Fair Maps and Power Grabs

/in , , ,

New legislative district boundaries are drawn every ten years based on the most recent census data. In 2021 the Alaska Redistricting Board adopted a final redistricting plan for Alaska, which delineates the districts legislators will represent. The politics of redistricting are rife with power grabs, and the maps are almost always litigated.

The balance of power in the Legislature is closely divided between Republicans and the Tri-Partisan coalition of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. The Redistricting Board is composed of a majority of Republicans, and the outcome was a map that was challenged in court on numerous fronts. The central point was that the state Senate district pairing part of east Anchorage and Eagle River constituted an “unconstitutional political gerrymander.” The court agreed and gave the Redistricting Board until April 15 to revise its maps.

Each Senate District contains two House districts. In the case of the Eagle River/East Anchorage gerrymander, the Redistricting Board adopted a Senate District that, instead of combining the two staunchly conservative Eagle River House districts, merged one of the conservative Eagle River districts with a more moderate Muldoon district. Notably, that district in question has a much greater BIPOC population than Eagle River. Should the courts have left the Senate district in place, the effect would have been a district that watered down the voting impact of Muldoon residents. There was intense disagreement from Melanie Bahnke and Nicole Borromeo, the only two redistricting board members not appointed by staunch Republicans–and the only two Alaska Native women on the Board. Ms. Bahnke and Borromeo stood up to the rest of the Board when this plan was adopted on a majority line vote, and their fight for fair representation ultimately prevailed.

The Alaska Redistricting Board has been required by the courts to revise their maps so that Alaskan voices are more equitably represented. The Redistricting Board will take public testimony tomorrow (Saturday, April 2) at 2:00 p.m. To participate in:
Anchorage, call 907-563-9085
Juneau: 907-586-9085
Other: 844-586-9085.

This Saturday is a critical opportunity to submit comments to the Redistricting Board. If you cannot be at Saturday’s meeting, you can also submit written comments in advance at https://www.akredistrict.org/map-comment/

The main talking points are:

The Board should act immediately to comply with the court’s requirements and minimize confusion if this process is dragged out. It is in the public interest to swiftly adopt a map with final senate pairings so that voters can familiarize themselves with their new districts, precincts, and voting locations, on top of a new election system (RCV) and an unprecedented special election. The redistricting Board has an obligation to the public to resolve this quickly to avoid voter confusion and disenfranchisement.

In Anchorage, the Board should adopt the Senate pairings proposed by Redistricting Board member Melanie Bahnke instead of coming up with new pairings. These pairings, proposed by Melanie Bahnke, have been presented and considered on the record and were informed by public input and testimony. These pairings do not change districts’ underlying deviation and uphold the one person, one vote principle. In addition, they are the common-sense geographic and socioeconomic pairings (keeping Muldoon w/ Muldoon, West Anc. w/ West Anc, Eagle River w/ Eagle River, etc.).

Plan to participate and help secure Alaska’s more just and equitable redistricting map.

