Wednesday, July 22, 2026
Home Blog Page 1142

Pebbled: When the government dictates ‘advanced prohibition’ of any project

SENIOR CONTRIBUTOR
-
26

By MARK HAMILTON

(Editor’s note: This is the fourth in a series by Mark Hamilton about the history of the Pebble Project in Alaska.)

Part of our collective awareness must be the recognition of the opponents to our responsible development.

It is important that Alaskans understand the degree to which preservationists will go to stop development.  The National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) is already a “guilty until proven innocent” event wherein a planned project must demonstrate compliance with every regulation governing the permits required for a project.

I think that is appropriate. Alaskans want to be certain that any approved development project results in the least environmentally damaging plan. The NEPA process demands that. Later, we can examine in detail the NEPA process, but for now it’s important to understand that preservationists don’t want projects to even enter the permit process.

How can they do that?  The Environmental Protection Agency purports an authority to stop a project prior to any evaluation by the NEPA process.  In the case of Pebble mine, discussions were underway at EPA as early as 2005—that is even before the parent company had secured 100% of the claims in the area.

In true government fashion, EPA wants you to believe this is good for you, that it will facilitate planning by developers and industry.  They claim it “will eliminate the frustrating situations in which someone spends time and money developing a project for an inappropriate site and learns at an advanced stage that he must start over.”  

Who do you think would be the authority to determine “inappropriate” sites?  Exactly how would that be determined?

Get ready for the next promise.  “…in addition, advance prohibition will facilitate comprehensive rather than piecemeal protection of wetlands.”

Let’s digest this one for a moment. The phrase “advance prohibition” should make you take a breath. Advance of what? In this case, any science, even the pathetic Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment, pseudo-science at best, had not yet begun.  Advance of public input?  Advance of a development plan?

Concerned yet?  How about “comprehensive rather than piecemeal protection.”  That way no one needs to deal with a single development project, we can skip site specific assessment, size of development, environmental baseline assessments, the whole array of environmental safeguards that might apply to a “piecemeal” evaluation.

With this claimed authority, EPA can zone massive regions with advance prohibition. Indeed, the conclusion of Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment was “no mine of any size” should be allowed in Bristol Bay.  They had hoped to have the effort serve as a model for a new wave that they termed “proactive watershed planning.”  There you have it 
Alaska, prohibitive zoning of a piece of land as large as the state of Ohio.

With the end game revealed, you can start to see the reason and the purpose of the massive narrative of fear campaign carried out by EPA and its host of environmental activists.

But EPA had a problem. Years after their initial discussions about the prospect of a preemptive veto (in bureaucratic terms “preliminary determination”), EPA had no case, no science, in short no reason for the veto they so desperately wanted as a model.  

And worse, the developers were getting closer and closer to submitting their permit application. Once in the NEPA process, EPA would have to depend on careful and scientific assessment, not exactly what they had in mind.  

That’s not a guess; later the developers sued EPA (to be discussed in more detail in future columns) and, as you probably know, with that legal action, Freedom of Information Act allowed access to their emails. 

There is no need to conjecture about the intent and the mood of EPA; it’s all there in their emails.  

EPA announced the plan to conduct the Bristol Bay Watershed Assessment with the statement that it would not be used for a regulatory decision.

EPA’s cover story was so convincing that Alaska’s senior Sen. Lisa Murkowski stated that no veto decision would occur until all the science had been evaluated.  

Reacting to her statement, a senior EPA official said in an email, “an interesting spin of EPA’s announcement/decision,… her statement would suggest that no [“veto”] would be done until all the science is in …Obviously, that’s not what we have in mind…”

So, don’t beat yourself up if you were fooled. Our own senator with tons more access than you or I have, bought it hook, line, and sinker.

In the end, Murkowski was hopelessly pebbled.

The “Pebbled” series at Must Read Alaska is authored by Mark Hamilton. After 31 years of service to this nation, Hamilton retired as a Major General with the U. S. Army in July of 1998. He served for 12 years as President of University of Alaska, and is now President Emeritus. He worked for the Pebble Partnership for three years before retiring.

[Read: Pebbled: The secret history of ANWR and the human hand that shaped it]

[Read: Pebbled: Environmentalists have fear mongering down to an art]

[Read: Pebbled: Virtue signaling blocked the project of the century for Alaska]

Operating budget fails House after marathon weekend session

Suzanne Downing
-
18
Operating budget fails House after marathon weekend session

Due to a baby ready to be born in one legislator’s family, and a sick child in another member’s family, the House didn’t get the budget passed on Sunday.

