Gov. Bill Walker made the announcement himself this time: The State of Alaska has approved ExxonMobil’s plan to engineer the expansion of the Point Thomson project on the North Slope.
In August, the Division of Oil and Gas issued a six-page letter of denial of the company’s plans at Point Thomson, saying there were instances of conditional language in the company’s expansion. The company submitted a revised plan as requested by October.
Now, with all that in the rear view mirror, the governor struck a jubilant note about how Pt. Thomson could contribute to the gas line he hopes to build from Prudhoe Bay to Nikiski to ship gas to China.
“The Alaska LNG Project has been endorsed by the Trump Administration and the Chinese government. Interest in this project has grown immensely in the last 45 days due to the historic Joint Development Agreement between the State of Alaska, Sinopec, the Bank of China and the Chinese Investment Corp.,” said Governor Bill Walker.
“Our approval of the Point Thomson to Prudhoe Bay pipeline plan adds to the momentum of the Alaska LNG Project and demonstrates the commitment of the Point Thomson working interest owners to move gas from Point Thomson into Alaska Gasline Development Corp.’s 800-mile pipeline,” Governor Walker said in the statement. “The expansion project also helps build a Stronger Alaska, because it will increase oil production out of Point Thomson by 50,000 barrels per day.”
“It’s clear that ExxonMobil is committed to commercializing North Slope gas, particularly from Point Thomson. This helps align the company’s work in Alaska with the State of Alaska and AGDC,” said Natural Resources Commissioner Andy Mack, in the governor’s press release.
It may be a signal that Walker is ready to make peace with Exxon. The announcement, coming at a time of year when the public is generally distracted, is a signal that he doesn’t want much scrutiny focused upon it.
Walker has held a well-known, decades-long grudge against Exxon. He even sued the State of Alaska over its settlement with Exxon during the Parnell Administration — a good settlement that led to billions of dollars in investment and 10,000 barrels of condensate being put into the Trans Alaska Pipeline.
He reluctantly dropped his suit against the the Exxon settlement once he became governor in 2015.
You’ve worked hard this year to make Alaska a better place. I know you have, because I hear from so many Alaskans, and from every corner of the state.
Thank you for your donations throughout the year — they’ve allowed Must Read Alaska to remain standing and fighting for common-sense conservative values and an economy that has room for everyone who wants to be a part of it.
I value you as a reader, and appreciate every contribution, large and small. Donate today, if you find this work important to Alaska.
Sen. Mike Dunleavy suspended his campaign for governor in September to focus on his health. Today, he said that concern is behind him and he’s back in the race. 100 percent, he said.
Dunleavy made the announcement on Facebook during a live video broadcast at noon Alaska time. Over 50 people tuned in during the broadcast.
The senator from Wasilla left the Republican Senate Majority last winter over differences on using the Permanent Fund as part of the solution to the state’s budget crunch.
Sitting in his living room in front of his Christmas tree, and speaking to the camera, he said his campaign will focus on three things: Public safety, budget, and protecting the Permanent Fund and by extension, the Permanent Fund dividend.
His first-ever Facebook live video was less than 10 minutes in length. He asked the public to contact him through his web site, AlaskansforDunleavy.comto offer their support, both as volunteers and financially.
Immediately after his Facebook video, his campaign posted a press release.
“Senator Mike Dunleavy is thrilled to announce he is re-engaging his campaign for Governor, effective immediately. Three months ago, Senator Dunleavy suspended his campaign for Governor due to a medical condition that required at that time, undetermined treatment and recovery.
“I am glad to report that, thanks to great physicians, nurses and care providers, the medical treatments were successful, and my recovery has been excellent. In late August, I underwent a medical procedure to address atrial fibrillation,” said Dunleavy. “This condition was not life threatening, but was a serious impediment to handling the rigors of the campaign trail. I also received treatment in November for some inflammation of the heart tissue (myocarditis) that had been causing serious fatigue. The outpouring of well wishes and prayers from Alaskans all across the state was truly humbling and inspiring.”
Dunleavy said he needed to know beyond a shadow of a doubt that his health be well enough that he could follow through.
“Broken campaign promises are nearly the rule and not the exception these days. Then after they are repeatedly lied to, voters are chastised for not engaging by the very same politicians that didn’t keep their word. That is simply unacceptable to me,” stated Dunleavy.
