The Alaska Legislative Council voted Monday to close the Unalaska office it keeps open for constituents seven months out of the year.
The office is part of a network of 23 legislative offices around the state where Alaskans can testify during hearings via teleconference, and where they can send their opinions to legislators via email and watch legislative hearings live.
Closing the Unalaska LIO passed with all eight voting members who were present.
Sen. Anna MacKinnon and Rep. David Eastman both voted against using the savings to expand hours for the other LIOs, which had their hours cut back in 2016 during a time of budgetary belt-tightening and are now closed on Friday afternoons. Those two votes blocked Chairman Rep. David Guttenberg’s effort to reallocate the Unalaska money. MacKinnon said that during a time of tight budgets, any additional expenditures now would be prime targets for cuts during next year’s budget talks.
TESTIMONY FROM LEGISLATIVE OFFICES BY POPULATION, AND TOTAL TESTIFIERS
The Unalaska LIO opened in 2011 and is seasonally staffed December through May. The geographic differential pay scale for the office is $106,000 a year, making it one of the most expensive to operate.
The Unalaska LIO had five participants in 2016, two participants in 2017, and no participants in 2018. Meanwhile, the other 22 LIOs had their hours reduces and the 17 employees were cut from 12 months to 11.3 months,
LEGISLATIVE VOTING MACHINES TO BE REPLACED
The Legislative Council also voted on Monday to replace the old and unreliable voting system that legislators use in Juneau. The system is not supported by the vendor and began seriously failing during the 29th Legislature, despite technical and support staff efforts. There are no more Microsoft updates for the software. The cost of replacement is expected to be at least $912,700, with additional maintenance costs annually of over $17,000.
But each additional day the Legislature is in session due to voting machine malfunctions costs the State more than $100,000.
Attending Legislative Council were Reps. David Guttenberg, Charisse Millett, Daniel Ortiz, Louise Stutes, David Eastman, Harriet Drummond, Matt Claman, and Bryce Edgmon, who is the lawmaker who represents Unalaska.
On the Senate side were Sen. Anna MacKinnon, Sen. President Pete Kelly, and Sen. Bert Stedman. Most lawmakers outside of Anchorage attended telephonically.
A nearly fully developed and healthy marijuana plant has flourished next to the Alaska Pretrial Services Office on DeBarr Road in Anchorage, and the staff would like the owner to come and claim it.
“While APS staff supports the conservation of our trees and plants, we do have to have some limits. We would like to thank the kind person(s) for donating your “plant” to the woods next to our office. However we must decline this “plant” donation. Feel free to check in with the APS Case Officer Division to claim your recent donation to our property,” the staff posted on its official Facebook page.
Later, they had a change of heart and decided to adopt the plant, naming it “Paulie.”
Must Read Alaska predicts it’s going to need an ankle monitor.
With the US Supreme Court’s recent decision in Janus v. AFSCME, it is no longer legal to compel public employees to be union members or pay representation fees as a condition of employment.
For those public employees who choose to no longer be members or fee payers, it is not as simple as just stopping the payment or payroll deduction of dues if you are a member, and maybe even if you are a fee payer.
Few State employees and to the best of my knowledge few other public employees choose to be fee payers.
For a usually very small reduction in the payment to the union, an employee loses all rights to have a voice in the very collective bargaining process that the USSC had held that they could be compelled to pay for.
Janus reversed the Court’s prior holding on this issue. The vast majority of employees chose to be members so they could have a voice in contract ratifications or amendments and grievance resolutions. It does not change under Janus; if you do not choose to be a member, you will have no voice in what the union negotiates into, or out of, the labor agreement you work under.
So long as the union remains the certified exclusive representative of the bargaining it unit, the wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment it negotiates apply to all members of the bargaining unit, not just to members of the union, and the union has a duty of fair representation to all members of the bargaining unit whether or not an employee is a member of the union.
If you choose to exercise your right to stop paying dues and you are a member, you must, in writing, resign your membership in the union and send that resignation to the union. I would advise that you send it certified mail and also copy your employer; keep copies for yourself.
