Tuesday, April 28, 2026
Home Blog Page 1102

Win Gruening: We pay, they spend, as Juneau Assembly rejects property tax relief

By WIN GRUENING

In a recent City and Borough of Juneau Finance Committee meeting, a majority of Assembly members rebuffed an attempt to provide tax relief to local property owners.  

The proposal by Michelle Hale, supported by Greg Smith and Wade Bryson, would have lowered the mill rate from its current 10.66 mills to 10.56 mills. After some discussion, it was defeated on a 6-3 vote. The decision to maintain the current mill rate (a reduction from the previously proposed .20 mill increase) was forwarded for final approval at the next regular Assembly meeting on June 14.

While the proposal would not have provided a substantial reduction in taxes at the individual level, it would have sent an important message to residents and businesses that their elected Assembly was cognizant of the past and future economic hardship caused by the pandemic.

If anything, the proposed reduction was woefully short considering the significant property valuation increases experienced by Juneau commercial property owners.  Consider that many Juneau businesses are struggling after experiencing their second year of minimal to zero revenue and, even with the prospect of some cruise arrivals by August, may not fully open this year.  According to City Manager Rorie Watt, the city was “way behind” on updating commercial assessments as required by state law.

The severe jump in assessed land values caught commercial property owners off guard and will result in major property tax increases. Predictably, this has provoked a sharp reaction from many downtown business owners.  Some owners that have purchased property in the last several years have reported assessments that have been double their original purchase price.  

Over 300 tax appeals have been filed this year contesting the city’s latest round of tax assessments – triple the number in a normal year.  According to the city, while the new assessments have primarily affected land values, businesses can expect similar increases in building values next year.

While recognizing that property valuation is a complex process with many factors, a cursory review of tax assessments on the CBJ website reflect some odd and outsized disparities.  The unimproved waterfront lot purchased last year by Norwegian Cruise Lines for $20 million is still assessed at $7.5 million which values the land at about $60 per square foot.  

Even if it were assessed at the higher sale value, it would be $161 per square foot. Yet, the Archipelago lot downtown on South Franklin Street is assessed at $300 per square foot.  Some nearby improved properties reflect updated land values of $450 per square foot – all resulting in double-digit increases in their property taxes.

Some Juneau Assembly members believe that continuing the current mill rate is tantamount to “holding the line” on taxes and that’s where their responsibility ends.  But everyone knows that property tax formulation is a combination of the mill rate and property valuation – and both should be considered when budgeting our tax dollars.  

Even amid the pandemic, the Assembly blithely approved some large discretionary expenditures – all while the private sector suffered massive layoffs. City staff never considered serious operating spending reductions.  Last year $1.5 million in scheduled pay raises for city employees were approved along with new hires, longevity pay and merit increases. Additional increases in employee benefits and compensation is expected this year. 

Also funded was a brand-new childcare program that adds millions to future expenses along with a $1.5 million grant to Sealaska Heritage Institute subsidizing their $14 million arts plaza under construction in downtown Juneau.

Why is it that municipal operating expenditures are never reduced but consideration of temporary property tax relief for residents and small businesses is considered a tax break for the wealthy?

The city currently has around $40 million in reserves and unrestricted fund balances.  This is considerably higher than past years and more than enough to absorb a substantial temporary reduction in property taxes. Our economy has begun to recover, and, with declining debt and increased sales tax collections, our municipal revenues will recover as well.

The economic health of Juneau’s families, businesses and their employees should be as important as non-essential CBJ spending. One of the most important ways the Assembly can continue to help existing small businesses and attract new startup businesses is to keep property taxes and overall cost of living low.

The Assembly can still reconsider property tax relief.  The time to act is now when Juneau’s businesses and citizens need it most.

After retiring as the senior vice president in charge of business banking for Key Bank in Alaska, Win Gruening began writing op-eds for local and statewide media. He was born and raised in Juneau and graduated from the U.S. Air Force Academy in 1970. He is involved in various local and statewide organizations and currently serves on the board of the Alaska Policy Forum.

Art Chance: When you wish upon a star

By ART CHANCE

Juneau is a nice place to live if you are among the upper levels of the local, state, and federal government and the people who deal with them.   

