The Ketchikan Gateway Borough Clerk has approved recall petition applications targeting three members of the Ketchikan School Board: Judy Leask Guthrie, Jordan Tabb, and Board President Katherine Tatsuda.
Petitioners allege the three violated state laws and board policies by authorizing expenditures beyond available revenues and approving hires that did not meet qualification requirements.
According to the petitions, the board members failed to provide proper financial and administrative oversight of Superintendent Michael Robbins, who stepped down at the end of the 2024-2025 school year.
“The Board approved and failed to prevent expenditures that exceeded authorized budget limits, resulting in a fiscal year 2024 deficit of $379,786. This violated state law and Board Policy 3100, which requires a balanced budget,” the petition reads. “The lack of oversight continues: on June 11, 2025, the Board approved contracts exceeding the adopted budget by $371,629 without identifying additional income or adopting a corresponding budget amendment.”
The Ketchikan Gateway Borough School District’s budget for the 2025-2026 fiscal year is $42 million, as approved by the school board in a 6-1 vote on May 1. Board member Ali Ginter was the lone “no” vote.
In addition to budget issues, the petitions claim the board failed to ensure compliance with hiring rules that require the district to employ “the most highly qualified person available for each open position.” On at least one occasion, the board approved a superintendent recommendation to hire individuals with only emergency certification, despite more qualified candidates being available. The most recent instance cited occurred on May 28, 2025.
The school district has seen significant upheaval. Not only did the superintendent resign, but earlier this year School Board President Michelle O’Brien and board member Keenan Sanderson resigned.
Petitioners now have 60 days to collect 530 valid signatures per petition from registered voters in the borough. If successful, the recall questions will appear on the Oct. 7 ballot.
The Haines Borough Assembly voted 4-2 on Tuesday to deny an easement request by the Takshanuk Watershed Council that would have allowed the environmental nonprofit to build infrastructure across Jones Point Cemetery, the only cemetery in Haines. The decision followed two hours of public testimony and capped weeks of mounting opposition from residents and tribal members.
The easement would have permitted the nonprofit to construct a 7-foot electrified wildlife barrier and establish access across a portion of the cemetery property as part of its commercial composting operation. The project is located on an adjacent parcel, where TWC owns approximately 50 acres.
While composting has support in the community, the proposed encroachment on cemetery land drew resistance. Residents packed the Assembly chambers to voice concerns about the sanctity of the cemetery and the legality of using land protected by a 1922 deed, which limits it to burial-related purposes.
Opponents of the easement also highlighted that the compost facility was constructed before a land use permit was issued. TWC applied for an after-the-fact permit on Oct. 31, 2023, months after building the structure. Some residents expressed frustration that the nonprofit had not planned for the facility entirely on its own property, despite owning ample acreage.
The Assembly vote came after the Haines Planning Commission had recommended the easement by a 5-1 vote in June. That meeting drew about 90 minutes of public comment, nearly all opposed. Residents again turned out in large numbers Tuesday, with many people present who had rarely or never spoken at Assembly meetings.
In the hours leading up to the Assembly meeting, the Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Indian Tribes of Alaska sent a two-page letter opposing the easement. The letter noted that the nonprofit also encroaches with its trails on an adjacent Native allotment and raised objections to TWC’s use of cemetery land. The Tlingit and Haida Central Council’s opposition was especially significant, as it had provided funding to TWC, including for this composting facility. The Tlingit and Haida money given to the composting project originated from the US Department of Agriculture.
Those who supported the easement argued that composting serves an environmental good, and some downplayed the permit deficit issues as simple mistakes. But several community members spoke passionately in defense of the cemetery, pushing back against the influence of well-organized, heavily funded nonprofits in local decision-making.
Assembly members Craig Loomis and Kevin Forster cast the two dissenting votes against the motion to deny the easement.
Assembly members thanked the cemetery caretakers for their selfless dedication to the care and maintaining of the cemetery and for taking care of final arrangements with family members of the departed for the last 37 years. They also apologized for the city and borough’s failure to prioritize cemetery needs throughout the years.
For now, the cemetery land remains protected from being traipsed through by people on their way to add coffee grounds, banana peels, and eggshells to the community compost.
Alaska Wildlife Troopers rescued three fishermen in Bristol Bay, after their boat ran into a sandbar, became stuck, and capsized.
