Sunday, April 19, 2026
Home Blog Page 14

House Transportation Committee Advances Vehicle Bills with Focus on Commercial Autonomy and Title Standards

Todd M Lindley
-
0
House Transportation Committee Advances Vehicle Bills with Focus on Commercial Autonomy and Title Standards

The Alaska House Transportation Committee convened yesterday to refine legislation shaping the state’s future mobility landscape. Lawmakers adopted targeted amendments to House Bill 217 on autonomous vehicles before holding it for further review, then moved to discuss House Bill 303 on motor vehicle registration. The session underscored the need to balance innovation with practical enforcement and alignment with federal standards.

HB 217 – Clarifying Commercial Autonomous Vehicles Amid Enforcement Questions

The committee opened with HB 217, which seeks to establish a regulatory framework for autonomous vehicles, particularly commercial applications. Two amendments were adopted without objection. Representative Mina’s (D – Anchorage) Amendment A2 defined “personal delivery devices” (small sidewalk robots) to exclude them from the broader autonomous vehicle definition, preventing municipal regulatory confusion. “The defines those little robots, which are actually called personal delivery devices in statute,” Mina explained.

Representative Nelson’s (R – Sutton) Amendment A1 narrowed the bill’s scope to commercial vehicles such as big rigs and large passenger carriers. “This really dials it into commercial vehicles, saying exactly what it’ll be applied to, which is what our discussion all revolved around,” Nelson stated.

Discussion intensified when Representative McCabe (R – Big Lake) raised enforcement challenges, questioning fault determination, human operator verification, and ethical decision-making in crash scenarios. Emerging Technologies Coordinator Benjamin Glenn from the Department of Transportation provided key context: the bill targets SAE levels 3-5 automation, but verification relies on operator statements or post-incident data since capabilities are software-based. “The bill just defines capability, not any external markers,” Glenn noted.

Co-Chair Carrick (D – Fairbanks) emphasized keeping the bill narrowly focused on commercial vehicles rather than opening a broader autonomy debate. After Glenn’s input on federal preemption risks (HR 7390) and the need for ongoing stakeholder work, the committee held HB 217 and reopened the amendment deadline.

HB 303 – Updating Vehicle Title Requirements for Modern Standards

The committee then turned to HB 303, sponsored by Representative St. Clair (R – Wasilla), which aligns Alaska with federal and most state standards by establishing a 25-year rolling average for vehicle title requirements. No amendments were offered. St. Clair described it as straightforward modernization: “This is simple common-sense legislation. It’s just bringing us on par with the feds and most other states with a 25-year rolling average.”

With no discussion, Representative Stutes (R – Kodiak) moved the bill, which advanced unanimously with a “do pass” recommendation and zero fiscal note.

Next week’s “Tech Week” agenda includes presentations on drone innovation and Department of Transportation technology initiatives. The actions signal legislative intent to modernize transportation rules while addressing practical implementation hurdles for emerging technologies.

Public Urge Robust Funding for Renewables, Survivor Services, Education and Infrastructure as Senate Finance Weighs Budgets and Supplemental

Todd M Lindley
-
0
Public Urge Robust Funding for Renewables, Survivor Services, Education and Infrastructure as Senate Finance Weighs Budgets and Supplemental

Alaskans from across the state delivered a clear message during Thursday’s Senate Finance Committee public testimony session: invest now in renewable energy, domestic violence services, early childhood programs, education, tourism marketing and transportation infrastructure to safeguard communities, stabilize budgets and prevent long-term costs. The next two-days of hearings will cover the FY27 operating budget (SB 213), capital budget (SB 214), mental health budget (SB 215) and the current-year supplemental adjustments in House Bill 289.

A resident from Ketchikan, speaking for Southeast utilities and the region’s economic development group, called for $14.2 million — the recent three-year average — or at minimum $10 million for the Renewable Energy Fund. He cited Alaska Energy Authority data showing REF projects already offset 13 million gallons of diesel annually, worth $52 million at conservative pricing — more than the Power Cost Equalization endowment can sustainably pay out. Without continued REF support, he warned, PCE pro-ration risks rise and rural schools, businesses and jobs in mining, timber and seafood would suffer higher energy costs.