It is an especially nice place to live if you’re among the self-anointed “in crowd” of old Juneau money, Democrat and Native royalty, and lobbyist and political money.

This crowd and the people closely associated with them have pretty much a monopoly on the million-dollar houses with a water view.  Some of the old money goes back to the gold mining days when Juneau was the richest town in America and maybe in the world.   

The rest of the rich and powerful got their money and power from knowing the right people and being in the right place at the right time. Harry Truman once said that the only way you can get rich in government is to be a crook, and that is pretty much true. I know or know of a few who got rich by being inside government, though that can be risky business, but I know or know of many more who got rich by having connections inside government.

Juneau is not a very nice place to live if you are a Republican elected or appointed official, an employee at the delivery of service level in government, or below the owner/manager/professional level of what little private sector there is in the capital city. 

Compared to other urban areas in Alaska, and only in Alaska would a town of 30K people be considered urban, Juneau is breathtakingly expensive. The Bureau of Labor Statistics does not monitor cost of living in Juneau. The Alaska Department of Labor does a market basket survey that is sometimes reliable but is subject to political influence. The State last did a comprehensive and somewhat objective survey of cost of living differentials within Alaska and between Alaska and Seattle in 1984.   

The cold breath of the Capital move was still strong enough that the State concluded that there was no reason for a geographic differential for Juneau; the math was simple; if you paid a Geographic Differential for Juneau, it was easy to economically justify moving any position to Anchorage. 

The State also concluded that there would be a negative differential between urban Alaska, including Juneau, and Seattle of 12.5%. The Seattle based marine highway unions knew better and had the power to force the State to agree to a 25% differential for any of their members who claimed to reside in Alaska, which mostly meant those who claimed to live in Juneau or Ketchikan.

The Public Employment Relations Act requires that any labor agreement include a cost of living differential between Alaska and Seattle. That is language from the early 1980s and was precipitated by the Hammond Administration’s attempts to rein in the cost of the ferry system. By the time I became director of labor relations in early 2003, using Seattle as a base had become untenable. In the early 2000s, Seattle was far more expensive than Anchorage or Fairbanks.  

Since I had the power to do it and nobody knew enough to question me, I just made the base Western Washington, which is expensive enough, but not as expensive as Queen Anne Hill. I spent $100K on salary surveys but never could get a truly reliable number, but the old marine highway number of about 25% is pretty good for a Juneau differential.   

I kept my office in Juneau, but only because the governor and the commissioner of Administration were there most of the time. Most of our actual work was in Anchorage and Fairbanks and we spent hundreds of thousands of dollars a year on travel costs between Juneau and those cities. We were in Juneau for meetings, most of which were unnecessary or could have been done by phone or video.  We all knew that moving the office to Anchorage would be at least a 25% pay raise and a savings of several hundred thousand dollars a year in travel costs.

Gov. Frank Murkowski was the last governor to insist that all of his commissioners maintain their primary office in Juneau other than the adjutant general, and somewhat, the commissioner of Public Safety. Governors Sarah Palin and Sean Parnell let division directors and above maintain an office wherever they chose. Most chose Anchorage.  

Gov. Bill Walker made Bruce Botelho, former mayor of Juneau, his henchman to remove everyone who’d ever had a Republican thought from State government, but even Walker made little attempt to either hire the Juneau anointed ruling class or to return the runaway State employees to the People’s Republic.   

Actually, the Republican Dunleavy Administration has a bit more of a political appointee presence in Juneau than had its recent predecessors. In sum, the only vestigial remains of the State Capital in Juneau are some of the Office of the Governor, some of the Department of Administration, and some of the finance and budget sections/divisions of operating departments that have to deal directly with Admin or OMB.  

Oh, and they still have the star on the map and an old post office and a former federal office building that we call the Capitol.   Except during the legislative session, Juneau is nothing more than a regional center for government. 

They seem to think that star will be there forever.

But Juneau’s self-anointed in-crowd is, as always, totally lacking self-awareness. I read a Juneauite’s hoity-toity retort on a post on Juneau’s attempt to eliminate the cruise industry. He goes on and on about what a cultural mecca Juneau is.   

Well, it is, for a town of 30,000 people, but only if you are affluent enough to afford tickets to Perseverance Theatre, dinner at Salt, and drinks after work at The Hangar or other watering holes in town. 