Notify your employer’s payroll or human resources/labor relations office that you want to cancel your dues deduction authorization, commonly called a dues check-off form. Give the notice to the employer in writing, copy the union, and keep copies.
Certified, return receipt isn’t a bad idea. Neither unions, nor administrations backed by unions are going to do anything to make this easy for you.
One of my regrets from my time with State labor relations is that I was never able to persuade my principals to come to the aid of employees who had stopped paying union dues in the periods when the State had stopped enforcing the compulsory dues provisions of labor agreements.
After the General Government Agreement expired on June 30, 1986, employees began drifting away from paying dues to the Alaska Public Employees Association and the State didn’t act on requests from APEA to dismiss employees for non-payment of dues.
APEA wasn’t very aggressive about it because they were being challenged by the nascent Alaska State Employees’ Association for representation of the unit, and didn’t need to make any more enemies.
When ASEA won the election and became the exclusive representative of the unit, the State took the position that only the mandatory terms; wages, hours, and terms and conditions, survived the change of representative and formally refused to enforce the union security provisions of the expired GGU agreement.
With nothing now to lose, APEA went after the employees who had stopped paying dues with a vengeance, and the courts sided with them. Lots of State employees only figured out that they had a judgment against them for unpaid dues when they tried to buy a house or car, and there were some very, very upset employees who had to pony up the money.
The courts held that just stopping the payment was not enough and that signing the membership form established a contractual relationship between the employee and the union that remained enforceable.
I don’t know how good the law is; you can always find a trial court judge who’ll side with a politically powerful entity in hopes of appointment to a higher court, but nobody appealed it to the Alaska Supreme Court, the State didn’t intervene, so that is the state of the law; unless and until you resign your membership in the union, you are obligated to keep paying them dues unless you just want to fight the matter all the way to the Supreme Court.
The same thing happened again when the State stopped enforcing ASEA’s compulsory dues provisions during the Hickel Administration. ASEA went for a couple of years without a contract and the State accepted employee requests to stop dues deductions. When the union-bought Knowles Administration gave ASEA their union security clause back, ASEA, like APEA before them, went after employees who had stopped paying with a vengeance and the courts sided with them.
So, I’m not advocating any action; there is a real downside to letting the ideologues and malcontents that form the hard core of union support determine your wages and working conditions; being a member allows you at least some opportunity to have a voice.
Knowing this, if you choose to stop paying dues or fees, protect yourself by resigning your membership or cancelling your fee payer authorization in addition to cancelling your dues/fees deduction from your check. Do it in writing, do it by certified mail, and keep copies of everything; your employer will not be your friend.
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. Chance coined the phrase “hermaphrodite administration” to describe a governor who is simultaneously a Republican and a Democrat. This was a grave insult to hermaphrodites, but he has not apologized.
ALASKA ORDERS NEW HIRES TO SIGN UP, PAY DUES, OR ELSE
The Janus vs AFSCME ruling at the Supreme Court in June was unambiguous in deciding that union membership for public employees is optional.
But the State of Alaska promotes it as a requirement for new employees, and gives no information on how to opt out.
The Janus decision says government workers must have a choice when it comes to union membership, The question before the court was from a child-support worker in Illinois, who didn’t want to join the state union: To keep their jobs, should government employees be forced to fund the political agendas of unions, even if they disagree with them?
Public-sector unions do work that is inherently political, including lobbying and bargaining with the government and telling the government what it should spend. This is political speech, protected by the First Amendment. But forcing workers to pay for speech they disagree with violates their First Amendment rights.
But the Walker Administration is dragging its heels in implementing the Janus decision: at the Department of Administration, several online notices state that enrolling in union membership is a requirement for newly hired employees and is time sensitive. Two of them are shown here:
While Gov. Bill Walker recently signed Administrative Order 296,saying that, in response to the Janus ruling, the state cannot give workers’ information to unions, nor force or coerce membership in them, his Labor Commissioner Heidi Drygas penned her own stunning analysis of the Janus ruling, calling it a “right to work for less” policy and “forcing unions to represent free riders who pay nothing but receive union benefits.”