“Alaska needs a leader that listens to, respects, believes in, and protects Alaskans,” said Dunleavy. “There is simply no excuse for the position our state is in – a significant rise in crime, both violent crime and crime that endangers our economic stability like theft, an economy in recession, the highest unemployment rate in the country and millions being wasted in government at the expense of the people and private sector. There exist viable solutions to the challenges facing us, and with the help of all Alaskans, I will work to swiftly and immediately enact systematic change to improve safety, get expenditures in line with revenues, and protect the Alaskan PFD as its founders envisioned.”
WHO WILL FILL HIS SHOES IN THE SENATE?
Rep. George Rauscher, District 9, said he is heaviliy considering that since Dunleavy can’t run for Senate and governor, “I would heavily consider running for his seat.”
Another likely candidate would be Rep. David Eastman, District 10.
With all the negative economic news making headlines in Alaska, sometimes it’s tough to stay positive. But we have plenty of reasons to be thankful.
Imagine where Alaska would be if we didn’t have core industries supporting our economy every day – 365 days a year.
A past column touched on some bright spots: legislation authorizing drilling in ANWR, the increased military expenditures in Alaska for missile defense, regulatory reform, and Alaskans appointed to high profile Federal agency positions directly affecting our state.
These developments are important, but we need to recognize the continuing importance of Alaska’s major private-sector industries: oil & gas, mining, seafood and tourism.
In 2017, Prudhoe Bay production and Trans-Alaska Pipeline operations celebrated 40-year anniversaries. Since pipeline operations commenced, 17.5 billion barrels of oil have been transported from the North Slope to the Valdez Marine Terminal. Despite the recent downturn in oil prices, Alaska’s oil industry has reversed recent production declines and remains the single most important economic engine in Alaska.
The positive impacts of this sector cannot be overstated. According to a recent McDowell Group study, oil and gas industry spending in Alaska accounted for 45,575 jobs and $3.1 billion in total wages in Alaska last year. After accounting for state and local government spending of taxes and royalties paid by the industry, an additional 58,300 jobs and $2.9 billion in wages were added to Alaska’s economy.
The total, 103,875 jobs and $6.0 billion in wages, represents nearly a third of wage and salary jobs in Alaska.
Oil development is often targeted for additional burdensome regulatory review and taxes – advocated by environmental groups opposing any expanded operations. Yet, if not for this industry there would be no Permanent Fund to cushion the effects of our current recession.
The mining industry, while not as large in scale, remains a growing force in Alaska’s economy. With over 8,600 jobs and $675 million in total payroll the mining industry accounted for some of Alaska’s highest paying jobs with an estimated average annual wage of $108,000, over twice the state average.
The mining industry is particularly important for residents of over 50 communities throughout Alaska, half of them in rural Alaska where jobs are scarce. Northern Southeast Alaska has benefited greatly from its two mines, Kensington and Greens Creek. Currently, Greens Creek Mine is Juneau’s largest private employer and property tax payer with over $1.4 million in annual property tax payments.
The seafood industry, our state’s largest exporter, is a major factor in our economy – employing 60,000 workers earning $1.6 billion in wages and accounting for $9 billion in total economic activity.
The demographic and geographic diversity of participants in this industry is unique. 31,580 fishermen earned income in Alaska’s commercial fisheries (over half were Alaska residents) including skippers and crew. Those fishermen operated a fleet of 8,600 vessels.
Alaska’s 2014 seafood harvest of 5.7 billion pounds had a total ex-vessel value of $1.9 billion. This production generally places Alaska sixth in seafood export value compared to all other seafood producing nations.
Our fourth major industry, tourism, or more broadly, the visitor industry, continues to prosper in our state.
In 2016, 1.8 million out-of-state visitors came to Alaska – the highest volume on record. 55 percent came via cruise ship, 40 percent arrived by air, and 5 percent were highway/ferry visitors.
Southeast is the most visited region in Alaska, capturing 67 percent of the overall market, followed by Southcentral (52 percent) and Interior (29 percent). Alaska visitors spent an average of $1,057 per person here (not including transportation to or from the state or any cruise/tour packages).
The cruise industry’s visitor volume creates tremendous multiplier effects throughout the economy. In Juneau (and other SE ports) marine passenger fees add tens of millions of dollars to municipal coffers.