If you’re a State Range 12 or 14, the typical delivery-of-service employee, those destinations are once a year, just for special occasions. Juneau can’t even support a McDonald’s downtown or chain restaurants in the Mendenhall Valley. Even Walmart couldn’t stay in business there.  

My former hometown in Georgia has about a third of the population and about a third of the per capita income as Juneau and yet it has a thriving Walmart “Super Center.”  Were it not for the vestigial remains of the upper levels of the Executive Branch, and the legislative session, downtown Juneau would be a ghost town between September and May. Ever been to Skagway in January? That would be downtown Juneau.

But Juneau’s clueless in-crowd wants to destroy the tourism economy that supports all the stuff they take for granted.   

I’ll admit that at the public policy level I’m not a big fan of a tourism economy; it produces a few rich owners and a lot of poor and transient service workers; as a public policy matter, you need more than that or you become a tourism city in the Third World.   

When I lived in Juneau, I saw the same ships in January in Puerto Vallarta that I saw in July in Juneau and even ran into people at bars and restaurants in Juneau who I’d seen in bars and restaurants in Puerto Vallarta. Those “cultural amenities” that the Juneau elite likes to tout are dependent for their survival not on government or the Juneau elite, but on tourism.  I’ve never lived off money that my great-grandfather made, so I know what it is like to live in Alaska’s seasonal and “boom and bust” economy.   

In the good times, you take money to the bank in a wheelbarrow; in the bad times you take money out of the bank in a wheelbarrow, and you hope that there is a little left over for you to start the next season.

I spent a quarter century in Juneau, most of it in the upper levels of state government.  I lived well though I spent a lot of time on airplanes, in hotels, and hearing rooms. When I came home it took a few days to not reach for the phone to call room service when the alarm went off.  I worked with people who I still cherish and I worked with people I simply hated; you have to be able to do that in government. 

We loved our boat and the lifestyle that goes with it. But, if you don’t have a job or business that allows you to have amenities and travel a bit, Juneau is a dismal, dark place.

Now, the people who are living off money granddaddy made or off public employee retirements are trying to make it impossible for anyone else to tolerate living in Juneau. It isn’t unheard of; Haines did the same thing when it chased the tourism industry away, but going to Haines isn’t exactly on anybody’s bucket list. Fairbanks is a regional center for government and can be brutal in winter, but you can drive out or fly out at a somewhat reasonable price. You can fly around the world from anywhere else in the US for the price of a ticket from Juneau to Seattle or Portland, and if you’re going anywhere other than the major left coast cities, throw in a few hundred bucks for staying overnight in the People’s Republic of Seattle or Portland.   

At bottom, if you don’t have a boat and have the money to travel a bit, or a job that pays for you to travel a bit, Juneau is pretty much unfit for human habitation. I guess the “in-crowd” just wants to keep their own company because a stroke of the governor’s pen or 21 and 11 in the legislature moves the Legislature and the upper levels of government out of Juneau.   

The federal employees follow the government out other than the Coast Guard and maybe some law enforcement.   Juneau can be cold, wet, dark, and lonely in January; check out Skagway in January some time.

Art Chance is a retired Director of Labor Relations for the State of Alaska, formerly of Juneau and now living in Anchorage. He is the author of the book, “Red on Blue, Establishing a Republican Governance,” available at Amazon. 

Kristie Babcock: Only rural person of color denied opportunity by Chief Justice Bolger

By KRISTIE BABCOCK

Chief Justice Joel Bolger, like many lawyers, is good with words, but the words have no real meaning.

This is the lesson I learned during my first official session on the Alaska Judicial Council. I read the chief justice’s June 8, 2020 letter.  

Justice Bolger wrote: “We recognize that too often African-American, Alaska Natives, and other people of color are not treated with the same dignity and respect as white members of our communities.  And we recognize that as community members, lawyers, and especially as judicial officers, we must do more to change this reality.”  

Yet when confronted with a test of his own prejudice, his own condescending attitude toward rural Alaska, his own “big city” bias, he failed the test.  

The vacancy the Judicial Council was dealing with was to replace the soon to be retired Bolger himself.  On his way out, he still wanted to control who might replace him. There was one applicant for the State Supreme Court who was from rural Alaska.  That same applicant was also the only person of color to apply.  

