Opinion ID: 2584102
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Applying a substantial compliance standard is consistent with the accurate representation language of AS 39.50.030(a).

Text: Grimm and McGahan's private enforcement action under AS 39.50.100 seeking an AS 39.50.060(b) forfeiture necessarily assumed that Wagoner failed to satisfy AS 39.50.030. [24] Subsection .030(a) requires that each disclosure statement be an accurate representation of the financial affairs of the public official or candidate. [25] The criterion for measuring compliance with the substantive requirements of AS 39.50 is therefore whether the disclosure provides an accurate representation of the candidate's finances. To apply subsection .060(b)'s penalty provisions, at a minimum a court would have to find that a candidate failed to provide an accurate representation under subsection.030(a). Is strict compliance with the disclosure requirements necessary to provide an accurate representation of a candidate's finances? The answer is no. Accurate means variously in exact conformity to fact, or conforming closely to a standard. [26] Use of representation as part of the statutory standard is more consistent with the latter definition. A representation is a depiction or description, [27] and the phrase accurate representation implies close conformity rather than absolute precision. An accurate representation does not necessarily connote or imply flawless perfection; it can be achieved with something less than absolute exactitude. We therefore read accurate representation in subsection .030(a) as not precluding a substantial compliance standard for enforcement of subsection .060(b). A candidate can comply with subsection .030(a) for the purposes of subsection .060(b) without strictly complying with the substantive disclosure requirements.