Thank you!
The Alaska Center

A DEC Budget Trap

/in , , , , ,

[cs_content][cs_element_section _id=”1″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”2″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”3″ ][cs_element_text _id=”4″ ][cs_content_seo]So far, only three states in the United States have assumed primacy for dredge and fill permitting in wetlands. One of those states – Florida – assumed permit primacy in the waning days of the Trump administration. Like Governor Sean Parnell before him, Governor Dunleavy wants Alaska to pay for wetland permitting that is now being paid for by the federal government. The rationale for this proposed forever budget increase paid for by our schools and universities and roads in lean years is that there is an expectation that there will be a return on investment. Through far more relaxed permitting requirements, zero Tribal consultation, and minimal enforcement, Alaska will see a massive influx of Mines.
Governor Dunleavy convinced the state House Finance Committee to add $5 million to the operating budget so that the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation could hire 32 full-time staff. This means 32 new full-time salaries, benefits, travel budgets, etc., to create a state wetland dredge and fill program that is equivalent to the program already paid for by the federal EPA. Perhaps the Dunleavy administration is going to pay these new workers peanuts. $5 million is a far cry from the cost estimate in 2013 when Governor Parnell foisted primacy on the Legislature. At that time – EPA had 49 positions administering its permitting program at a cost of $7.9 million in 2013 dollars. You don’t have to read a crystal ball to see how this will play out for Alaska should the Senate adopt the House numbers and we start a wetland permitting program. You can bet that if the Legislature agrees to this initial $5 million allocation, we should more realistically expect to pay at least a 10 million dollar figure, subject to inflation, moving forward in countless budget years.
It will require more money than was described initially by a less than trustable Dunleavy Administration and the former Pebble spokesperson running DEC now – you can bank on that as a fact. It will lead to costly litigation for the state – bank on that. It will be a messy and costly tug of war between the state and federal government–look at what happened in Florida.
In Florida, with a Governor who is predictably combative with the federal government, there is significant disagreement on the scope of what are to be considered wetlands. Florida continues to apply the Trump EPA version, a predictably and significantly restrictive definition. This definition (Waters Of The United States – WOTUS) was invalidated by a district court opinion, and the Biden EPA is applying a pre-2015 version of WOTUS to which Florida disagrees. Alaska has 65% of the nation’s wetlands and a Governor who loves nothing more than to spend state money fighting the Feds, so the Legislature should anticipate this allocation to DEC will also kick off endless increases in “Statehood Defense” spending. 
The return on investment for paying to take over wetland permitting is likely to be this: 1. Good grandstanding politics for Governors. 2. Mine development plans that factor in lax state permitting and no Tribal consultation, so Mines are freer to destroy salmon habitat, and 3. Jobs–mainly for State attorneys paid out of the General Fund to fight with the EPA. That sounds like a great deal!
The State Senate should say No to this allocation of our money.
Sincerely,
The Alaska Center\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][cs_element_section _id=”5″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”6″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”7″ ][cs_element_button _id=”8″ ][cs_content_seo]Bills to Watch This Week\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][cs_element_layout_column _id=”9″ ][cs_element_button _id=”10″ ][cs_content_seo]More Bills This Session\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][/cs_content]

It’s baaaaack!

/in , , ,

Last week, we wrote about the approximately $5 Million that the Governor is requesting for the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) to hire 32 full-time staff to take over and administer wetland dredge and fill permitting currently done by the federal government EPA. Ironically, at the same time that DEC is asking for more responsibility over permitting (to benefit large scale mining development); they are also trying to dodge their responsibility to administer protections for high ecological value waters under the federal Outstanding National Resource Waters. Instead, they have introduced HB 398, which would require that the Legislature take responsibility.

HB 398 is the 2022 version of a bill that has been around for many many years, and different legislative sessions – yet has never enjoyed enough support to pass. In essence, it would require that high-value water protection be determined by the state legislature instead of through DEC regulation. HB 398 seeks to make it impossible for Alaskans to protect waters of high ecological value as Tier III waters under the Clean Water Act. Right now, federal law requires states to craft a process for citizens to nominate pristine high-value (fish spawning, culturally critical, etc.) top Tier or Tier III waters for protection from pollution. DEC is legally authorized to protect waters under a Tier III status, but they don’t want to do it.

Instead of DEC simply taking legal responsibility to protect high-value waters nominated by Alaskans, they propose HB 398, which creates more bureaucracy, expense, and red tape that strips Alaskans of our right to protect our waters. This bill is bad.

It would remove Alaskan’s right to have a voice in protecting water in Alaska by putting the power in the hands of politicians instead of the experts with Indigenous, local, and scientific knowledge.

It would allow committee chairs in the House and Senate to prevent Tier III nominations from moving through the Legislature, creating a de facto ban on water protections.

It would take power away from Alaskans and give an upper hand to outside mining companies and big businesses with no interest in protecting our fisheries and the clean water.

It would create additional bureaucracy, expense, and political paralysis that leaves our most essential and vulnerable waterways unprotected.

It would put our $2 billion salmon industry at risk.

It would silence constituents from being a part of the decision-making process around the use of waters integral to our cultures, livelihoods, and survival.

Legislative attorneys have time and again concluded that DEC can already establish and administer a process for Alaskans to seek the protection of high-value water through agency regulation. DEC has time and time again sought to shirk its responsibility, hiding behind bogus legal interpretations and philosophical objections.

Why should the Legislature approve increasing the budget to give DEC the complex responsibility of permitting mining projects in wetlands that support our salmon when, simultaneously, DEC is telling everyone with HB 398 that it does not want to be the agency to protect salmon?

Keep an eye on this bad bill.