That applicant was Superior Court Judge Paul Roetman, presiding judge of the entire 2nd Judicial District.  The Judicial Council split 3-3 on nominating Judge Roetman.  

The tie-breaking vote was Chief Justice Bolger.  

Let us review what Bolger wrote just one year ago: 

“We judges must examine…what biases – both conscious and unconscious – we bring, and how we can improve our justice system…We must continue our efforts to make our court system and its judges reflect the community that we serve.”  

“We must also work to attract more people of color to the practice of law and, ultimately, to judicial careers.”

Read: Alaska Supreme Court puts its judicial activism in writing

When put to the test, Chief Justice Bolger proved his biases against even nominating a person of color and a person who lives in rural Alaska.  What did the (very white, and very urban, and urbane) chief justice have to say when he denied Judge Roetman even the opportunity to be considered for appointment?  Nothing.

In my opinion his vote tells the truth and his June 8, 2020 letter was just puffery.

Bolger had no trouble writing these words: “To heal the raw wounds of racism and history so painfully laid bare.”  But when it was up to him to nominate the only applicant who was both from rural Alaska and the only person of color, he voted no.  Instead, only three white, urban judges were nominated.  

I was shocked that a highly qualified, sitting presiding judge was denied the opportunity to even be considered by the governor. You see, the way our Alaska Constitution is designed, the governor must appoint judges only from the nominations the Judicial Council sends along.   The Council has total control over the nomination.  The governor has no discretion except to pick from a list we send him.

And who are the seven members of the Judicial Council?  Three of us are public members, appointed by the Governor for six-year terms and subject to a vote of confirmation by a joint session of the Alaska Legislature. 

Three other members are privately selected by the Board of Governors of the Alaska Bar Association. Lawyers choosing lawyers to choose the judges.  That is the way the current system works.  The chief justice chairs the council and only casts tie-breaking votes.

Is it any surprise that the public members voted to give Judge Roetman a chance to be considered?  All three public members of the council were convinced Judge Roetman was highly qualified and deserved an opportunity to be considered by the Governor.  

The three lawyers voted no.   

What exactly was so negative about the presiding judge of the Second Judicial District that he should be denied the chance to be considered by the governor?   

He did not attend enough lawyer club activities in the urban areas?  Perhaps he does not dress the part?  Maybe he is good enough for rural Alaska, but not good enough for the big league in the big city?  Maybe he uses syntax that does not sound “white” enough?   I expect the responses from the lawyers will be what minorities are very used to hearing…not up to par, not quite good enough, not the “best timber,” does not have quite the right temperament, or some other gobbledygook.  

Those of us who are women recall such lame, chauvinist and absurd objections to our consideration in times past.   

At least the Judicial Council has moved beyond that prejudice, although it appears to still harbor some nasty biases – conscious or unconscious – when it comes to rural Alaska and people of color.

If only a presiding judge, a person of color, a lifelong Alaskan, with decades of experience, who lives and works and understands rural Alaska could be given the same opportunity. 

The ability, common sense and integrity of each applicant is what counts.  I do not make the argument that skin tone means very much, but Chief Justice Bolger prominently did. He made a huge point in his June 8, 2020, letter (a letter signed by 4 of the 5 members of the Supreme Court).  

The council is responsible for forwarding (at least two) names for nomination for every vacancy on the court, but nothing stops us from forwarding all highly qualified applicants for consideration by the governor.   

What Chief Justice Bolger, by his final act on the Judicial Council, did to the dreams and aspirations of people of color and rural Alaskans is devastating and terribly, terribly wrong.  

Kristie Babcock is a public member of the Alaska Judicial Council.  She is a lifelong Alaskan, business owner and resident of the Kenai Peninsula. She worked as director of boards and commissions for two governors and has observed the Judicial Council for over 30 years. 

What is wrong with these people?

ANCHORAGE DAILY PLANET

The Anchorage Assembly’s 8-2 vote this week to change local law to force women’s shelters to accept men who say they are women makes us wonder: What is wrong with the our Assembly members?

The vote – Assemblywomen Jamie Allard and Crystal Kennedy were the only “no” votes – would revise Anchorage Municipal Code Title 5, the Equal Rights section.