“In a place where the sea gives no second chances, these brave Troopers brought three fishermen home,” the Alaska State Troopers wrote. The video posted on social media comes from the body cameras worn by troopers involved in the rescue:
In the cold surf of the Ugashik District, in Bristol Bay, Alaska Wildlife Troopers rescued three fishermen whose boat was overturned in shallow, stormy water. In a place where the sea gives no second chances, these brave Troopers brought three fishermen home. pic.twitter.com/EirbcDuc7t
— Alaska State Troopers (@akstatetrooper) July 7, 2025
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday lifted a lower court’s block on President Donald Trump’s executive order directing federal agencies to prepare for sweeping reductions in the federal workforce.
The unsigned opinion from the Court grants the Trump Administration the ability to move forward with the executive order while legal challenges continue. The ruling doesn’t end the dispute over the authority of the executive branch to carry out large-scale reductions in force without congressional approval, but it signals that the justices believe the Trump Administration is likely to succeed on the merits of the case.
The executive order in question was issued by President Trump in February, to “promptly undertake preparations to initiate large-scale reductions in force (RIFs), consistent with applicable law.” The administration followed up with a memorandum from the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management to begin implementation.
Labor unions, advocacy groups, and several local governments filed suit in federal court, challenging the legality of the move and requesting an injunction to halt it. Senior US District Judge Susan Illston of San Francisco granted a preliminary injunction blocking implementation and required the government to provide planning documents related to the reductions.
When the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit refused to lift the injunction, Solicitor General D. John Sauer appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the injunction caused “ongoing and severe harm” to the government by interfering with the internal operations of the executive branch.
In its two-paragraph decision, the Supreme Court stated that Judge Illston’s injunction rested on a legal conclusion that the executive order and accompanying memorandum were unlawful. The majority, however, found that the government was likely correct in arguing that both documents are legal. Based on that conclusion and the other criteria, the Court put Illston’s ruling on hold. The Administration may move forward while the 9th Circuit appeal continues.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor concurred, noting that the executive order explicitly calls for plans that comply with existing law.
But Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson issued a 15-page dissent that said that the lower court’s injunction served as a temporary, harm-reducing measure while the legality of the executive order is assessed.
Jackson warned that allowing the order to proceed unchecked “permits an apparently unprecedented and congressionally unsanctioned dismantling of the Federal Government to continue apace, causing irreparable harm before courts can determine whether the President has the authority to engage in the actions he proposes.”
Drawing from her own experience as a former district court judge, Jackson made the nearly comical stretch that the lower court is best equipped to determine the actual scale and legal implications of the executive action. She concluded that the Supreme Court is just unable to do the job: “This Court lacks the capacity to fully evaluate, much less responsibly override, reasoned lower court fact finding.”
For now, the decision is a major victory for the Trump Administration as it seeks to reshape the size and structure of the federal government.
Editor’s note: This story is corrected throughout to remove the information that was associated with a different John Williams.
The Alaska Democratic Party now has its first declared candidate for the state’s sole US House seat on the 2026 ballot. At 10 pm on July 2, John Brendan Williams officially filed with the Federal Election Commission to run as a Democrat.
Alaska’s 2026 primary election is scheduled for Aug. 18, 2026, where all candidates, regardless of party, will appear on a single jungle primary ballot. The top four vote-getters will advance to the ranked choice general election in November.
Williams is the first Democrat to formally challenge incumbent Congressman Nick Begich III. In February he was registered as an “Undeclared” voter. He has made no formal announcement but has filed with both the Federal Election Commission and the Alaska Division of Elections.
During the last election cycle, Democrats had two candidate — Mary Peltola, the incumbent, and Eric Hefner, a felon who was serving time in prison out of state and who had never stepped foot in Alaska.
Former Lt. Gov. Craig Campbell has been named chairman of Bernadette Wilson’s campaign for Alaska governor, lending his decades of political and military leadership to support Wilson’s bid to lead the state after the 2026 general election.
In a statement released by the campaign, Campbell praised Wilson’s qualifications and framed her as a bold choice for turning around Alaska’s current challenges.
“Alaska’s future requires a dynamic leader; a person with demonstrated credentials to reverse our stagnating economy, declining statewide educational performance, growing social challenges, and drift away from the founding principles of our state,” Campbell said. “Bernadette Wilson is that person. As a successful business owner, political activist, and proven leader, she has the distinct qualities necessary to lead our state towards prosperity, while protecting our values and the precious aspects that make Alaska exceptional. I am proud to serve as Campaign Chairman to elect Bernadette Wilson as Alaska’s next governor.”