Wetland Permitting

/in , ,

The Dunleavy Administration is making a push in their budget proposal this year to take over wetland development permitting from the federal government. The proposed allocation of 4.9 million dollars in the Governor’s budget before the legislature would initiate a process where the state Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) would assume “primacy” from the federal Environmental Protection Agency over permitting development activities that impact wetlands protected under section 404 of the Clean Water Act.

Well-functioning and intact wetlands are critical to the protection of salmon, especially in their early stages of life. Wetlands and peatlands also serve a climate-protecting function, a major force in earthly carbon sequestration. The Biden Administration will likely be expanding the protection of wetlands which was decreased under the Trump Administration.

There are downsides with the state primacy of wetland permitting. The cost and complexity of a wetland permitting program is the main factor why only three states out of fifty have assumed primacy. This year, Alaska’s fiscal situation, buoyed up by high oil prices and federal dollars, is not in the long-term position to attract and retain the 28 new full-time employees requested to administer the wetland permitting function or even ensure these positions have funding into the future. Indeed, DEC has seen some of the most aggressive budget cuts of all state agencies over the past decade. (None of this is to point out the blatant irony of our red-pen Governor proposing a budget growth to make the state pay for something that the Federal Government provides freely.)

The cozy relationship between industry and regulatory agencies in Alaska is another cause for concern. The current Commissioner of DEC used to lobby on behalf of the Pebble Mine project when he was a government relations staff for the Anglo-American mining company. Wetland permits are critical to large mining and other industrial operations, so putting this authority in a shop run by a mine promoter is, well, probably a pretty bad idea.

Under federal primacy, the EPA must conduct government-to-government consultation with Alaska Native Tribes regarding wetland permit decisions to seek input and mitigate impacts to the land and water on which Tribal members rely. Should the State of Alaska take over the wetland permitting program, Tribal consultation is not a legal requirement. For this reason alone, the legislature should scrap the state primacy proposal.

Our salmon runs are in a perilous state across much of Alaska. One outlier is Bristol Bay, where the rivers flow from millions of acres of intact wetlands, the beating heart of the largest and last greatest sockeye run on earth. The Dunleavy Administration, DEC, and mine promoters want state primacy over wetland permitting to streamline the industrialization of areas like the Bristol Bay watershed. Unable to prevail in the court of public opinion or with the Federal EPA, the Dunleavy Administration is now attempting an end-run around both to permit the Pebble Mine with a budget allocation that would put an enforcement agency in place more closely tied to big industrial concerns.

On Monday, March 14th, at 9 a.m., the Senate Finance Committee will hear from DEC on its wetland permitting primacy proposal. Tune in.

Renewable Portfolio Standards drive innovation and economic development

/in , , , ,

The role of government in pushing different sectors of the economy to innovate through policy, tax incentives, and funding is well established. While some may oppose a mandatory Renewable Portfolio Standard or RPS policy to push electric utilities to generate or purchase more renewable energy, there is at least a broad historical precedent for the success of the policy.

The benefits of an RPS include economic development and construction and maintenance jobs to create the new generation facilities. For customers, increased renewable energy will put (in the parlance of utility managers) “downward pressure” on the rates we pay per kilowatt-hour. The transmission constraints and bottlenecks will have to be addressed for Alaska’s railbelt to achieve the proposed 80% renewable energy by 2040, and that is a good thing. Transmission upgrades build a bigger freeway for electrons to travel on and build important resiliency in our Alaskan system that’s subject to the weather rigors we know and love, not to mention natural disasters.

Jobs, innovative technologies, likely lower electric rates, and increased transmission system efficiency are not bad things. Considering that transportation and industry are both likely to move toward electric power soon and increase the load on the system as a whole both day and night, and considering the rapid advancement of battery storage to levelize the peaks and valleys of some renewables (as well as old and proven storage technology option of pumped hydro) the concerns of utility managers about renewable energy load variability are surmountable.

Judging by the discussion in the first Senate hearing on the Governors RPS legislation, there seems to be an interest expressed by some committee members in adding micro-nuclear reactors as an option for utilities to meet their RPS goals. This is a non-starter and likely would be opposed even by the Governor. Adding an unproven technology like micro-nuclear reactors into a policy that puts utilities on a time-sensitive course for achieving renewable energy goals could be a hindrance, not to mention the other negatives associated with nuclear (security threat, waste storage, etc.) There is a stand-alone bill pertaining to small nuclear generators, and in a stand-alone bill, it should remain.