The move appears aimed at the Downtown Hope Center, a Christian shelter, which allows women, but bars biological males, even if they identify as women.

The city lost its last kerfuffle with the Hope Center, which has provided safe space for battered and vulnerable homeless women for more than 30 years.

In a 2018 letter to the Anchorage Daily News, Kate Anderson, senior counsel with Alliance Defending Freedom, an Arizona-based legal ministry, which represented Downtown Hope Center, laid out the facts.

A man, Jessie Doe, claiming to identify as a woman, arrived at the center agitated, aggressive, and injured. Hope Center Executive Director Sherrie Laurie encouraged Doe to go to the hospital, even paying for the taxi to the emergency room, Anderson wrote.

Doe complained to the Anchorage Equal Rights Commission, claiming sex and gender identity discrimination.

“Laurie later learned that, before coming to the Hope Center, the police had picked Doe up from another homeless shelter where Doe had started a fight,” Anderson wrote. “The other shelter had even banned Doe from returning until July 4.”

After months of investigation, the commission pressured the Hope Center to change its policies, despite its finding no evidence of past discrimination – and despite the Anchorage ordinance in question specifically exempting homeless shelters.

By day, the Hope Center provides food, shower, and laundry services, and also job skills training to any man or woman in need, no matter their status, no matter their gender identity. It serves 450-600 cups of soup daily and 142,000 meals annually, Anderson says.

At night, the Hope Center becomes a women’s-only shelter to fill a deep need in the community to help homeless women who have been beaten, raped, trafficked and emotionally and physically abused, Anderson says.

The center went to federal court in September 2018 to block enforcement of Anchorage’s anti-discrimination laws against the center. The center argued it was exempt from the city’s anti-discrimination laws.

On Aug. 9, 2019, a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction to stop the municipality from enforcing its non-discrimination code.

The next month, Anchorage dropped its complaint against the center, conceding the shelter is not, under the law, operating a public accommodation. The Equal Rights Commission settled, awarding the Downtown Hope Center $100,000 in legal fees and $1 in damages.

It is nothing short of incredible that eight members of the Anchorage Assembly would force a shelter for battered, abused, vulnerable homeless women – women abused by men – to house men who say they are women at night in the same facility with those women. What kind of a mind believes that is OK?

You simply have to ask: What is wrong with these people?

Surprise concession: Biden Administration defends Willow project in court

Although pushed hard by environmentalists and his own Department of Interior Secretary to go the other way, the Biden administration is defending the ConocoPhillips Willow project in court.

The project has the potential to put 160,000 barrels a day into the Trans Alaska Pipeline System for the next 30 years, for up to approximately 590 million total barrels of oil.

Willow is located on the edge of the National Petroleum Reserve Alaska and was approved under the Trump Administration in October. Then came the lawsuits from environmentalists who said the decision was wrong and oil contributes to global warming. Earthjustice, a nonprofit environmental law firm, sued the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace. The Biden Administration is generally hostile to oil, and Interior Secretary Deb Haaland has written formal opposition to the project when she was a congresswoman.

During a meeting with Biden on Monday, when he signed a bill allowing cruise ships to return to Alaska, the Alaska delegation of Sen. Lisa Murkowski, Sen. Dan Sullivan, and Congressman Don Young told Biden that this project is vital to Alaska’s economy. According to the New York Times, on Wednesday the Biden Administration filed a brief in the case, saying the decision to go ahead on Willow was correct.

The Interior Department’s brief said that the Trump Administration’s green light for Willow complied with the environmental rules in place at the time and that Earthjustice did not challenge the approval “within the time limitations associated with environmental review projects” for the National Petroleum Reserve.

“Conoco does have valid lease rights,” the department wrote in its 70-page statement to the court.

More than 1,000 jobs are expected during peak construction of the Willow project, with more than 400 jobs coming online during the operation of it. Willow would help offset declines in production from the North Slope and the oil would be subject to royalties and revenue to the State.

“The project, known as Willow, set up a choice for the Biden administration: decline to defend oil drilling and hinder a lucrative project that conflicts with its climate policy or support a federal decision backed by the state of Alaska, some tribal nations, unions and key officials, including Lisa Murkowski, a moderate Republican senator seen as a potential ally of the administration in an evenly split Senate,” the Times wrote.