She wrote the Janus ruling is after one thing: “bust unions, which have long been the foundation of America’s middle class.”
Drygas’ essay may be the political signal that indicates the State is going to take its time in changing policies relating to union membership. Here is her essay in full:
GOVERNOR OPPOSES JANUS RULING, TOO
At the recent joint Chamber of Commerce candidate forum in Wasilla last month, gubernatorial candidates Gov. Bill Walker and Mark Begich both said they oppose the Janus ruling.
To date, no information is easily available at the State’s websites telling employees how they may opt-out of the unions. Instead, the State appears to be dragging its feet on compliance with Janus — and taking its cue from the chief executive, whose reelection campaign is (not coincidentally) enjoying strong government union support.
It’s here: The Alaska Primary Election season has started, with early voting available today and all voting ending on Aug. 21 at 8 pm.
Some 30,000 new voters have been added to the voter rolls, with about two thirds of them coming from the Permanent Fund Dividend automatic voter registration process implemented last year.
Here’s what you need to know to vote:
EARLY VOTING
Early voting starts Aug. 6, when you can go early to certain locations to cast your ballot, regardless of what district you are in. The Division of Elections sort these ballots and and assign them to their proper district.
It is also for absentee in-person, e-mail,and special-needs voting. Essentially, you can check voting off your to-do list by getting on it now.
Due to the threat of cyber attacks, such as the attempt on Alaska’s voting system in 2016, you won’t be able to submit an electronic ballot, although you can receive one by email. You will need to fax or mail it in.
OTHER DATES TO KNOW
Aug. 18: Regional offices open 10 am-4 pm for early and absentee in-person and special needs voting.
Aug. 19: Regional offices open 12 pm -4 pm for early and absentee in-person and special needs voting.
Aug. 20, 5 pm: Deadline to receive electronic transmission absentee ballot. applications from voters requesting an electronic transmission ballot.
Aug. 21: Election Day.
Aug. 21: Absentee electronic transmission ballots being returned by-fax must be received by 8 pm.
Aug. 21: Absentee ballots being returned by-mail must be postmarked on or before Election Day.
ABOUT THOSE BALLOTS
Alaska Democrats have an open primary, which means anyone can vote the open ballot, which includes Alaskan Independence Party and Libertarian Party candidates. This year, Alaskans choosing this ballot will be faced with an array of Democrats, non-partisan, and undeclared candidates running in the Alaska Democratic Party mrimary. Voters will see letters by their names indicating what they say they are, which may not be Democrat. They could be (U) or (N), but still running in the Democratic Party’s primary.
Only one person is running for lieutenant governor on this ballot: Debra Call, a Democrat. The Libertarians have no candidate in the lieutenant governor race.
THE REPUBLICAN BALLOT
Alaska Republicans have a closed ballot, which means only registered Republicans or those who are registered nonpartisan or undeclared can vote this ballot. A sample of what the Republican ballot shows several choices for governor and for lieutenant governor.
French, a former state senator, was the winning lieutenant governor nominee for the Democrats in 2014, until his party leadership showed him the door and created the hybrid ticket with Walker on top, and Byron Mallott as lieutenant governor.
French, it appears, is negotiating on behalf of Begich, in spite of the fact that Walker finally landed him a good job at the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission as a reward for stepping down from his candidacy.
Hollis French
Wohlforth got his hands on A Proposal for Solving the Three-Way Race,perhaps written by French, perhaps collaborated on by others who are advocating the position: “For the love of God, no three-way race for governor, please.”
Wohlforth wrote that French crafted a deal, and Begich made Walker an offer.
Walker, so the story goes, said “No way, not dropping out.”