The House leadership was trying to rush the budget through because Rep. Grier Hopkins had to get to Anchorage for the arrival of his child, and Rep. Zack Fields had to return to Anchorage due to a sick child.

There went the majority.

But Sunday at least ended in with a path forward in the Alaska House of Representatives, as the Operating Budget was sent back to the Rules Committee. Without the two men who left for Anchorage, the majority doesn’t have the votes to pass the budget, and won’t have a majority for a few days. On Monday, the House will instead meet in joint session with the Senate to hear remarks from U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan.

[Read: Republican input not welcome, as Democrats cut off amendments midstream]

Sunday was high drama, but much of it behind caucus doors.

In a procedural move that was very much “in the weeds,” the House majority voted earlier on Sunday to refused to allow HB 69, the Operating Budget, to go back to “second reading,” to help Speaker Louise Stutes stop the amendment process in its tracks, with over 30 amendments thrown in the trash, something liberal members like Rep. Ivy Spohnholz and other hard-left members of the majority wanted to do, since too many of the Republican amendments were passing.

Outtakes from Saturday’s House floor session that show the frustration Speaker Stutes was experiencing.

The fragile Democrat-dominated majority had made a mess of things over the weekend and had forgotten, it appears, that it would need the Republican votes to get into the Constitutional Budget Reserve and to sweep funds left over from last year into this year’s budget. Throwing out their amendments before they were even offered on the floor was the worst strategy possible.

Rep. Sara Rasmussen and Rep. Josiah Patkotak finally approached the dais on Sunday and appeared to break with the Democrats to tell Speaker Stutes they could not vote in favor of a budget that had disenfranchised so many representatives from being able to make their amendment motions.

Rep. Bryce Edgmon, the immediate past speaker, also approached the dais three times and appeared to warn Stutes she needed to adjourn because she was losing control of the House. Finally, the budget was sent back to the Rules Committee. When it comes back to the House Floor, the Republicans will be able to offer their amendments.

Republican input not welcome: House Democrats block dozens of amendments on operating budget

Suzanne Downing
-
22
Republican input not welcome: House Democrats block dozens of amendments on operating budget

It’s a mess in the Alaska House of Representatives today, as the Democrat-led majority blocked as many as 30 amendments that were yet to be offered on the State Operating Budget, House Bill 69. It appeared that the Republican minority was having too much success getting their amendments through during a marathon session in the House over the weekend. Speaker Louise Stutes put an end to it.

The Saturday House session lasted over eight hours. But on Sunday, the process was delayed and delayed, which shows the difficulty of having what is a nearly evenly split House, where every vote counts. The Democrat-controlled majority is exceedingly fragile. When Rep. Sara Rasmussen Rep. Kelly Merrick started voting with Republicans on some amendments, Rep. Geran Tarr simply exited the floor, making it impossible to get a majority vote. A “call on the House” was placed a couple of times to round her up from her hiding place.

On Sunday, the House majority was voted to stay in “third reading” on the budget, meaning dozens of proposed amendments would not be heard, even though they had been filed by the deadline. The Republican minority briefly left the House floor in disgust to caucus privately.

Normally, those minority members excluded from the House Finance budget process are allowed to offer amendments on the House floor. That is usually their only opportunity. But not today.

House Speaker Louise Stutes had a difficult time maintaining her composure and conducting business, clearly exhausted by the long days. At one point during the Saturday session, she uttered “Jesus,” in exasperation under her breath, but it was clearly audible by microphone. There were a number of “point of orders” that had tried her patience and limited skill set.

A few Republican amendments passed.

One, Amendment 19, by Rep. David Nelson, add funds to the Department of Law, using $200,000 from the Alaska Gasline Development Agency, all for the purpose of defending Second Amendment rights of Alaskans against the Biden Administration.

Rep. Sarah Vance’s Amendment 26 passed, reducing red tape with online applications.

Rep. George Rauscher amendment to eliminate legislators’ per diem after the first 121 days passed.

And Rep. David Eastman had a successful amendment — the Capitol Building must open to the public no later than Day 121 of this session.

House Minority Leader rose to speak to her disappointment in the process, which had disenfranchised over half of the state, whose representatives were not allowed to make floor amendments to the budget.

This is a developing story.

Can legislators hold two state positions?

Anchorage Daily Planet
-
8
Can legislators hold two state positions?