Next week, the House Energy Committee will hold two hearings on the RPS bill (HB 301). The first hearing is on Tuesday, March 8 at 10:15 a.m., and the second on Thursday at 10:15 a.m. These will be excellent opportunities for the public to learn more about the RPS. In addition, The Alaska Center will be hosting a webinar on March 10 at noon with House Energy Committee Chair, Representative Calvin Schrage as well as members of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory to discuss what an RPS is, the outlook for the policy this session, and how you can be involved.

If you’re interested in attending here is the registration information!

It is an exciting week ahead for the future of Alaska. Plan to tune in!

Climate Rights

/in , , , , , ,

[cs_content][cs_element_section _id=”1″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”2″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”3″ ][cs_element_text _id=”4″ ][cs_content_seo]Do current and future generations have a constitutional right to a safe climate? Sixteen youth plaintiffs filed a constitutional climate lawsuit against their state government in 2017 to argue that we do have such a right. 
In Sagoonick v. State of Alaska, the young plaintiffs assert that Alaska’s fossil fuel energy policy and the State-authorized fossil fuel development and ensuing greenhouse gas emissions that result have caused and contributed to Alaska’s climate crisis. The policies have placed the youth plaintiffs in danger and are harming their health, safety, homes, culture, and Native villages in violation of Alaska’s Constitution.
On January 28, 2022, in a split 3-2 decision, the Alaska Supreme Court ruled against the young plaintiffs. On February 7, the youth plaintiffs filed a petition for rehearing of their case, asking the Court to reconsider its decision and allow their case to go forward. The youth were disappointed about the February 25 denial of their petition, but the fight is far from over. 
State lawmakers have taken note of how close the decision in Sagoonick was. Representative Ben Carpenter, a Republican from the fossil-fuel embracing town of Nikiski, took to the House Floor to make a note of this. Representative Carpenter stated, “this isn’t going away” and that “the implication here…is that State…oil exploration policy…our energy policies…need to be adjusted for an individual’s right to have a safe climate.”  
While some lawmakers may take the close decision as a warning that the state’s petroleum industry is under attack by the youth, Carpenter’s words offered another assessment – sobering to some – that the courts are coming around to the idea of a right to a safe climate.   
Suppose an industry or a policy effectively uses our atmosphere as a dumping place for a chemical byproduct that is enough quantity can put into question the ability of mammals to survive on the planet. In that case, you bet today’s young people should try their level best to stop any additional inputs of that chemical byproduct. The courts are taking note of the danger ahead if we cannot radically decrease the emissions of CO2 and methane into the air. Too much is at stake for this issue to just go away. Expect future lawsuits, legislation, and petitions for rulemaking from the young people of our state and nation.  
Government regulations on industry are in place to protect our health and, ultimately, our individual freedom. The brave youth plaintiffs in Sagoonick v. State of Alaska are fighting for our individual health, individual freedom, and collective health and freedom. These youth are true patriots, and their actions resonate with other youth. Change is coming.
Yours,
The Alaska Center\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][cs_element_section _id=”5″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”6″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”7″ ][cs_element_button _id=”8″ ][cs_content_seo]Voice Your Support on March 1st\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][cs_element_section _id=”9″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”10″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”11″ ][cs_element_button _id=”12″ ][cs_content_seo]Bills To Watch This Week\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][cs_element_layout_column _id=”13″ ][cs_element_button _id=”14″ ][cs_content_seo]Learn More About Bills This Session\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][/cs_content]

The Expel Eastman Edition

/in , , ,

[cs_content][cs_element_section _id=”1″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”2″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”3″ ][cs_element_text _id=”4″ ][cs_content_seo]At The Alaska Center, we believe a true Democracy is one in which everyone feels safe, respected, and able to participate in public discourse. We entrust our elected leaders to uphold these values, and be accountable to the principles of truth, justice, and equality. They should follow the Alaska Constitution, the fundamental governing document of the State of Alaska.
Oath Keeper Representative David Eastman has clearly violated these principles and duties of his office, and should be expelled from the State House. His organization, The Oath Keepers, took part in the seditious and deadly activities of January 6th, 2021 – a date none of us should ever forget as it is a milestone of domestic terrorism and an assault on our Democracy. Allowing a member of an organization involved in sedition to serve in the Legislature normalizes the member’s activities and that must not occur.
Article XII Section 4 of Alaska’s Constitution is clear:
No person who advocates, or who aids or belongs to any party or organization or association which advocates, the overthrow by force or violence of the government of the United States or of the State shall be qualified to hold any public office of trust or profit under this Constitution.”

