October 2009: ACT volunteers put the question of assembly
term limits back on the ballot where it was once again approved by
borough voters. This citizen's initiative can not
be amended or repealed by the assembly until after the 2011 election.
October 2007: Introduced the original version of our
ACT-CAP Initiative, which was denied ballot access by
the Borough Clerk. Our attorney is prepared to fight to
protect YOUR RIGHT to BALLOT ACCESS and to control
Borough spending with a total Borough REVENUE CAP. We
are currently working to raise the necessary funds to
accomplish this goal.
We have competent and experienced attorneys working for
A.C.T., who are fighting for YOUR RIGHTS. If you agree
that the borough should have a revenue cap, please help
us, and together it will become a reality. Your
contribution could save you thousands on future property
tax bills! Click
HERE and contribute today.
June 2007: Introduced Citizens’ Initiatives for term
limits, one applicable for the Borough Assembly and
another for the School Board.
Both Ballot Propositions PASSED in October 2007.
The Borough Assembly subsequently refused to obey this
new Borough law, which forced A.C.T. to raise funds and
sue the Borough again. A.C.T. won the term limits
lawsuit, applicable for the assembly and the first
incumbent Assembly Member was term limited from office
in 2008. Two assembly members were limited out of
office in 2009 and three more will be limited out in
2010. Remember, term limits had been approved by the voters
twice prior to our successful initiative and the Borough
Assembly ignored those voter approved term limits each
time! Our successful lawsuit forced the borough to
finally obey the will of the people.
June 2005:
ACT introduced a Citizens’ Initiative, which would require
60% voter approval for the borough to increase sales
taxes beyond 2%.
The Ballot Proposition was PASSED in October 2005.
The Borough Assembly raised the sales tax rate to 3%
anyway and ACT sued the Borough. This suit has been
fully funded by members of the public and will
ultimately be decided by the Alaska Supreme Court.
April 2005:
ACT introduced a Citizens’ Initiative to lower the limit to
$1,000,000
that the Borough could spend for new Capital projects
and to require 60% voter approval.
The Ballot Proposition was PASSED in October 2005.
The assembly chose to ignored it and then used public
tax dollars challenged the election results in court.
We think the public should approve expensive capital
projects which we will ultimately pay for and the
borough position is that the
assembly has exclusive authority to decide how to spend
OUR money. ACT lawyers are now going to argue this
case before the Alaska Supreme
Court.
.gif)