Multiple residents from rural communities and hub towns, including those in Southeast and Kodiak, echoed calls for a $2.5 million increase to the Council on Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault grant line in the Department of Public Safety, with $500,000 specifically for civil legal services. One advocate from Prince of Wales Island described how flat funding since 2017 forces programs to cut emergency shelter, transportation and basic needs support even as demand rose 53 percent in her area last year. “We may be forced to do away with critical services,” she said, noting grocery prices alone have climbed more than 60 percent.

Education and early childhood priorities dominated testimony from Juneau and Southeast residents. A Juneau parent highlighted 600 open teaching positions statewide at the start of the school year and urged sustained base student allocation growth beyond last year’s $20 increase. Another Juneau resident, an early childhood professional, pressed for $5.72 million to restore and expand the Alaska Infant Learning Program, shifting eligibility from 50 percent to 25 percent developmental delay. She also supported full use of the $5.9 million FY26 childcare benefits appropriation and another round of Roots Awards retention stipends, noting turnover remains the biggest operational challenge for providers.

Tourism leaders from Skagway and Sitka framed marketing as economic infrastructure. A Sitka official requested $10 million in statewide tourism marketing funds, citing 5.6 billion dollars in total economic impact and 48,000 jobs supported last year. A Sitka business owner emphasized shoulder-season independent travel, noting that visitors who saw Alaska Travel Industry Association campaigns were twice as likely to visit and that such spending keeps coastal communities viable year-round.

Infrastructure and fiscal stability also surfaced. A resident from Cordova stressed the need for timely federal transportation matching funds to avoid delaying projects halfway through the short construction season, while a Sitka-area advocate urged repayment of the Higher Education Investment Fund. A Haines resident highlighted cost-effective home modifications in the mental health budget that keep seniors and veterans independent rather than in distant facilities.

General feedback on HB 289 — the current-year supplemental — showed strong alignment with the committee’s February 25 scrutiny of its $467.7 million package. Residents urged swift approval of the $70.2 million DOT match and disaster/fire suppression capitalizations to prevent construction delays and maintain response capacity amid ongoing events. Many echoed OMB Director Lacey Sanders’ warnings on oil revenue volatility and the value of headroom, while pushing for proactive REF and CDVSA investments to reduce future PCE and social service burdens. The Must Read Alaska report on the prior day’s session noted the committee’s focus on a $52 million revenue shortfall, $40 million disaster relief request and $98.7 million fire suppression need, with Sanders stressing urgency to avoid defaults. Public testimony Thursday reinforced those risks, calling for stable funding to avert compounding shortfalls.

One Juneau resident captured the prevailing sentiment: “We have the tools, we have the resources. We really just need the will.”

Public testimony continues today with northern and western regions. With HB 289 expected back next week, lawmakers face pressure to balance immediate supplemental needs against long-term FY27 priorities amid persistent revenue uncertainty.

SB 150: Debates Net Metering Amid Equity and Grid Concerns

Todd M Lindley
-
1
SB 150: Debates Net Metering Amid Equity and Grid Concerns

The Alaska Senate Labor and Commerce Committee held its second hearing on Senate Bill 150, a measure aimed at establishing a standardized net metering program to boost renewable energy generation across the state. The meeting focused on recapping the bill’s provisions, analyzing potential pitfalls from other states’ experiences, and discussing a draft committee substitute. While no formal action was taken, the discussion highlighted tensions between incentivizing solar adoption and ensuring equitable costs for all utility customers.

SB 150 seeks to allow consumer-generators—typically homeowners with solar panels—to receive full retail credits for excess energy fed back into the grid. Curtis Thayer from the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) provided a recap, explaining that credits would accrue monthly and expire annually on March 31, promoting renewable investments by matching the rate consumers pay for purchased energy. A key feature is a reimbursement fund administered by AEA to mitigate utility revenue shortfalls, potentially preventing rate hikes for non-solar customers.