The plain reading of our Constitution applies directly to Eastman: he has admitted to being a life member of an organization that sought to overthrow our democracy on January 6th. He was at the rally that led to the deadly violence in our nation’s capital. Allowing him to remain in the Legislature sends a message that violent and racist insurrections are “legitimate political discourse.”
In November of 2021 a large group of fellow West Point Alumni penned a letter to Eastman telling him to resign. Their message was clear:
“You were present in Washington, D.C. on January 6, protesting this fair and free election. You falsely blamed the day’s violence on “Antifa,” but it is clear the criminal acts were carried out by right-wing insurrectionists… What moved us to public comment was the revelation that you are a life member of one such insurrectionist group: the Oath Keepers, one of the largest far right anti-government groups in the United States. More than a dozen Oath Keepers have been charged with crimes for their role on January 6… You have stated that you “will always consider it a privilege” to belong to Oath Keepers. Membership in the Oath Keepers, or any other organization—left or right—calling for violence against our Constitutional system of government, is wildly at odds with the bedrock values of West Point, as well as with the legal oath you swore when you became a member of the Alaska Legislature.”

The message of the Alaska State House of Representatives should also be clear: Eastman is unfit by his actions, and by our state’s Constitution to continue to bear the honor and responsibility of Representative. The defense of Eastman by members of the House minority so far has been disturbing, especially after so many other racist and reprehensible offenses by him that led to his earlier censure. But if the House does not take action in this moment to denounce Eastman, they are being complicit in undermining our Democracy.  There will be a hearing on the Oath Keepers today in the House Military and Veterans Affairs Committee today at 1:00 p.m (tune in below). 

While a hearing is fine, we already know that The Oath Keeper organization is unambiguously dangerous to our American Democracy.  Oath Keeper David Eastman, who advocates for the violent overthrow of Democracy, is not fit to be a representative in this Democracy and must be expelled. Contact your legislator today and tell them that in Alaska our values include protecting Democracy.

The Alaska Center

\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][cs_element_section _id=”5″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”6″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”7″ ][cs_element_button _id=”8″ ][cs_content_seo]Tune In To The Hearing Here\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][cs_element_layout_column _id=”9″ ][cs_element_button _id=”10″ ][cs_content_seo]Contact Your State Legislator\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][/cs_content]

Renewable Energy Goals

/in , , , ,

[cs_content][cs_element_section _id=”1″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”2″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”3″ ][cs_element_text _id=”4″ ][cs_content_seo]We don’t often say nice things about our Governor, and that is because we disagree with many of his policies and tactics wholeheartedly. For instance, one of his first moves as Governor was to dismantle the Climate Action Leadership Team that The Alaska Center, Alaska Youth For Environmental Action, numerous partners, and frontline community members worked hard to help establish under the previous administration. However, in the case of a policy that will help our state do its part to combat emissions, we agree wholeheartedly with his proposed Renewable Portfolio Standard introduced today.
What is a Renewable Portfolio Standard, or an RPS as it is commonly called? It is a policy that requires utilities to sell electricity from renewable sources by specific dates or face financial penalties.
In short, an RPS for Alaska will push our electric utilities to accelerate their trajectory away from fossil fuel power generation. It will push utilities toward wind, solar, geothermal, tidal, and hydro projects, either funded by the utility itself or purchased from a company called an Independent Power Producer.
We at The Alaska Center, through programs such as Solarize Anchorage, Solarize MatSu, and Solarize Fairbanks, have actively organized Alaskans in support of increased renewable energy. We have helped elect members to Utility Boards that support increasing renewables. An RPS is something we are confident Alaska utilities can achieve when working together.
SB 179 and HB 301, the Governor’s bills call for regulated electric utilities to achieve benchmark renewable energy goals: 20% by the end of 2025, 30% by 2030, 55% by 2035, and 80% by 2040. Numerous exemptions are designed to accommodate utilities and help them reach the goal. For instance, should a major natural disaster impact a utility’s ability to meet its renewable goal, it would grant an exemption from the non-compliance penalty.
Faced with steadily increasing natural gas prices, many utilities, pushed by their members and their boards of directors, have moved toward renewable energy. The Homer Electric Association has adopted an aggressive goal of achieving 50% renewable energy by 2025. Large batteries are being incorporated into the renewable energy strategy to help balance the variable energy inputs of renewable energy production.
The recent passage of legislation requiring the Regulatory Commission of Alaska to approve an Integrated Resource Plan for the railbelt will help guide the process of integrating an increase in renewable energy and will provide the public and utilities with a process-oriented approach to the construction of new generation facilities. This legislation will help Alaskans avoid an ad-hoc, willy-nilly scramble by individual utilities toward renewable energy projects and instead will set standards and requirements for the projects on a regional basis.
While the Governor’s bills have a long and winding road through the committee process, the fact that this policy has been introduced is a good thing.
In hope,
 The Alaska Center