Update: Here are the statements from Alaska’s D.C. delegation in response to this action by Biden:

“Alaska’s relationship with the Biden administration got off to a rough start after the President’s sweep of a pen called for reviews – and potential halts – to a number of responsible resource development projects. I’ve been working from the get-go to educate the new administration on why the Willow project is so important to Alaska’s economy, the communities on the North Slope, and the thousands of people who are employed in the region. I am pleased to share that the Department of the Interior has filed a brief in support of Willow and has committed to supporting the project moving forward. Through their careful review, the administration reached the same conclusion that we have always known, which is that the Willow project went through a rigorous, comprehensive permitting process and can move forward because it is being held to the highest environmental and labor standards in the world,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski. 

“As a senior member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee and former Committee chair, I have been aggressive in my advocacy for the Willow project. I brought the significance of the project to President Biden’s attention and many other senior White House officials on the first day of the new administration. During her confirmation process, I pressed now Interior Secretary Haaland to defend the Record of Decisions for the Willow project now being litigated in courts. I submitted multiple letters of support for the record from Alaskans and exhausted all avenues to send a clear message: this project has gone through an extraordinarily extensive process and should be allowed to proceed. The process goes all the way back to when the leases were acquired under the Clinton administration. The NEPA analysis was conducted using the Obama administration 2013 Integrated Activity Plan, which contains over 270 mitigation requirements. And a two-year long EIS process began in 2018 which included over 100 meetings with stakeholders on the North Slope and multiple public comment periods, resulting in a robust 2,600 page final EIS. The process across multiple administrations has been more than thorough. It’s time to move this project forward.

“At a time when Russia is providing more barrels of crude oil to the United States per day than Alaska, the Alaska Delegation has continued to stress to this administration the importance of this new development project located within the National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska. The Willow project would not only provide a valuable resource, but could also create around 2,000 high paying jobs in Alaska and support $2.3 billion dollars in revenue for the state—a boost to the economy at a time when we need it most. I’m glad the Interior Department has listened to our advice and will now defend the litigation and allow the permit to proceed. I urge Interior to show Alaskans that their words and actions align by taking the Willow project off their “pause and review” list once and for all.”

“On Monday in the Oval Office, I, along with my fellow delegation members, had the opportunity to deliver a message directly to the President, one that we’ve been making for weeks to every member of his administration: ‘Alaska’s Willow project is one of the most environmentally responsible and rigorous energy projects in our country, and the project deserves you and your administration’s support,’” said Sen. Dan Sullivan.

“Willow will create thousands of direct and indirect jobs in Alaska, and provide opportunities and billions of dollars in revenues for our state and indigenous communities on the North Slope. It will produce American energy with the highest environmental standards at a time when we’re importing far too much from our adversaries, like Russia. I appreciate the President and Secretary Haaland for listening to us and defending this once-in-a-generation energy development that will unlock many more opportunities for our state and our country. I also want to commend the numerous Alaskans and Alaska Native leaders—especially those who live within NPR-A and on the North Slope—for weighing in with the secretary and making the case for Willow. While this is excellent news for our state, I remain deeply concerned about some of the administration’s remaining policies that are still targeting Alaska and our workers, but today’s news on Willow is very positive for Alaska, good-paying jobs for working families, and our economy.”

“This is a good day for Alaska, our energy economy, and American energy independence. I want to thank the Administration, particularly my friend, Secretary Deb Haaland, for reaching what Alaskans know to be the right conclusion: the Willow Project is legally defensible and holds great promise for our state,” said Congressman Don Young, who has a good relationship with Sec. Haaland.

 “Secretary Haaland is my friend, and while we do not always see eye to eye, I appreciate that she always listens to the Alaskan perspective with an open mind. I have advocated for the Willow Project in conversations with her for quite some time, and I am grateful for her attention on this issue. By halting the Willow Project, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a devastating blow to Alaska’s energy workers, their families, and all who would benefit from responsible resource development in the NPR-A. The Willow Project is years in the making, and countless individuals at the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) worked hard to ensure a thorough environmental review. Late last year, when the Record of Decision was issued, BLM made clear that Willow could proceed all while protecting our environment. It is my great hope that in court, with the Administration on our side, we will ultimately succeed so that this project can deliver the good-paying jobs and affordable energy that Alaskans deserve.”