Looking at these numbers, it’s hard to understand why responsible economic development always seems to generate such controversy.
These four major industries produce the oil, gas, minerals, seafood, and experiences bringing outside dollars to our state. Along with smaller private-sector producers, they provide the jobs and revenues that support government services, non-profits and associated service industries: retail, construction, medical, arts and culture, and transportation among others.
They deserve, but often don’t receive our gratitude.
But there’s more to be grateful for (just to name a few):
Service organizations whose members volunteer to help those less fortunate;
State-of-the-art medical facilities;
Perseverance Theatre (have you seen “Steel Magnolias” yet? It’s terrific);
Alaska Airlines – whose regular and dependable service continues to garner awards;
Many states (or countries) would love to have the diversity and richness of economic potential we have supporting our communities and quality of life.
We may not agree on everything, but can we agree on that?
Win Gruening retired as the senior vice president in charge of business banking for Key Bank in 2012. He was born and raised in Juneau and graduated from the U.S. Air Force Academy in 1970. He is active in community affairs as a 30-plus year member of Juneau Downtown Rotary Club and has been involved in various local and statewide organizations.
Just days after Northern Dynasty Minerals of Canada announced it had brought on a major partner, the company today says it has final paperwork ready to file for a major permit from the U.S. Army Corpos of Engineers for the Pebble Project in Western Alaska.
The permit application, expected Friday, Dec. 22, will initiate federal and state processes under the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA.
“At the outset of 2017, we established three ambitious corporate objectives for Northern Dynasty and the Pebble Project,” said Northern Dynasty President & CEO Ron Thiessen in a press release this morning. “We committed to reaching a resolution with the US Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) to restore the Pebble Project to normal course permitting, to re-partnering on the Pebble Project and to initiating permitting under NEPA. As we approach the end of the year, I’m proud to report that we will hit our mark on all three important milestones.”
The company announced a settlement agreement with EPA in May, after the EPA had said it would not even allow a permit application to be filed. Under the Obama Administration, the EPA took extraordinary steps to pre-empt any movement toward the application process, and the agency was found to be colluding with environmental groups.
Pebble sued, and the evidence was overwhelming. In the settlement with the EPA, the agency agreed to withdraw its denial and allow Pebble to apply for a Clean Water Act 404 permit with the US Army Corps of Engineers.
Earlier this week, Northern Dynasty announced a a partnership with First Quantum Minerals Ltd. for a $150 million option that will provide for the right to buy a 50 percent interest in the Pebble Project and a further investment of $1.5 billion. Pebble has received an initial $37.5 million installment.
“We are very pleased to move the Pebble Project forward to the next important phase by initiating the NEPA permitting process this year, as we committed to do,” said Tom Collier, Pebble Partnership CEO, in today’s press release.
“The project design we’re taking into permitting includes a substantially reduced development footprint and meaningful new environmental safeguards that respond directly to the priorities and concerns we’ve heard from stakeholders in Alaska. Not only are we confident that Pebble as currently envisaged will secure development permits from federal, state and local regulatory agencies, we are confident it will co-exist with the world class fisheries of Bristol Bay and earn the support of the people of the region and the state.”
DEVELOPMENT HIGHLIGHTS
The Pebble Project is a copper-gold-molybdenum porphyry deposit located on state land in the Bristol Bay Region of southwest Alaska, approximately 17 miles northwest of the community of Iliamna. The land has been set aside for generations as state mining land.
The project sits over two two contiguous deposits. On the West is a near surface resource of approximately 4.1 billion metric tons. To the east East is a deeper deposit with an estimated 3.4 billion metric tons.
Under the development scenario the Pebble Partnership will submit for federal and state permitting on Dec. 22, 2017:
The footprint of Pebble’s major mine facilities (pit, tailings storage facility) will be substantially smaller than previous planning iterations, at approximately 5.9 square miles;
There will be no primary mine operations in the Upper Talarik watershed, minimizing the project’s environmental footprint and addressing stakeholder concerns related to potential impacts on local salmon productivity;
The Tailing Storage Facility will incorporate a more conservative design, including enhanced buttresses, greater slope angles and an improved factor of safety;
Potentially acid generating tailings will be separated from other tailings and stored in a lined TSF. All tailings storage will be consolidated in a single drainage-area (the North Fork Koktuli);
The mine plan does not include permanent waste rock piles, significantly reducing risks associated with water quality;
Cyanide will not be used in the mineral recovery process at Pebble. (While cyanide is used safely in Alaska and around the world to enhance gold recoveries, Pebble has taken a decision not to employ it in direct response to stakeholder concerns);
A new ferry route across Iliamna Lake will be evaluated in order to minimize road construction, stream crossings, bridges and culverts, as well as the proposed mine’s impact on local wetlands; and
The mine will be designed to withstand the greatest possible seismicity predicted by science.