Gwen Holdmann, Chief Scientist at the Alaska Center for Energy and Power (ACEP), delivered an analysis, drawing lessons from states like Hawaii and California, where initial net metering policies have been reformed due to unintended consequences. She categorized issues into equity and cost-shifting, grid value of distributed solar, system caps, and battery storage promotion. On equity, Holdmann warned that paying full retail for excess power shifts fixed grid costs—such as maintenance—to non-solar users, potentially increasing their bills. “This cost shift still occurs. It’s just that we’re socializing it in a different way more at the state level,” Holdmann said, noting the fund’s uniqueness but lack of automatic funding mechanism.

Senator Rob Yundt (R – Wasilla) voiced concerns about disproportionate impacts: “It seems like it would disproportionately hurt those that don’t have solar.” Holdmann affirmed this, suggesting alternatives like utility-determined caps or innovative rate structures, such as monthly system charges for solar users to cover grid services. She also recommended trimming the bill’s list of qualifying technologies, excluding unlikely small-scale options like geothermal or ocean thermal energy.

Questions arose about the Regulatory Commission of Alaska’s (RCA) authority. Holdmann expressed doubt whether current statutes allow utilities to voluntarily implement full retail net metering without legislative changes, citing equity restrictions within rate classes. RCA’s Julie Vogler clarified that SB 150 amends discrimination statutes to exclude net metering, and existing regulations (3 AAC 5 900-949) would need updates. Thayer emphasized the need for legislative guidance, as utilities lack a unified plan and seek parameters for fair implementation.

Chair Bjorkman (R – Nikiski) noted a draft committee substitute incorporating some of Holdmann’s concepts, distributed for review but not formally adopted. “It merely is a draft for this iterative process to continue,” he said, aiming for a system that’s “fair and equitable as well as encourage people to build out additional electricity generation.”

The bill aligns with broader efforts to expand solar access, potentially making installations more economical by allowing annual credit rollovers to offset winter shortfalls. Advocates like Cook Inletkeeper argue it could incentivize larger systems, reducing reliance on gas amid shortages. However, critics worry about uncapping net metering without safeguards, as seen in other states where saturation strained grids.

SB 150 was set aside, with potential amendments addressing funding, caps, and equity.

Senate Finance Committee Scrutinizes $467M FY2026 Supplemental Amid Revenue Volatility and Disaster Needs

Todd M Lindley
-
0
Senate Finance Committee Scrutinizes $467M FY2026 Supplemental Amid Revenue Volatility and Disaster Needs

Alaska Senate Finance Committee, reviewed the Governor’s proposed FY2026 supplemental budget, addressing a projected $467.7 million shortfall driven by declining oil revenues, escalating disaster costs, and operational necessities. Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Lacey Sanders presented the package, emphasizing the need for swift action to avoid payment defaults, program interruptions, and construction delays. The hearing highlighted fiscal prudence amid oil price fluctuations, with a mid-March revenue forecast from the Department of Revenue poised to potentially alter the deficit outlook.

Sanders framed the discussion around unrestricted general funds, noting the supplemental’s scale: “$467.7 million is a substantial amount for a supplemental.” This figure stems from a $52 million revenue shortfall, down from a $68 per barrel oil price assumption last spring to $65.48 in the fall forecast. She stressed volatility: recent prices have climbed to around $70, but dips to near $60 remain possible, underscoring the need for “headroom” in appropriations to buffer against further declines.

Key components include $35.6 million for formula programs. The Department of Health requested $1.125 million for the Senior Benefits Program due to increased utilization, warning that without it, payments to eligible seniors would cease. More significantly, Medicaid needs $34.4 million in state funds plus $361 million in federal authority, based on mid-February projections. Sanders explained: without this, the state would halt $14 million bi-weekly check runs to providers, leading to defaults and compounding arrears into FY2027.

Fund capitalizations total $138.7 million, with $40 million for the Disaster Relief Fund to cover the October Ha Long storm (estimated at $150 million total, assuming a 90/10 FEMA match) and repay $10 million borrowed from a Department of Environmental Conservation project. An appeal for the 90/10 split is pending; denial would revert to 75/25, increasing state exposure. Sanders noted Alaska faces “about a disaster a month,” projecting $4-6 million remaining if no more occur by June. Fire Suppression requires $98.7 million, including $55 million from interim declarations and $43.7 million for prior obligations and spring preparedness, leaving $7-8 million cushion.