\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][cs_element_section _id=”5″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”6″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”7″ ][cs_element_button _id=”8″ ][cs_content_seo]Bills To Watch This Week\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][cs_element_layout_column _id=”9″ ][cs_element_button _id=”10″ ][cs_content_seo]Learn More About Bills This Session\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][/cs_content]

Local Control

/in , ,

[cs_content][cs_element_section _id=”1″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”2″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”3″ ][cs_element_text _id=”4″ ][cs_content_seo]A very seasoned and shrewd retired politician said the other day, “sometimes a money spill can be worse than an oil spill,” meaning we should be careful how our current leaders handle an influx of federal infrastructure funds. We should watch how they use our State’s investment bank and how they look to our Permanent Fund as a means to develop roads to resources, mines, and other industrial development that can be extremely harmful to communities, tribes and the fish and wildlife and land and water they depend on.  
A case in point is Ambler Road. The Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) has been called “The Governor’s Slush Fund.” It is poorly insulated against political winds, and the board of directors serves at the pleasure of the Gov. AIDEA has plowed ahead with financing for the highly controversial road to a proposed mining district in the heart of the country between the Kobuk and Ambler rivers. One major criticism of AIDEA is secrecy. Many of the board’s decisions are conducted in executive sessions and run counter to the expressed will of those Alaskans who provide testimony to the board.  
There are also recent issues with AIDEA keeping tribes out of meetings and yesterday AIDEA had a board meeting in which they proposed spending another $15 million next summer on the Ambler Road proposal. AIDEA is unilaterally moving forward with approving this additional $15 million toward the Ambler Road – all outside of the legislative budget process. AIDEA has been getting away with shifting money around in legally dubious ways to date. They haven’t been able to get their money through the capital budget process, so now they are going big with this new expenditure and making those decisions outside the legislature’s purview.
To add insult to injury, Governor Dunleavy’s Department of Transportation (DOT) proposes a “man camp” for out of town and out-of-state workers right in the middle of the community of Bettles. The man camp would take over the community’s picnic pavilion area in Bettles. Bettles has been against the Ambler Road from day one.  
One Bettles resident penned a compelling message regarding the man camp proposal:
“The baseball field in our tiny village of 24 people is the town gathering place. It is an open space where children play, by which we walk every day on the way to the ranger station or the airstrip. We have our Fourth of July festivities there – silly dress-up races, potato sack races, keep the egg on the spoon. If you’ve come to Bettles on your way to Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve for a backcountry trip, you’ve probably set up your tent and camped in this ballfield. You’ve probably enjoyed cooking a meal in the little pavilion there.
The Alaska Dept. of Transportation has proposed leasing our community ballfield in Bettles for the next 10 years as a man camp in support of the Ambler Access Project. Please help out our community by writing elzbeth.robson@alaska.gov and referencing ADA-72673 to voice your opposition to the development of a man camp in our town gathering place. Comment deadline is 4:30 pm on 1/31.
If this camp and all that comes along with it is permitted to take root, the heart of our town will belong to someone else – industry and its uncaring, itinerant strangers. The U.S. Bureau of Justice performed a study in 2019 that found that violent victimization increased by 70% in rural communities wherein a man camp was erected. That statistic is widely believed to underrepresent the issue, given how many offenses go unreported. Further, it is buffered by the presence in those communities of agencies and entities charged with the control and prevention of violence, whereas here in Bettles no such law enforcement exists.
Whoever occupies the camp over the next decade will leave one day, and behind them, their detritus and whatever their impacts. If they do nothing violent, if they victimize no person bodily, they will be an exceptional deviation from a statistic, but they will nonetheless have done a great deal to victimize a community.
If you can, please take a moment to email elzbeth.robson@alaska.gov and voice your opposition to this proposal.”
If the Ambler Road project is any indication, those large industrial concerns, often headquartered in other countries, have a powerful partner in our state government agencies. Future allocations of federal infrastructure money should be under the control of the arm of government directly accountable to local voters – the allocating body – the State Legislature. That way the citizens of the State will have a more significant say in how the money is spent.
HB 177 is a good start. Under HB 177, informally called the “Balance of Powers Act,” a Governor would be prohibited from unilaterally spending large federal appropriations should it flow into the State when the legislature is not in session. As Alaska prepares to receive a slug of federal infrastructure funds, we must remedy this statute to uphold the Alaska Constitution and ensure that full appropriation power resides where it should, with the elected representatives of the people, the Alaska state legislature.   
Yours,
The Alaska Center

