You crack that, and it'll set the stage for more."

Marks said if the jump in the number of signatures to gather was meant to dampen the spirits of those involved in the recall, it's done the opposite.

"People are just that much more energized," Marks said.