Jewish Museum, Mad Myrna’s target by hate as swastika stickers show up on buildings

Anchorage Police are asking for the public’s help in identifying the person or persons responsible for placing swastika stickers on two buildings in Anchorage. The stickers are white with a black swastika in the middle and the words “we are everywhere” at the top and bottom.
 
The two reports of the stickers — at the Jewish Museum and at Mad Myrna’s bar — were made on May 25. If anyone has any information about this investigation, including video, please call Dispatch at 3-1-1. If you find such a sticker, police ask that you don’t remove it or touch it but call Dispatch and report it.
 
“There is no place for hate in our community. The Anchorage Police Department (APD) takes these matters seriously. As part of our on-going investigation, we’ve partnered with the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) to determine any potential state and federal violations,” the police said in a statement.

Although an ancient symbol that dates back to 3000 BC, the current use of swastikas in America and Europe are to indicate racial supremacy, anti-Semitism, and are generally meant to intimidate Jews.

Six years later, a look back at the Berkowitz transition team’s ambitious homeless plan

Six years ago, the incoming administration of Mayor Ethan Berkowitz published an ambitious document detailing the mayor’s plans for public safety, homelessness, and the economy.

Read the Berkowitz Transition Report at this link:

Homelessness was such a priority of the Berkowitz Administration but his promises were unfulfilled. As Dave Bronson becomes mayor, the Berkowitz transition report is an informative read. Bronson will be sworn in on July 1 and has begun his transition team process.

The first priority of the Berkowitz homelessness plan was to improve transportation and access for the homeless. The deliverables were a complete needs assessment, free and reduced bus passes, lower prices for youth, and to focus on the safety and comfortability of transportation.

The second priority was to hire a homeless coordinator. That person came from the transition team itself — Nancy Burke — who was hired in August of 2015. After coordinating homeless programs for six years, Burke moved on in March, and is now special assistant to the president and CEO at United Way for housing and Covid-19 response. But while working for Berkowitz, she reported directly to the mayor. Her duties included looking at the money that is being spent on homelessness, including costs of police, hospital, jail, and coordinating with existing programs to ensure that affordable housing is safe and comfortable.

“We can make better use of our resources by coordinating our response to homelessness,” Berkowitz said at the time, while criticizing former Mayor Dan Sullivan for eliminating the homeless coordinator position in 2012, when the budget was tight. “Those are what I’d consider penny-wise and pound foolish cuts,” he told reporters.

The mayor also said in 2015 that if the State of Alaska didn’t expand Medicaid, Anchorage would do so on a local level. Gov. Bill Walker expanded Medicaid to cover more people that year, relieving Berkowitz of that battle.

A third priority was housing. The deliverable was to create a committee from Planning and Zoning to make recommendations for zoning changes. The rest of the deliverables were overflowing with bureaucratese that is not easily quantifiable:

•  Coordinate reports and groups that are working on this issue, continue work with transition teams

•  Affordable housing – mechanisms for subsidies, non-cash assets

•  Minimize co-location of low-income projects in low income neighborhoods

•  Creative solutions to encourage landlords to have affordable housing

A fourth priority was to train all municipal employees on Green Dot Bystander intervention techniques, which was a 90-minute training for all staff.

Berkowitz’ fifth priority was to keep “safe harbor” buildings in use. The deliverables were to leverage money to support the program, advocate increase public awareness about the importance of the program and work with RuralCAP.

Read about safe harbor buildings at this link.

By six months into his administration, Mayor Berkowitz promised he would have a job training program up and running to address homelessness. In his transition report, he said he’d have youth doing the watering of municipal gardens, and develop public/private partnerships to provide job trainings. He promised he would have micro loans and investments in small businesses of people who are homeless. He promised to “support development of meaningful use of time programs,” and “find create end to backlog of public assistance programs.

Also at six months, Berkowitz said his administration would address the “societal perspective on homelessness.” He would work on public awareness and “increase humanity toward people experiencing homelessness.”