Statewide items amount to $127 million, featuring $2.5 million in debt service savings from bond refunding by the Department of Revenue. A $70.2 million capital supplemental recapitalizes the Alaska Higher Education Investment Fund from the Constitutional Budget Reserve (CBR), reversing last year’s drawdown. Operational needs total $44 million, including $3.3 million (multi-year) for Public Defender Agency contractors to clear backlogs, $4.7 million for Department of Corrections health care, and $1.25 million for Village Public Safety Officers (VPSOs) to fill vacancies.

A $70.2 million capital item for Department of Transportation (DOT) federal matching drew urgency. Senator James Kaufman (R – Anchorage) pressed: “I honestly don’t want to see projects delayed another year,” citing three years of instability. Sanders confirmed executive support, with Chair Stedman (R – Sitka) affirming timeliness to stabilize the industry. Without July 1 funding, projects risk deferral.

Comparing to House Bill 289 ($489.9 million), Sanders noted differences: a $2 million Medicaid reduction, $43 million more for fire suppression, and House inclusions like $30 million headroom and $35 million disaster contingency. Headroom, she explained, preauthorizes CBR draws via three-quarter vote, providing flexibility without repeated supermajorities. Stedman clarified legislative control: “We can still turn it down.”

Recent amendments (February 18) include Medicaid tweaks, VPSO funds, Economic Research Group retention adjustments to combat turnover, and bond savings. These post-date HB 289’s cutoff, so the Senate will incorporate them upon receipt.

Concerns arose over $1 million for “statehood defense” in the Department of Law, with Senator Jesse Kiehl (D – Juneau) questioning its use for cases potentially misaligned with Alaska sovereignty. Stedman noted planned scrutiny in the operating budget.

Sanders projected 98% confidence in stabilizing funds like fire suppression via reimbursements. The committee intends swift action on HB 289, prioritizing essentials while monitoring FEMA and revenue updates.

This supplemental addresses immediate gaps but underscores Alaska’s fiscal challenges: oil dependency, rising disasters, and program demands. Public testimony is slated for upcoming sessions, with regional access. As Sanders concluded, “Always happy to help answer questions,” signaling ongoing collaboration.

Senate Resources Grills AGDC on 8 Star Amid Transparency Concerns

Todd M Lindley
-
1
Senate Resources Grills AGDC on 8 Star Amid Transparency Concerns

In a tense and probing session yesterday afternoon in Juneau, the Alaska Senate Resources Committee scrutinized the state’s evolving role in the 8 Star Alaska LLC for the Alaska Gasline and LNG project, a multi-billion-dollar endeavor aimed at monetizing North Slope natural gas. Chaired by Senator Cathy Giessel (R – Anchorage), the meeting highlighted lawmakers’ frustrations over limited access to governance documents and the project’s shift from public-led to private-developer control. Presenters from the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC), including President Frank Richards and Commercial Director Matt Kissinger, defended the structure as a strategic pivot to attract private investment while preserving state benefits, but faced sharp questions on control, valuation, and timelines.

The hearing focused solely on Alaska’s interest in 8 Star Alaska LLC, reflecting the project’s significance amid Alaska’s energy challenges. AGDC, established in 2010 and bolstered by legislation in 2013 and 2014, was tasked with maximizing North Slope gas for local and global markets. Richards traced the project’s history: from an equity partnership with major producers like Exxon, BP, and ConocoPhillips, which faltered, to a 2016 restructuring recommended by consultants Wood Mackenzie. This led to a tolling model and project finance approach, culminating in federal approvals from FERC and other agencies.

A pivotal change occurred in March 2025 when AGDC transferred 75% of 8 Star LLC—a subsidiary holding permits, engineering, and rights-of-way—to Glenfarne Group, LLC, for an in-kind commitment to advance the project to Final Investment Decision (FID), valued at around $150 million. AGDC retains a 25% stake, with transition completed by July 1, 2025. Kissinger detailed the series LLC structure: a “TopCo” (8 Star Alaska LLC) oversees three subprojects—Arctic Carbon Capture (8 Star ACC, LLC), the 800-mile pipeline (8 Star Pipeline, LLC), and the LNG terminal (8 Star LNG, LLC) in Nikiski—allowing specialized investor participation while centralizing authorizations.

