APOC complaint filed against Rep. Zack Fields

By SUZANNE DOWNING

March 30, 2026 – An Anchorage resident has filed a complaint with the Alaska Public Offices Commission alleging that Anchorage Democratic Rep. Zack Fields improperly used a legislative update to advocate for passage of municipal bonds on the April 7 Anchorage ballot.

Sami Graham submitted the complaint after receiving what she described as a “Representative’s Update” mailed to her home on March 19. According to the filing, the mailer arrived at roughly the same time as her Anchorage vote-by-mail ballot and urged support for four municipal bond propositions.

Graham alleges the mailing lacked a required APOC disclaimer and constituted election advocacy using public resources. She contends the timing of the mailing, arriving alongside ballots, was intended “for maximum impact” on voters.

The complaint cites Alaska Statute 15.13.145(b), which governs the use of public funds to influence ballot measures. The statute allows government entities to use funds to influence ballot propositions only if the money has been specifically appropriated for that purpose by law or ordinance.

Graham argues that the legislative update violated that provision by advocating for passage of the bonds without such an appropriation.

She is also requesting expedited review by the Alaska Public Offices Commission, because the complaint meets the required criteria:

• The action could materially affect the outcome of the April 7 election
• The alleged violation could cause irreparable harm that penalties would not remedy
• There is reasonable cause to believe a violation occurred or will occur

Fields has a strong political background, having worked for the Alaska Democratic Party and the AFL-CIO and is experienced in campaign communications. He is experienced in APOC regulations and campaign laws.

The Anchorage municipal election is conducted entirely by mail, with ballots distributed in mid-March and due by April 7.

The complaint centers on whether the mailer crossed the line from informational constituent communication into advocacy for specific ballot propositions — a distinction that has been the subject of prior APOC disputes involving elected officials.