Campbell is deeply respected across the state for his heartfelt Alaska servant leadership. Wilson welcomed Campbell to the campaign and highlighted his unmatched experience and civic dedication:
“I am deeply honored to have former Lieutenant Governor Craig Campbell join our team as campaign chairman,” said Wilson. “His decades of service, both in uniform, and in leadership roles across Alaska, reflect a lifetime commitment to the values we are fighting to protect. He understands, like I do, the urgency of securing Alaska’s economic future and the heartbreaking decisions many families face when trying to determine whether they can afford to stay here. His leadership and insight are invaluable as we work to restore opportunity, protect our way of life, and put Alaska first.”
Campbell served as Alaska’s 10th lieutenant governor and brings over 40 years of political experience in Alaska.
He has held leadership roles in Alaska aviation and aerospace, including President and CEO of the Alaska Aerospace Corporation and Manager of Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport. He was also appointed by Gov. Mike Dunleavy to the Alaska Railroad Corporation Board of Directors, serving as board chair.
His state government experience includes serving as commissioner of the Alaska Department of Military and Veterans Affairs under two governors and leading the Alaska National Guard as the state’s Adjutant General. He retired in 2009 with the federal rank of Major General and the state rank of Lieutenant General.
A prominent figure in the Alaska Republican Party, Campbell served as finance chair, vice chair, and as Alaska’s national committeeman to the Republican National Committee.
Campbell’s early involvement signals a serious and organized effort ahead of the 2026 gubernatorial election. Since announcing her bid for office, Wilson has brought on proven veterans from the Donald Trump and Nick Begich campaigns, has received an endorsement from Congressman Byron Donalds, and has been traveling across the state to meet with Alaskans and listen to their concerns.
Wilson, a conservative business owner and longtime political activist, launched her campaign in May. Her campaign has centered on economic revitalization, emphasizing protecting the Permanent Fund dividend, addressing trawling practices, and improving education, with a firm belief that America’s strength starts with Alaska.
I received a heads up last week from Craig Medred, announcing a World Bank publication that spoke in glowing terms about the role aquaculture is going to play in feeding a growing worldwide population. It predicts as many as 22 million new jobs by 2050, 25 years from today, and investment opportunities of $1.5 trillion over the same period. Growth is projected somewhere between 60 – 97 million tonnes annual production over those 25 years. Today, aquaculture provides almost 60% of global seafood production.
As with any opportunity, there are competitors. The press release linked above lists shrimp from Ecuador, salmon from Chile, Pangasius (shark catfish) from Vietnam. China and Bangladesh are supplying their own domestic markets with carp and black tiger shrimp.
The immediate question arises: How will Alaska play in this new, apparently highly lucrative global marketplace? What do we bring to the competitive table? What, if anything do we do well? What do we sell?
The first and most important thing to note is that Alaska does not and for the foreseeable future will not participate in any effort to commercially farm finfish for commercial sale, having made it illegal in 1990. This was done as a protectionist effort to protect Alaska commfish from competition. What it actually did was ensure Alaska commfish completely incapable of participating in the growing global marketplace in any meaningful way. Even a Dunleavy attempt to introduce onshore, fish farming for trout (mostly based on the current freshwater stocking program) this legislative session was summarily ignored until it died.
The closest we here in Alaska get to fish farming is hatchery release of a billion or two pink fry into Prince William Soung yearly (ocean ranching), fish which are out competing all other salmon species for food, quickly driving them into oblivion. Environmental concerns about the ongoing destruction wrought by excess pink population in the North Pacific is swatted aside by ADF&G commfish friendly biologists with the same tender loving care that the tobacco companies swatted away lung cancer concerns up until 30 years ago when the Clinton administration turned tobacco into a cash cow for trial lawyers who elected him.
All is not doom and gloom, though there is a little aquaculture going on in Alaska, intentionally limited to seaweed and shellfish. The industry is quite new, starting in 1988 with the goal of $100 million in sales by 2040. The most recent NOAA sales figure from 2019 was $1.4 million. Let’s see, an increase in sales from zero to $1.4 million in a mere 31 years, somehow I think we’re going to miss the $100 million goal by a lot ($98 million). This is hardly serious growth.
Contrast that with the World Bank Report of 20 million new jobs, $1.5 trillion new investment opportunity and 67 – 90 million tonnes of product over the next 25 years worldwide and ask yourself how are we going to play in that new world?
Note that the total value of Alaska commercial salmon harvest in 2024was $304 million, down 24% from 2023, with around 450 million pounds of fish harvested, around 67 cents / pound. Is this the best value we can get for the resource? Or is there another way?