Lawmakers pressed on governance and control. Senator Bill Wielechowski (D – Anchorage) questioned the state’s diminished influence, noting Glenfarne’s majority board seats. Kissinger countered that minority protections, including unanimous consent on key matters, provide influence beyond voting. However, when Giessel demanded redacted operating agreements to verify these safeguards—citing over $1 billion in public investment since 2014—Kissinger cited confidentiality, requiring Glenfarne’s approval. “We’re unable to share those agreements… they are confidential,” he said. Giessel insisted on disclosure, emphasizing fiduciary duties under statute to deliver “maximum benefit” to Alaskans.

The discussion delved into the integrated project’s scope: removing CO2 via ACC for liquefaction, transporting gas south, and enabling exports of up to 20 million tonnes per year (MTPA). Senator Scott Kawasaki (D – Fairbanks) clarified ACC’s necessity, while Wielechowski probed ownership flows. AGDC owns 25% of the parent LLC, receiving distributions from retained subproject equity post-sell-down, with an optional “back-in” right for 5-25% direct investment within six months of FID—no obligation to fund to maintain the parent stake.

Phasing emerged as a flashpoint. Phase 1 prioritizes the pipeline for in-state gas delivery, estimated at $10.8 billion, with full build-out adding $33 billion for ACC and LNG. Richards expressed high optimism for Railbelt utilities facing supply shortages: “I put my confidence level at 98 percent” that the line will be built, alleviating needs for LNG imports. This confidence stems from milestones like gas supply agreements with Exxon, Hilcorp, ConocoPhillips (in principle), and Pantheon; letters of intent with Enstar and Donlin Gold; FEED completion by Worley; and two-thirds of pipe supply contracted.

Pricing projections varied: $16 per MMBtu for Phase 1, dropping to $5 at full volume due to economies of scale. Senator Myers (R – North Pole) noted Fairbanks’ current $24 rates would benefit, while Anchorage might see increases from $10, though Kissinger warned Cook Inlet contracts are rising to $16-20 anyway.

Transparency dominated closing remarks. Vice Chair Senator Matt Claman (D – Anchorage) lamented limited state access compared to private investors under NDAs. Giessel challenged the project’s alignment with Senate Bill 138 (2014), arguing it “morphed into something materially different.” She reiterated demands for documents, noting a similar request to Glenfarne’s Adam Prestidge.

The session adjourned with clear action items: AGDC to seek redacted disclosures and justify refusals.

This hearing underscores Alaska’s push for energy independence amid global LNG demand, but highlights tensions between commercial sensitivity and public accountability. With FID and pipe-laying possibly by December 2026, the project could transform the state’s economy—creating jobs, securing supplies, and generating revenue—yet lawmakers demand proof it serves Alaskans first.

Bolstering North American Trade – SJR 25 Set Aside for Refinement

Todd M Lindley
-
0
Bolstering North American Trade – SJR 25 Set Aside for Refinement

The committee heard SJR 25, a resolution sponsored by Senator Scott Kawasaki (D – Fairbanks) urging the continuation and modernization of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). Enacted in 2020 with bipartisan backing, the agreement faces a pivotal review in 2026, and the resolution aims to preserve its benefits while removing trade obstacles. Kawasaki framed it as essential for Alaska, given its close ties to Canada—its primary trading partner and land-border neighbor—supporting supply chains, jobs, and economic stability.

The presentation began lightheartedly with hockey banter, celebrating the UAF Nanooks’ Governor’s Cup win, before delving into the topic at hand. Staffer Samuel Marquardt detailed USMCA’s role in predictable trade, noting Alaska’s reliance on Canadian transit for goods like construction materials and fuel. He warned that missing the 2026 review could delay updates until 2032, injecting uncertainty. Senator Gray-Jackson (D – Anchorage) questioned Mexico’s role, prompting Kawasaki to affirm the tri-national scope, though Canada dominates Alaska’s trade volumes.