GAME OF CHICKEN CONTINUES
Sitting governors do not drop out of the race. They love being governor, especially in Alaska, where we have a strong governorship that wields buckets of power. It’s an honor and a chance to make changes that are important to them, and leave a legacy. They don’t just give up, and nor will Alaska’s 11th governor, Bill Walker. It is unreasonable to expect them to.
Neither do former U.S. senators, especially those with the last name of Begich. A guy like Mark Begich, who was Alaska’s 7th elected U.S. senator, is not going to throw in the towel and hand victory to a guy like Walker, who he considers a bumbling tangle of ineptitude.
Or will he? Word is that Begich is worried about Walker’s advantage of incumbency and is afraid of performing poorly in the race. His traditional backers in Big Labor are not lining up behind him this time.
THE ULTIMATE POLL APPROACHES
But the big test comes on Aug. 21: As much as Hollis French proposes some well-timed polls and asks the weaker one to be a gentleman and drop out for the sake of Alaska, the ultimate poll for Begich starts with early voting today, Aug. 6. He could get about 40,000 votes by Aug. 21 from Democrats, nonpartisans, and undeclared. These are the votes that will propel him to November.
After the primary, he’ll show the Walker folks his math: “I’ve got 40,000 votes to start with. What do you have?” They’ll have until Sept. 5 to crowd each other out of the race before ballots are printed for November.
There are about 75,000 registered Democrats in the state and another 84,440 who register as nonpartisan, the latter of which have a strong tendency to vote Democrat.
Especially coveted are those nonpartisans, who vote in higher numbers than the registered undeclared voters.
THE PSYCHOLOGY OF THE VOTER
Let’s take a look at the regular Alaska voter, not the one who thinks about strategic machinations.
We can count on Democrats and nonpartisan voters choosing the Democrat ballot on Aug. 21.
At the top of that ballot, they”ll see a crowded race: Christopher Cumings, Alyse Galvin, Carol Hafner, and Demitri Shein for U.S. House, all running as Democrats. Voters will fill in an oval.
Then they’ll drop down to the next section: Governor. There, they will choose between Mark Begich, the only Democrat running since Walker dropped out and decided to run as a petition candidate, and Libertarian candidate Billy Toien.
Are they going to skip over voting for governor? Will they then skip over voting for Democrat Debra Call for lieutenant governor during the primary? There goes half the ballot, if they do.
Take a look at that ballot — will voters just not vote in two of the four races?
What Begich has to be concerned about is the drop off between those voting in the U.S. House race at the top of the page, and those voting for him for governor. If there’s a 10,000 vote drop off, those are voters who are sticking with Walker. They’ve figured out that by voting for Begich in the primary, they embolden him and strengthen his ticket for the General.
For both Walker and Begich, this primary is a defining moment.
Walker also has to be concerned about the psychology of the voter facing a primary ballot: The real excitement in this election is the governor’s race, and anyone who votes for Begich in the primary will be likely to vote for him again in November.
Walker’s campaign, unlike Begich’s, has to figure out how to convince people to not take part in that excitement, and not vote that part of the ballot, because it psychologically commits them for the General Election.
It’s an awkward task, but the best way to ensure Begich doesn’t get that psychologically valuable vote in August is for the governor to make the pitch (somehow) that Democrats shouldn’t vote at all, lest they make the mistake of casting a vote for Begich. Awkward. And not at all helpful for Democrats in other races.
Check out a sample ballot for District 20 Democrats above and you’ll see what will make Bill Walker a bit nervous: His name is missing again, just as it was in 2014, but this time, he doesn’t have to talk Byron Mallott into dropping down into the second spot. He has to talk Begich into spending more time with his family.
It makes the governor’s “Unity Ticket” of 2014 seem so simple.
In December of 2017, National Geographic unveiled a moving video of a starving polar bear, and wrote: “This is what climate change looks like.” The background music was mournful and the dying bear was pitiful. Think of the extended death scene in Puccini’s opera, Madama Butterfly.
It stirred controversy. Some said the film crew should have aided the bear. Others decried modern humanity for condemning such a noble creature to this terrible fate. Other said that it was fake news, and that there was no way to know if this bear was a victim of climate change or just plain old.