By ANCHORAGE DAILY PLANET

Excuse us for asking, but how is it that two Alaska legislators appear to each be holding two state positions at the same time – something barred by the Alaska Constitution? Where is the news media?

Reported only by MustReadAlaska.com, Democrat Rep. Liz Snyder, District 27, is a member of the Alaska House of Representatives since last year and is advertising for enrollment for a class she will teach this fall at the University of Alaska Anchorage under her aka name, Elizabeth Hodges.

Snyder’s public official financial disclosure shows she was paid up to $100,000 last year by the University of Alaska, the website reported.

Democrat Rep. Geran Tarr, District 19, lists herself as adjunct faculty member at UAA. Her financial disclosure shows she made between $2,000 and $5,000 last year for classes at UAA, while she was a legislator, the website reports. She’s been teaching classes there since 1999, and has been a legislator since 2013.

Here, in part is what the constitution says: No legislator may hold any other office or position of profit under the United States or the state.

Kaboom! Seems clear to us.

What is not so clear is why the mainstream news media in this state is so deeply asleep that lawmakers can flout the constitution under their noses. It leaves us to wonder: What else is going on?

Read more at the Anchorage Daily Planet.

Fact-checking Dunbar: Anchorage’s operating budget cannot be cut?

Suzanne Downing
-
20
Fact-checking Dunbar: Anchorage’s operating budget cannot be cut?

In a recent televised debate, mayoral candidate Dave Bronson said that he will find ways to trim the municipal budget so the city can make property tax rebates to those who had to pay those taxes during the months that their businesses were closed by order of the mayor during 2020.

It’s a matter of fairness, Bronson said: To shut down businesses and then charge them property tax during the shutdown is morally wrong.

His opponent, Forrest Dunbar, who came into office in 2016 and voted in favor of ever-expanding budgets under his political mentor Mayor Ethan Berkowitz, says no tax rebates will be allowed under the Dunbar administration. He also claimed the budget is actually already cut, and he challenged Bronson to name where he’d cut.

“If we want to be an economically competitive city with the rest of the world, with the rest of the country, we have to offer unique quality of life. That means safe streets, good schools, things like parks and trails,” Dunbar said. “We can’t have huge cuts to these services and expect people to want to move here, to remain here, to start businesses here or to retire here.”

Anchorage, under Berkowitz and Dunbar, has developed a unique quality of life. It is not known for safe streets, and even it’s once fabulous parks and trails are no longer bragging points, since many residents find them unsafely occupied by drug-addled vagrants. Dunbar, who is not married and has no children, may not be in touch with just how low-performing the public schools in Anchorage have become.

Dunbar was in lockstep with Berkowitz, who had been elected the year prior and served until his fall from grace and hasty resignation on Oct. 23, 2020. The men, and the majority-liberal Assembly grew the budget by over $69 million during those years, a 14.3 percent increase in just five years. Dunbar also successfully pushed passage of a beverage tax during his tenure on the Assembly.

If the budget had kept pace only with inflation, the Anchorage budget would today be about $540 million, but instead it has increased beyond the rate of inflation from $481 million to $550 million.

For comparison, the cold climate city of Buffalo, N.Y, has a budget of $519 million for an equivalent population of 261,310, while the cold-climate city of Lincoln, Neb. has a budget of $210 million for a population of 289,102.

Former Mayor Dan Sullivan found he had to trim the budget in 2009 after he inherited an untenable fiscal crisis from former Mayor Mark Begich, who had drained every savings account to pay for his pet projects. Sullivan proceeded to ask all department heads to offer ways to cut their budgets by a few percentage points, and he also rolled back executive employee salaries by 5 percent. He also reduced staffing through attrition and retirements.

According to the Alaska Policy Forum, there were 2,940 full-time employees and 390 part-time or seasonal/temporary employees in the Municipality. The average salary and benefits cost for full-time employees is $128,162, as of 2017. Some data points are captured in the APF study of the 2017 Anchorage Municipal payroll.

That, of course, was before the Muni added the latest cost-driver, an equity officer hired from Tacoma, Washington for over $115,000 a year.

[Read: Equity officer hired from Tacoma]

Must Read Alaska rules the statements by Dunbar as Fact-Free.

No CourtView: Malware attack forces Alaska Court System to take services offline

Suzanne Downing
-
7
No CourtView: Malware attack forces Alaska Court System to take services offline

The Alaska Court System temporarily disconnected online services, including its website and the ability to look up case information in CourtView. The servers holding the information were attacked by malware, the court system said in a press release Saturday night.