Chair Bjorkman (R – Nikiski) raised dynamic risks, referencing recent violence in Mexico trapping Alaskans and a Supreme Court decision on tariffs potentially enabling unilateral presidential changes. Kawasaki preferred keeping the resolution focused on trade architecture, avoiding geopolitical entanglements. He noted tariffs as consumer cost drivers and praised the Trump-era renegotiation.

Invited testimony from Steven Myers of the Pacific Northwest Economic Region (PNWER) reinforced the case, citing post-2020 trade growth of 56% and $343 billion in Canadian investment, supporting over 20,000 Alaska jobs. Myers emphasized stability for energy, minerals, and Arctic logistics, with the July 2026 joint review as a critical juncture.

Myers highlighted economic interdependence: “Canadian trade supports more than twenty thousand Alaska jobs, with nearly six thousand additional jobs provided by Canadian-owned businesses operating in the state.” The committee set SJR 25 aside for further consideration, potentially incorporating amendments on barriers or tariff implications. Rationale centers on sustaining investment and supply chains, especially Alaska-Canada corridors, without delving into crises. This resolution underscores Alaska’s strategic position in North American trade, where USMCA has driven growth amid global uncertainties. Unresolved elements include integrating Mexico-specific language and addressing tariff jurisprudence, as per legislative tracking. If advanced, it could influence federal negotiations, benefiting sectors like tourism and defense.

Understanding House Bill 280: Impact on Digitized Business Taxes

Todd M Lindley
-
0
Understanding House Bill 280: Impact on Digitized Business Taxes

The House Finance committee turned to House Bill 280, the “highly digitized tax” measure, which amends the Multistate Tax Compact to adopt market-based sourcing and shifts highly digitized businesses to single-factor apportionment for corporate taxes. Staffer Brody Anderson recapped: the bill targets online firms selling to Alaskans without physical presence, with a retroactive clause to January 1, 2026. Recent testimony from industries like motion pictures, banking, and telecom prompted amendment suggestions mirroring a vetoed prior bill.

Anderson walked through the fiscal note: $321,700 initial operating costs, dropping to $313,700 annually, funding two new auditors (Tax Auditor IV and II) for enforcement. While no revenue shown upfront, internal estimates project $25-65 million yearly gains, midpoint $30 million. Department of Revenue (DOR) officials Brandon Spanos and Michael Williams fielded queries remotely from Anchorage.

Implementation timing sparked questions. A member inquired on notifying taxpayers for 2026 filings due in 2027; Spanos affirmed hiring post-enactment in FY 2027, with outreach via existing staff. On vacancies, he reported none in corporate tax but some in other groups, noting a 30% division shrinkage over a decade from legislative and executive cuts.

Rep. Will Stapp (R – Fairbanks) followed up: “You said you had a big downsizing in auditor positions. Was there a specific reason for that?” Spanos attributed it to defunding, including four positions cut last year by the Senate Finance Subcommittee.

Rep. Jeremy Bynum (R – Ketchikan) explored shifting the effective date to January 1, 2027, to avoid retroactivity. Spanos clarified no system overhaul needed, as factors are built-in, confirming “no fiscal impact by moving the effective date.” Co-Chair Andy Josephson (D – Anchorage) requested formal documentation on auditor cuts, recalling a veto override on oil/gas auditors; Spanos committed to emailing details, citing Walker-era executive cuts and recent legislative ones.

No further questions arose; the bill was set aside for DOR analysis of industry amendments at the next meeting. Decisions: March 2 amendment deadline, with submissions to staff. Action items: DOR’s amendment review, auditor history email, and taxpayer outreach plan. Unresolved: retroactivity policy, amendment scopes, and precise cut attributions.

The bill echoes a 2025 vetoed measure expanding taxes on digitized firms to fund education, amid ongoing fiscal debates. Supporters see revenue potential; critics eye administrative burdens.