“While science has established that there is a strong connection between melting sea ice and polar bears dying off, there is no way to know for certain why this bear was on the verge of death,” the magazine wrote, and it updated the captioning on the video.
“Perhaps we made a mistake in not telling the full story—that we were looking for a picture that foretold the future and that we didn’t know what had happened to this particular polar bear,” wrote Cristina Mittermeier, a contributing photographer, speaker, and explorer for National Geographic.
Mittermeier is also an environmental advocate as the “co-founder, executive director, and vision lead” of SeaLegacy, a nonprofit organization working to protect the oceans, which contributed to the production.
SHADES OF LITIGATION TO COME FROM YES ON 1 ADVOCATES?
The “Stand for Salmon” advocacy group changed the name of its campaign to “Yes for Salmon” to match the goal of communicating to voters what the group wants them to do in November.
That goal is to get voters to pick “yes” on Ballot Measure No. 1, should it survive a court challenge.
Another group emerged to get voters to say “no.” That group is “Stand for Alaska – No on 1,” and it’s pushing hard to educate the public about the dangers of Ballot Measure 1.
Now, Stand for Salmon wants Stand for Alaska to change its name. It’s gone to the Alaska Public Offices Commission with a set of demands.
As a harbinger for lawsuits that would surely come with passage of Ballot Measure 1, Stand for Salmon has complained to APOC that the Stand For Alaska group has a name that is confusingly similar to Stand for Salmon.
Stand for Salmon says that the name Stand for Alaska, is just too ambiguous.
The group has asked for, and last week was denied, an expedited decision from APOC on the matter.
APOC wisely appears to be in no hurry to tell any group they cannot call themselves Stand for Alaska, when so many groups have names like “Alaska’s Future,” “Families for Alaska,” and other names that are just as vaguely aspirational.
Stand for Alaska responded to the complaint that “to the extent that Complainant sees to interfere with Respondent using Stand for Alaska as part of its name, Complainant’s request runs smack into SFA – Vote No on 1’s first amendment rights to the name of its choice, so long as it meets statutory requirements, which it clearly does. Complainant has no right to dictate Respondent’s choice of name.”
In other words Stand for Alaska could call itself “Salmon Lovers Need Houses Too” or “Puppies and Kittens Against Ballot Measure One.” It’s not up to Stand for Salmon to choose an opposing group’s name.
“We believe that, in light of SFA – Vote No on One’s actions taken to comply with the law, and with the length of time yet remaining until the election, Stand for Salmon’s request for expedited treatment is baseless and, frankly, reflects a bad faith attempt to use APOC as an electioneering ploy to salvage its faltering campaign,” wrote the Stand for Alaska – Vote No on 1 attorney, Thomas Amodio.
APOC spent 20 minutes on the matter and denied the expedited hearing.
WHAT IS BALLOT MEASURE 1?
Ballot Measure 1 is an attempt to block the development of industry or construction in any watershed that is related to anadromous fish habitat. That’s a lot of Alaska — and a lot of Alaskans are concerned by its language. From home builders to bridge builders, there is opposition to the measure’s stringent environmental language, and opposition is coming from the hardhat sector all the way up to the governor.
But who isn’t for salmon, clean water, and habitat? The war for the hearts and votes of Alaskans continues.
Read the Initiative that Stand for Salmon has proposed for the November ballot:
A ruling from the State Supreme Court is expected soon on whether the ballot measure is even legal. The ballot printing deadline for the General Election is Sept. 5, but if the Supreme Court waits too long, it may be difficult to resolve aspects of the ballot language that the court may carve out as unconstitutional.
Steel tariffs didn’t faze Alaska Gasline Development Corporation President Keith Meyer when they were announced by the Trump Administration this spring.
And energy tariffs proposed by the Chinese aren’t worrying Alaska’s governor, who this summer remains confident about the Alaska LNG project.