He would also “maximize existing potential detox and substance abuse treatment,” and fund existing vacant beds.

By the six-month mark, Berkowitz said he would have found the resources to devote to homelessness programs, reduce taxes or give tax credits to landlords who rent to people with housing vouchers, increase the supply of land and buildings for permanent supported housing.

By 2019, Year Four of the Berkowitz era, there were an estimated 1,100 people who were known to be homeless in Anchorage, and the city was spending tens of millions of dollars every year on the problem. The number had not really budged in his years at the helm, even with the help of the homeless coordinator.

Berkowitz’ term in office ended abruptly on Oct. 23 2020, after a salacious episode with a local reporter became the news.

But before he left office, he had worked to space people out in homeless shelters to prevent the spread of Covid-19, and in doing so had commandeered the Sullivan, Ben Boeke and Dempsey-Anderson Arenas. The Sullivan is still a shelter for about 400 people, and those people now become Mayor-Elect Dave Bronson’s concern as he and his team enter the transition process and try to figure out the right path to deal with Anchorage’s toughest nut to crack: Homelessness.

Judicial Council advances three names for new Supreme Court Justice, snubs the lone minority rural applicant

The Judicial Council advanced to Gov. Mike Dunleavy the names of three judges to fill the upcoming vacancy on the Alaska Supreme Court. But in breaking a tie vote, Chief Justice Joel Bolger turned back the only minority and rural applicant.

The finalists were Dani Crosby, Jennifer Stuart Henderson, and Yvonne Lamoureux, white urban women.

The members of the council had the chance to advance the name of a rural minority judge, Paul Roetman of Kotzebue Superior, but the three lawyers on the council voted against the rural judge, while the three public members voted for him.

Chief Justice Joel Bolger broke the tie and voted against Roetman, in spite of Bolger being on the record stating that the court needs rural justices and minorities.

The judges whose names were advanced are all Anchorage Superior Court judges. Their names will be forwarded to the governor who must choose the next Supreme Court justice from those three.

Roetman, who describes himself as Mexican-American, has served in Kotzebue for many years and his nomination was championed by public member Kristie Babcock.

Ironically, it was Babcock who faced hostility from Democrats for her nomination to the judicial council because she was not from rural Alaska. Rep. Matt Claman lobbied against her for that reason, as did other Democrats and two members of the Alaska Redistricting Board. Babcock is from Kenai.

During the discussion at her first vote on the Judicial Council, Babcock said that if Roetman’s name could not be moved forward, she’ would vote against the other nominees.

“If we cannot move that name forward, then it’s not right to move any names forward,” Babcock said.

Roetman is considered a conservative “constructionist” judge. The three whose names were advanced to Dunleavy are all considered liberal to quite partisan.

Bolger is leaving the court early. Although his term ends in 2027, he has become controversial due to perceived hostilities toward the Dunleavy Administration.

Targeting the Hope Center, Assembly passes measure to force women’s shelters to accept biological males

The Anchorage Assembly on Tuesday night heard testimony on a change in local law that would force shelters for women to accept biological males.

Then the Assembly voted 8-2 to revise Anchorage Municipal Code Title 5, the Equal Rights section, to prohibit women’s shelters from barring men who say they are women.

Assemblywomen Jamie Allard and Crystal Kennedy, both from Eagle River, voted against the measure.

The measure is in response to the Hope Center in downtown Anchorage, a Christian shelter which allows women to sleep shoulder to shoulder on mats on the floor, but does not permit biological males in the shelter, even if they identify as women.

The Hope Center faced a complaint by a transgendered individual and successfully fought it in court, ultimately settling with the Anchorage Equal Rights Commission. The Municipality of Anchorage paid $100,001 to the Hope Center and was forced to allow the shelter to continue operating for biological women only.

People testified on both sides of the matter before the vote was taken. One testifier said that because the Assembly had in a previous meeting appropriated funds for a transgender shelter for 18-24-year-olds, it had established precedence that some people need specific safe spaces.

The changes to Title 5 had already been through two work sessions but sets up the city for a lawsuit down the road, if a women in a shelter is attacked or traumatized by having to share space with a male.

It appears the liberal Assembly is trying to push measures like this through before Dave Bronson is sworn In as mayor on July 1, when he would have the power to veto such changes.