House Bill 271: Debates Over Natural Gas Royalty Reductions in Alaska

Todd M Lindley
-
0
House Bill 271: Debates Over Natural Gas Royalty Reductions in Alaska

Alaska House Resources Committee voted to advance House Bill 271, a measure that would permanently reduce the royalty rate to 3% for natural gas production in the Kitchen Lights unit of Cook Inlet. Sponsored by Rep. Zach Fields (D- Anchorage), the bill aims to incentivize further investment and production in the aging basin, which supplies much of Southcentral Alaska’s energy needs. Critics, however, decried it as a targeted giveaway to a single operator, HEX/Furie, amid the state’s ongoing fiscal woes.

After a brief recess, public testimony opened, revealing sharp divisions.

Jeff Landfield, operator of the Alaska Landmine news website, delivered a scathing critique, framing the bill as the latest in a series of “political handouts” to HEX/Furie owner John Hendrix. Landfield recounted Hendrix’s acquisition of Furie out of bankruptcy in 2019 for $15 million, partly financed by a state loan, and his subsequent battles over property taxes. He noted that the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) had already granted a 75% royalty reduction in September 2024, resulting in a $2 million credit and slashing monthly payments from $400,000 to $100,000. “The royalty relief he’s already obtained does nothing for ratepayers, it just enriches his pockets,” Landfield said. “I urge this committee to put this bill where it belongs: in the trash.”

Carrie Harris, testifying online, echoed the opposition, arguing that the bill creates a “permanent three percent royalty carve out for a single operator” without geological justification. “Alaskans are being told there isn’t enough money for a permanent fund. Essential services are strained,” she said, warning of a “really big bad precedent” that could prompt other producers to seek similar deals.

With public comment closed, the committee deliberated on three amendments. Rep. Donna Mears (D – Anchorage) moved Amendment G.1, proposing a sunset date of January 1, 2030, to limit the relief while allowing time for the operator to refine plans through DNR processes. “I fundamentally believe that this work should be done through DNR’s thorough process rather than legislative action,” Mears explained. Fields opposed, arguing four years was insufficient to attract major investments like jack-up rigs, suggesting 2035 instead. Rep. Dan Saddler (R – Eagle River) called the shorter timeline “counterproductive,” potentially harming financing. The amendment failed 2-7.

Mears’s second amendment, G.2, sought to remove intent language justifying the bill’s focus on one unit, citing drafting guidelines. Fields defended it as essential to address constitutional concerns over special legislation, emphasizing the unit’s role in boosting competition and supply. Rep. Mike Prax (R – North Pole) supported removal, viewing the bill as “special treatment for a particular company.” It also failed 2-7.

A conceptual amendment from Sadler, changing “avoid reliance on imported fuels” to “reduce reliance” for realism, passed without objection.

Debate intensified on the bill’s merits. Mears opposed, trusting DNR’s existing robust process. Prax argued it overreaches legislative expertise, setting a bad precedent by overriding DNR. Saddler countered that statutes provide enduring certainty executive actions cannot: “What the executive giveth, the executive can taketh away. Uncertainty is the enemy of fiscal certainty.” Fields clarified, “This bill definitely does not override what DNR did. It actually takes DNR’s decision and gives us some multi-year predictability and stability to encourage investment and production.”

Rep. Julie Coulombe (R – Anchorage) supported, noting it endorses DNR’s research showing relief yields more gas: “This is not overriding DNR. This is actually supporting what DNR did.” Mears reiterated that DNR relief is a durable contract across administrations.

Co-Chair Maxine Dibert (D – Fairbanks) moved the amended bill, granting Legislative Legal leeway for technical changes. After objection, a roll call passed it 7-2, with Mears and Prax dissenting.

The bill now heads to further committees amid broader debates on Cook Inlet’s declining output and high gas prices. Supporters see it bolstering supply; opponents fear favoritism eroding state revenues.

Saddler, in a key remark during debate, underscored the pragmatic stakes: “We’d rather have fifty percent of loaf or one hundred percent of no loaf at all, and that’s the situation we are faced up against. My constituents do have a need for natural gas in the inlet.”

This decision comes as Alaska grapples with energy security, with Hilcorp’s production update slated for February 25. Critics like Landfield vow continued scrutiny, alleging Hendricks’s influence. Proponents argue it’s vital for competition in a basin not “what it was.”