“At this time, the court system does not believe any confidential court documents or employee information has been compromised, but will promptly notify any affected individuals if that occurs. No customer credit card information was compromised.”

The court system is working with a cybersecurity company to respond to the incident and prevent any further system breaches, the press release said, having disconnected its servers from the internet to stop any additional incursions. This impacts the public’s ability to:

  • access the Alaska Court System website, except for the homepage;
  • access to CourtView, the court’s case management system which includes listings of all filings, orders, andhearing dates;
  • send email to any court email addresses, including filing documents by email;
  • receive email from court email addresses;
  • eFiling through TrueFiling;
  • submit online juror questionnaires;
  • participate by Zoom in hearings or meetings;
  • participate in hearings by video from jail facilities that use Polycom systems;
  • make online payments for bail or filing fees ; and
  • send citations through TRACS.The following systems will continue to work:
  • phone, fax and Zoom phone numbers;
  • internal email between ACS employees;
  • courtroom recording system;
  • electronic file access by judicial officers in eFiling locations; and
  • courthouse security systems and building access

It is unclear when the courts will reconnect to the internet. The court system is committed to continuing operations while remedying the cybersecurity incident.

Emergency hearings and essential proceedings will occur including: arraignments, domestic violence hearings, Child in Need of Aid emergency hearings, bail hearings, mental health commitment hearings, emergency guardianship proceedings, and search warrant requests.

Other proceedings may occur and the court will notify parties of any schedule changes. Most hearings will happen telephonically. All scheduled jury trials will continue as planned. The court system will be unable to update its website regularly while online services are down.

Phone numbers for individual courthouses are the best way to contact the court system. Updates and more information aboutaccessing services and court calendars will be made on the court system’s Facebook page and Twitter account ; you do not need Facebook or Twitter accounts to see updates.

Sen. Sullivan weighs in on FBI raid at Homer residence in search of Pelosi laptop

Suzanne Downing
-
35
Sen. Sullivan weighs in on FBI raid at Homer residence in search of Pelosi laptop

Sen. Dan Sullivan today wrote that he was concerned about the FBI raid on the home of a couple in Homer, Alaska. On his official Facebook page, he urged people to not jump to conclusions and to remember that law enforcement agents have a tough job.

That said, Sullivan wrote, “the FBI and Department of Justice have enormous power over American citizens, and unfortunately, Alaska has a history of overzealous federal agency actions. For example, the illegal and corrupt prosecution of U.S. Senator Ted Stevens remains a source of distrust between federal agents and the Alaskan people,” Sullivan said.

“As part of the U.S. Senate’s oversight responsibilities, I will be asking FBI Director Christopher Wray and the special agent in charge of the Alaska field office about the recent federal law enforcement actions in Homer, and if these actions infringed upon the civil liberties of the Alaskans involved,” he said.

On April 28, Paul and Marilyn Hueper and two of their houseguests were handcuffed and interrogated after FBI agents, Capitol Police, and other unknown law enforcement agents busted down the door to the Hueper’s home, searching for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s laptop. The Hueper’s believe it was a case of mistaken identity. Although they went to the Trump rally on Jan. 6 in Washington, D.C., they maintain that their actions were legal and they did not enter the Capitol, as they were accused of doing by the agents.

According to Marilyn Hueper, the search warrant was not produced until long after the agents had violated the sanctity of their home, searching through Marilyn’s wardrobe for clothing that matches that of a person of interest.

Paul Hueper said he took a photo of his wife walking up the Capitol steps on Jan. 6, but they were no closer than 100 yards (91 meters) from the building entrance itself. He posted that photo on Instagram, and from the back, the hair and coat are similar to that of the woman the FBI are apparently seeking.

The woman the FBI are seeking, who is not Marilyn Hueper.

[Read: FBI break into Homer, Alaska home looking for Nancy Pelosi’s laptop.]

Fact-checking Dunbar: Did he vote to open Anchorage due to election? (He says ‘no’)

Suzanne Downing
-
11
Fact-checking Dunbar: Did he vote to open Anchorage due to election? (He says ‘no’)

In a debate with mayoral candidate Dave Bronson on Tuesday, Assemblyman Forrest Dunbar said that his co-sponsorship of an ordinance that relaxed the Anchorage emergency order restrictions on businesses was not a calculated political move.

Dunbar said it was something he had been thinking about for some time and that he was encouraging the city to move from “mandates” to “recommendations.”