One other way would be to embrace the growing worldwide marketplace for farmed fish. Railing against fish farming and frankenfish, while fun, won’t do anything to make us more competitive.
Sadly, any approach will require action by both the governor and the legislature. Starting with a repeal of the 1990 ban on fish farming in Alaska. The Alaska Legislature can and should be leading this, but their approach to Dunleavy’s proposal for onshore fish farming for trout did not inspire much confidence. It is all too easy to sit back and figure out new ways to raid the Permanent Fund and spend the PFD rather than try to grow the economy.
Still, some things may be changing. The perennial commfish friendly speed bump to progress in Kodiak, Gary Stevens is retiring. An open seat in that part of the state should listen to calls to take advantage of the new opportunities, at least until Election Day 2026.
It is imperative that this state quickly and vigorously embrace fish farming both onshore (recirculating aquaculture systems – RAS) and offshore. There is opportunity out there. Embrace it and we all win.
Continue down our current path, squabbling over ever decreasing returns of valuable salmon species (kings, anyone?), and we will be left with little more than failing businesses and endangered salmon in the streams or in the oceans.
If what we are doing isn’t working, isn’t it time to do something else? Choose wisely.
Alex Gimarc lives in Anchorage since retiring from the military in 1997. His interests include science and technology, environment, energy, economics, military affairs, fishing and disabilities policies. His weekly column “Interesting Items” is a summary of news stories with substantive Alaska-themed topics. He was a small business owner and Information Technology professional.
The Transportation Security Administration has begun phasing out the long-standing requirement for passengers to remove their shoes at airport checkpoints.
Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem announced Tuesday the major policy change from TSA that may streamline airport security processes, reduce wait times, and improve the passenger experience nationwide.
The new policy applies initially to a set of pilot airports equipped with updated scanning technology and lower-risk profiles, with a broader national rollout expected to follow quickly.
The first airports to implement the change include:
Baltimore/Washington International (BWI)
Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky International (CVG)
Portland International (PDX)
Philadelphia International (PHL)
Piedmont Triad International (GSO) in North Carolina
In addition, major hubs such as Los Angeles International (LAX) and New York’s LaGuardia (LGA) have already adopted the policy as part of TSA’s rapid deployment.
TSA officials confirmed that the change will apply to most travelers unless they trigger an alarm during screening. The agency emphasized that the new policy does not compromise safety; advanced scanning systems continue to detect concealed items without requiring shoe removal in most cases.
For Alaskans, the update is welcome news. Travelers in the state often wear heavy-duty boots due to rugged terrain, heavy work, and exposure to cold weather, making shoe removal at security checkpoints time-consuming and cumbersome. With TSA aiming to expand the policy nationwide, Alaska’s major airports may follow in the footsteps of the pilot airports.
The change is part of a broader modernization effort by the Department of Homeland Security to make air travel more efficient while maintaining security. The shoe removal rule, in place since 2001, has long been one of the most unpopular parts of the airport screening process.
A far-left political organization known for its street-level activism says it has received the green light to move forward with a proposed change to the Anchorage Municipal Charter.
The Party for Socialism and Liberation announced that it has been authorized by the Anchorage Municipal Clerk to begin collecting signatures for a petition titled “New Charter Section 4.08. Inspector General.” The initiative seeks to create an Office of Inspector General within the legislative branch of the municipality.
This is the same group that recently insisted that a municipal golf course be converted into a tent city for vagrants and that short-term rentals be banned in the city. It is the same group that has called for the death of Zionists and Jews, in support of Palestinians.
The petition was officially certified by the clerk’s office on July 7, the group announced. In order for the measure to appear on the ballot next March, the group must now collect at least 7,225 verified signatures from registered Anchorage voters by the Oct. 6 deadline.
If successful, the ballot measure would ask voters to amend the Municipal Charter and establish a new watchdog position — an Inspector General — to presumably provide oversight of municipal government operations.
There already is an Ombudsman’s office in Anchorage that serves a similar purpose.
Big cities like New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, and Washington, DC have inspectors general but small cities like Anchorage typically do not. New York City’s Inspector General had a budget of approximately $25.6 million for fiscal year 2024, while Los Angeles had a budget of $5 million.
The PSL, which is spearheading the effort, describes itself as a Marxist-Leninist political party and has been active in Anchorage through organized protests and demonstrations centered on housing, police defunding, and anti-capitalist causes.