Gov. Bill Walker issued a brief statement on Friday about China’s tariffs:
“Alaska’s vast reserves of natural gas can satisfy market demand for nearly a century, and short-term trade tensions do not change this long-term value proposition,” Walker said.
“Alaska LNG would be the largest job-creating infrastructure project in the country, and would generate billions of dollars in revenue. My team and I will continue to work with the Trump administration to ensure that Chinese and U.S. officials strike a fair compromise so that Alaska’s natural gas reaches the market,” Walker reassured the public in his statement.
China’s threatened tariff against U.S. LNG is part of a raging trade war with the communist-run nation.
Walker did not revisit the overall feasibility of the project, the details of which the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation is still trying to nail down after the joint development agreements Walker signed with China last November.
According to the Alaska Journal of Commerce, Sinopec sent officials to Alaska to review plans, and then the company pulled out of the development phase. It is now only interested in the buying of natural gas, should the project come to fruition.
Meyer told the newspaper that Sinopec had expressed interest in being a major participant in construction of the 800-mile gasline, but after flying the route and studying it on the ground, decided the project was beyond its capability.
Few Alaskans even knew that Sinopec was planning to participate in building the gasline, since when the joint agreement was signed, Walker announced Sinopec as the buyer, not the builder. And, in public forums on the campaign trail, he has sought to downplay the role of Chinese entities in building and operating the line.
Regardless, Sinopec as builder is just one aspect of a less-than-transparent set of agreements that Walker has been trying to put together with China.
The Nov. 8 five-party joint development agreement included Alaska, AGDC, and Chinese entities Sinopec, Bank of China, and the China Investment Corporation.
In November, the governor explained that Sinopec would have the right to buy 75 percent of Alaska’s LNG, and the Bank of China and China Investment Group would finance 75 percent of the development.
“This agreement has all five necessary signatories—the buyer, the lender, the investor, the developer and the state,” Gov. Walker said in November. “This is a big project with big players and big benefits.”
STEEL TARIFFS A CONCERN – AT LEAST TO CONOCOPHILLIPS
While the tariff war with China could end before the Alaska gasline is built, tariffs on steel imports are perhaps more of an issue than the Governor’s Office and AGDC have acknowledged.
Al Hirshberg of ConocoPhillips said last month said that steel tariffs are turning into a significant expense item for the company, which spends $300 million a year on steel between its operations in Alaska and the Lower 48. That includes pipes, valves, and fittings, according to Petroleum News.
Hirschberg told analysts that hot-rolled steel prices in the U.S. are up 26 percent since the first of the year, although ConocoPhillips has been insulated somewhat due to its supply chain agreements. He expects the company’s cost increases to worsen next year, Petroleum News reported.
WHAT IS THE ALASKA GASLINE?
AGDC, a State-owned entity, plans to build and operate a gas treatment plant near Prudhoe Bay; a 1.0-mile-long, 60-inch-diameter Prudhoe Bay Unit Gas Transmission Line; a 62.5-mile-long, 32-inch-diameter Point Thomson Unit Gas Transmission Line; a 806.6-mile-long, 42-inch-diameter natural gas pipeline from the gas treatment plant to the LNG terminal in Nikiski; and an LNG terminal with a 20 million ton per annum liquefaction capacity. There will be numerous facilities associated with the project, which would have an annual average 3.9 billion standard cubic feet per day peak capacity of natural gas.
The State of Alaska is now the sole owner of the project after BP, Exxon, and ConocoPhillips pulled out as developers, with the encouragement of Gov. Walker, who wanted the project to be state-owned so it could capture tax breaks from the federal government. He also wanted to move the project along at a faster pace than the partners were willing, although in their absence project resources have shrunk.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will issue a draft environmental impact statement next March, followed by a final EIS in December 2019.
In the meantime, broader market forces such as competing, lower cost energy supplies in the Pacific Basin and the raging trade war between the U.S. and China continue to blow strong headwinds against the Alaska LNG project, happy talk from Gov. Walker notwithstanding.
