An Anchorage Assembly survey intended to measure public opinion on whether to change the Municipality of Anchorage’s official seal has instead ignited controversy after Assembly Chair Chris Constant dismissed results that did not align with his preferred outcome.
The city released an online survey late last month asking the public to weigh in on five seal options, including one option that made no changes to the existing seal. Participation was open, unrestricted by residency, and accessible to anyone with the link. Anyone in the world, as was pointed out by The Alaska Story that asked “what could possibly go wrong?”
Earlier this week, Anchorage IT officials reported that more than 2,100 responses were submitted in under an hour, many using nearly identical language and favoring the option to keep the current seal.
City officials said the volume and similarity of responses suggested automation or coordinated activity, though they acknowledged they could not definitively prove fraud.
“It’s possible, not plausible, but it is possible that these are possibly legitimate survey responses?” Eagle River Assemblyman Jared Goecker asked during a work session.
Anchorage Chief Information Security Officer Jon Rendulic said that statistically, it’s improbable that the responses were legitimate, but admitted he can’t prove it.
Constant later characterized the survey as being “rigged,” arguing that responses opposing a new seal were influenced by what he described as misinformation about cost. He said some respondents cited concerns that replacing the seal would be expensive, a claim he attributed to local media coverage. He said within minutes of that media coverage he got hundreds of comments saying it was too expensive.
According to Constant, those cost concerns should not be considered valid because municipal code allows the seal to be phased in gradually as materials are replaced over time.
“When you need new letterhead, you will add the new letterhead and you’ll print it when it’s time,” Constant said. “When we buy a new snowplow, we will add it to the new snowplow, but we’re not going to send the fleet back in for paint jobs.” It was unclear what he intended to point out.
City officials did not dispute that the survey was open to anyone worldwide, nor did they implement safeguards to prevent automated or mass submissions. Constant said, without proof, that the votes he didn’t agree with were by “bots,” or automatic digital players.
Despite those design flaws, Constant went ahead and adjusted the survey results to the Assembly that removed the 2,100 responses he deemed malicious and those that cited concerns about costs, because he said that is an invalid reason. After excluding those responses and reasons, Constant said the remaining results showed roughly a 50–50 split on whether the seal should be changed.
Even with those exclusions, the single option that received the most support overall was keeping the existing seal. No single new design received a clear majority among respondents.
The proposed seal designs all feature a central anchor and a yellow-and-blue color scheme. Some incorporate traditional or simplified Dena’ina quillwork patterns.
The Anchorage Assembly is scheduled to select one of the seal options at its meeting Tuesday night, despite unresolved questions about the integrity, design, and interpretation of the survey intended to guide that decision.
Dismissing votes and discarding reasons after the fact may undermine the very purpose of public input, particularly when the process was designed and approved by the same officials now rigging its outcome.
Watch the meeting on YouTube at this link.
Anchorage opens municipal seal survey to the whole world: What could possibly go wrong?
7 thoughts on “Anchorage Assembly chair becomes an ‘election denier,’ dismissing results of public survey”
It appears that my vote – and I only voted ONE TIME – was excluded due to our petulant Assembly Chair not getting his way. It’s not hard to believe that a majority of the votes were cast to retain the original seal. Why? Because the “indigenous” graphic artist put in less than minimal effort (and that’s being polite) in crafting a better option than what existed. If anyone knows how to make a Path in Adobe Illustrator and, has existing art on-hand, they’d know that it takes about 5-10 minutes – including creating the circle that he applied the Path to. Aside from using Mrs. Kimura’s art and making a Path he did nothing.
A list of all excluded votes must be shared. Constant can F himself if he threw mine out.
” I reject your reality and substitute my own” .. Constant-ly complaining
Hey! I am being disenfranchised!
I voted once for keeping our current seal. It is an expense we can avoid. IF we are facing a “fiscal cliff” nice to have feel-good projects should be canceled immediately.
Yet what do we expect from our assembly chair with a history of mouthing the F-U at a constituent or flashing the loser sign….
We all lost when Constants district chose a loser to lead the mayor and everyone else making decisions behind closed doors.
I responded to the survey, supported keeping the existing seal and did not cite cost as a consideration. I hope I inflamed our petulant and obnoxious Assembly chair by observing that transforming the seal to suggest a deep Native connection to Anchorage is not supported by the likely facts. The small Native settlement at Eklutna is twenty-five miles from modern Anchorage at the mouth of Ship Creek. Native presence in the Anchorage bowl was very limited. I wish the Eklutna Natives no ill but pretending that Anchorage has Native roots dishonors those that actually established Anchorage. I hope Mr. Constant laments the little remaining time he has on the Assembly.
Who out there actually thought the outcome of this phony exercise would not be predetermined by the low down commie rats on the assembly?