The Anchorage full vaccination rate for Covid is below 50 percent, and Dunbar had said two weeks earlier the rate needs to be 70 percent before he’d be willing to relax the restrictions.

Alaska’s News Source–KTUU’s Mike Ross asked Dunbar if, given the mayoral runoff in two weeks, Dunbar could understand how his vote looked political, rather than scientific.

Watch the video:

Dunbar replied, “The truth is, two weeks before that I was also having conversations with the health department trying to get these things turned into recommendations because we saw the trajectory of the vaccine.”

But two weeks earlier, Dunbar had a completely different story on the record at the Assembly. He spoke at length about the need for restrictions on businesses, gatherings, and sports, and he was hoping the city could open by June if everyone behaved. He said the State of Alaska was going to have an emergency declaration for most of the year.

“There’s no declaration at the state level. But the governor asked for one. The governor asked for one to go into the fall and even into the winter. But the Legislature was so caught up in partisan bickering that they failed to pass it in time.”

Dunbar wasn’t reading the political tea leaves. The governor didn’t want the emergency lockdowns to go into the fall or winter and neither did most of the Legislature. In fact, as soon as he signed the disaster declaration on April 30, he then signed a proclamation ending the disaster.

[Read: Governor signs disaster order, then proclamation ending disaster]

But Dunbar two weeks ago was prepared for a long emergency through the summer:

“So the state has asked for and is now moving towards a much longer emergency declaration than what we were asking for. I don’t think we need to go that long, because I actually do believe have we are going to get to 70 percent. We are going to be able to remove these E.O.s [emergency orders.] We’re going to be able to do it this summer. I hope we can do it before June, but even if we don’t I think we can move toward reducing these things,” Dunbar said of the restrictions during an Assembly meeting two weeks ago.

“But right now I don’t want to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. We have come so far. We’ve got our deaths down to zero per week, which is tremendous. I will support extending this because again, I think it makes sense,” Dunbar said. And with that, he said he would be a yes vote to continue the emergency orders that severely damaged businesses in Anchorage.

This week, he did a 180 and proposed to remove the restrictions except for the mask mandate, which is still in effect. The mayoral runoff election ends on May 11 at 8 pm.

Dunbar is running on a theme of fact-based leadership. Must Read Alaska rates this Dunbar statement as Fact-Free.

[Read: Dunbar: “I didn’t say that.”]

[Read: Is Anchorage safer with Dunbar at the helm?]

House Finance denies statutory PFD

Suzanne Downing
-
34
House Finance denies statutory PFD

The Alaska House Finance Committee on Thursday said no to an amendment that would have set the Permanent Fund dividend at about $3,000 this year, honoring the statutory formula. On a vote of 8-3, the amendment by Rep. DeLena Johnson of Palmer was voted down.

“By not paying the full, statutory PFD, it’s allowed us to kick the can down the road,” Johnson said. “With that in mind, this [statutory formula] still is the law.”

Among those voting against following the statutory formula for the dividend calculation was Johnson’s fellow Republican Rep. Sara Rasmussen of District 22, following in the footsteps of her predecessor Jason Grenn, who also voted against a full PFD.

Also opposing were Reps. Andy Josephson, Bart LeBon, Daniel Ortiz, Steve Thompson, Adam Wool, Bryce Edgmon, and Kelly Merrick.

Nikiski Rep. Ben Carpenter, a Republican, and Nome Rep. Neal Foster, a Democrat, voted in favor of it, along with Johnson, the Republican maker of the motion.

The Operating Budget moved from committee and is subject to amendments on the House Floor. A vote on the operating budget is expected this weekend. Capitol observers say they expect more PFD amendments before the final vote on the budget.

1...1,1411,1421,143...1,804Page 1,142 of 1,804

About us

Must Read Alaska is news of people, politics, policy, culture, and happenings in Alaska.

Contact
4021 West Hill Road,
Homer, AK 99603

Op-Ed/Article:
[email protected]

Subscription: [email protected]

The latest

The Marks of a True Shepherd: A Reflection on Psalm 23

Faith Watch 0
When I read through Psalm 23 a few days...

Opinion: Why Senator Lisa Murkowski Is Wrong on the SAVE Act and Election Security

AK Voices 0
By Josh Church, 2026 Candidate for Lt. Governor As a...

Analysis: Legislators Say Hilcorp Killed HB 381— Now Here’s the Truth

AK Voices 0
The displeasure and frustration from all parties on the...

© Must Read Alaska