\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][cs_element_section _id=”5″ ][cs_element_layout_row _id=”6″ ][cs_element_layout_column _id=”7″ ][cs_element_button _id=”8″ ][cs_content_seo]Bills To Watch This Week\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][cs_element_layout_column _id=”9″ ][cs_element_button _id=”10″ ][cs_content_seo]Learn More About Bills This Session\n\n[/cs_content_seo][/cs_element_layout_column][/cs_element_layout_row][/cs_element_section][/cs_content]

State of State Predictions

/in , , , ,

The Governor’s State of The State Address is next week (7 p.m. on Tuesday, January 25). It is sure to contain grievances about the Federal Government, excitement about mineral resource development projects in Alaska, and a dash of “Election Integrity” talk. It will maybe/probably contain a few lines about renewable energy, fisheries, Alaska’s strategic economic and military location, and “greatest resource is the people of AK” platitudes, etc., to put a bow on it.

It is becoming clear through various releases of information that the Governor is actively lying about his role in the firing of the Permanent Fund E.D. and that the firing was political retribution as Ms. Rodell did not grant the Governor’s cherished overdraw of the Permanent Fund earnings reserve money – we expect that this will not be a part of the State of the State, and hey, it might cause the Gov. to not throw jabs during the speech at the Legislature on the issue of the big PFD never being approved by lawmakers.

With the new Ranked Choice Voting law in place, the Governor is free to pick a suitable running mate and facing at least two known challenges from the far-right flank in his bid for Re-election. Dunleavy made the choice to dump Lt. Governor Kevin Meyer from the ticket despite his faithful dealings with this evolving fiasco of an administration. There is a slight, outside, chance that the Governor will say some nice things about the Lt. Governor, but we would not hold our breath. After all, the Lt. Gov has defended the 2020 election in Alaska, which the far-right know with great certainty was “stolen.”

State Medical officer Dr. Anne Zink, also ever faithful in her dealings with the Dunleavy Administration, is under attack by supporters of Dunleavy and his challenger, political nobody Rep. Chris Kurka who has the firing of Dr. Zink as part of his campaign platform. If the Governor wanted to appear that he has a backbone, he would go strong in defense of Dr. Zink in his speech. To date, his defense has been very muted and wimpy as her credibility is attacked and she is personally threatened.

While he is defending Alaskans from attack by other Alaskans (seemingly something a Governor should do), he might include in his speech an apology to the former Assistant Attorney General, Elizabeth Bakalar. She was targeted with toxic animus and threats of all varieties from far-right Dunleavy supporters after she took legal action against her illegal firing by Dunleavy. Bakalar won on most grounds in federal court this past week. The state will be on the hook for damages. The action by the administration was wrong and will cost the state. Now that the case is settled, it is time to clear the air and address the cost to the state and (former) state workers like Bakalar in the State of the State.

Federal spending on Infrastructure will cushion the reality of our state’s structural budget deficit. Federal COVID relief has and will continue to protect vulnerable Alaskans and help prop up the economy. We hope the Governor does not adopt a posture of holding his hand out while flipping the bird to the Feds with his other hand. However, this is likely, since this particular brand of complaint has been refined and reworked in speeches since statehood and before.

We anticipate that there will be few surprises and many missed opportunities in Tuesday night’s address. We remain open to the possibility of shock, reflection, reconciliation, and rejuvenation. Wouldn’t that be something?

Yours,
The Alaska Center Team