Editors Note: Corrected spelling of John Hendrix and HEX/Furie.

For Alaska School Districts: A $1.5 Million Settlement Serves as a Wake-up Call

Jon Faulkner
-
2
For Alaska School Districts: A $1.5 Million Settlement Serves as a Wake-up Call

In a landmark ruling last summer (Mahmoud v Taylor), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that parents must be informed of classroom instruction involving certain gender and sexually explicit subject matter; and moreover, must be afforded an opportunity to “opt out” of such programs.  

A Massachusetts court recently affirmed in Alan L. v. Lexington Public Schools that no public school can force a parent to choose between giving up the benefit of a public education and exposing their child to material that burdens the parent’s right to the free exercise of religion.

Alaska’s Attorney General affirmed the intent of the law. (See a memo from the former Alaska Attorney General).

Last week, in what is widely viewed as a wake-up call over municipal liability for non-compliance, the Montgomery County, Maryland Board of Education agreed to pay a $1.5 million award to families whose religious rights were violated when their opt-out opportunity was denied to them. The case affirms that school districts nationwide have financial liability for failing to protect the constitutional rights of parents whose children attend public school.

Notably, the Maryland board was directed to issue advance notice to parents before introducing certain sexuality explicit materials.  

READ: Liberal County Took On Religious Parents — Now They’re Paying For It

Here in Alaska, some believe our state courts have misconstrued privacy protections to the degree that Alaska legal precedent undermines the rights of parents.

Jim Minnery, Director at the Alaska Family Council, observes:

Our homes and places of worship are being invaded and undermined by our public schools…In spite of the law, Schools nationwide are still teaching kids a view of sexuality that undermines parental rights and traditional views on sexuality by faith leaders.

Today, Alaska caselaw with respect to parental consent appears increasingly out-of-sync with Federal law and with public opinion. Historically, Alaska’s legislature has avoided statutory reforms that would strengthen parental rights.  

Increasingly, these conflicts center on our public schools.  Senate Bill 90, sponsored by Senator Cathy Giessel, is the latest example of what Minnery describes as a “dangerous overreach that undermines the fundamental rights of parents to guide their children’s healthcare decisions.”

According to Minnery,  Alaska Senate Bill 90 claims to help teens access needed mental health services, but instead “creates a system where minors can receive ongoing treatment behind their parents’ backs—with potentially devastating consequences.”

“SB 90 gets [the goal] exactly backward”, states Minnery.  “Instead of supporting families, it enables providers to exclude them. Instead of protecting children, it exposes them to potentially harmful decisions made without the guidance of those who know and love them best…Alaska’s parents have both a constitutional right and a moral responsibility to direct their children’s healthcare.”

In Alaska, outreach is underway. In a press release, the Alliance Defending Freedom seeks to connect with Alaskans concerned about transparency and compliance in our public schools. The release stated:  

“Alliance Defending Freedom’s Center for Parental Rights seeks to identify public-school parents who are struggling to access curriculum and public schools that refuse to honor parents’ requests to opt their children out of the curriculum and programs that undermine their rights as parents. We want to help parents access curriculum, request notice, and make informed choices about what their children are taught and exposed to during the school day.”

Letters are being sent to District Superintendents across Alaska reminding them of their duty to enforce the law, and that failure to enforce the law is not “neutral”. Rural Alaskan tribes, elders and councils especially are being encouraged to understand the rights of parents seeking to retain traditional family structures within their communities and places of public learning.

1...131415...1,775Page 14 of 1,775

About us

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

Contact
4021 West Hill Road,
Homer, AK 99603
[email protected]

The latest

Americans Across the Country Gather to Read the Entire Bible Out Loud This Week

Faith Watch 0
Starting at 5:00 a.m. Alaska time tomorrow, April 18,...

Opinion: Why We March for Life

The Social 0
By Jim Minnery, President of Alaska Family Council This story...

Opinion: Alaska GOP Needs Better Political Strategy  

Columns 0
By Michael Tavoliero Currently, the Alaska’s 2026 governor’s race fields at least 16...

© Must Read Alaska