COMMUNITY BENEFITS
The company is offering these anticipated benefits associated with the Pebble Project:
During mine operations, estimated annual payments to the Lake & Peninsula Borough will be $19-21 million; estimated annual payments to the State of Alaska will be $49-66 million per year;
Total direct and indirect jobs created for Alaskans during mine operations will be 1,500-2,000;
The Pebble Partnership will advance a revenue sharing plan to enhance local and regional financial benefits associated with development of Pebble;
The project will align with State of Alaska public priorities by facilitating the development of low-cost energy for rural communities;
The Pebble Partnership will work with local commercial fishing interests on ways to help with non-Pebble related challenges associated with price and run variability, and the decline of local participation in the fishery; and
The Pebble Partnership will advance a business development and mentoring initiative to ensure that Alaska Native village corporations are ready to compete for construction and operations-phase contracts.
CONTROVERSY
The environmental groups opposing the Pebble Project say the project will harm salmon stocks. Save Bristol Bay sums up the opposition with this statement on its website: “Pebble mine threatens one of the world’s last great salmon fisheries in Bristol Bay, Alaska. Tribes, commercial fishermen, sportsmen and women, local businesses and many others across the country are working to protect these iconic and productive rivers and the people they support.”
The opposition to the project crosses political lines, and the project will likely be an issue in the upcoming gubernatorial race in 2018. Gov. Bill Walker, who has aligned with the Alaska Democratic Party, is opposed to the project. Potential gubernatorial candidate Bob Gillam, a Republican, is also opposed to it. Other leaders say they want to see the project’s specifics before they pass judgment.
Three House lawmaker are calling on the Legislature to bring in an outside investigator to look into recent claims of harassment and how they have been handled.
House Minority Leader Charisse Millett, and Reps. Mike Chenault of Kenai and Colleen Sullivan-Leonard of Wasilla sent a request to Rules Chair Rep. Gabrielle LeDoux, saying it’s time to bring in some professional help.
Reps. Mike Chenault, Charisse Millett (Minority Leader) and Colleen Sullivan-Leonard
The letter comes at a time when questions have been raised about the House Majority’s mishandling of sexual harassment of legislative staffers. Eight legislative staff members have gone on the record describing harassment by Rep. Dean Westlake.
“As more information and stories surface about the handling of sexual harassment reports made in 2017 to House Leadership, it has become clear to our offices that further examination is needed into all complaints made to and handled by the House this year. Rumors of unreported cases and secret dealings erode the trust and safety that are paramount in our workplace. Victims, and employees at all levels, deserve to know what failures existed, and that all those involved are being held responsible for their actions. Clarity in this matter can only result in improved justice for victims, increased understanding of our previous policies, and provide a clear path forward for making needed improvements and changes,” the three wrote on Tuesday.
They also wrote they first went to Legislative Council to ask for a third-party investigation, but the Legislative Legal Services advise the three to go through the Rules Committee.
Rules Chair Gabrielle LeDoux
“It would be our request that as House Rules Committee Chair, you immediately begin a process to conduct a review of all harassment reports made this year to House Leadership, and work with Legislative Council to contract with an outside expert to perform this investigation. Such an investigation would ensure that any evaluation would be free of internal biases,” the letter continued.
The letter is in response to reports that House Majority Leader Chris Tuck, an Anchorage Democrat, hid a letter that was written and given to him by a legislative staffer in March detailing harassment she had suffered at the hands of Rep. Westlake of Kotzebue. No action was taken on the complaint until the woman went public with her allegations in November.
Westlake was asked by House Democrats to resign only after the matter came to light; he has not been able to defend himself in any sort of due process.
Westlake is said to be considering postponing his resignation until after session adjourns.
Rep. Dean Westlake
Since the initial allegation came to light, no investigation has been undertaken to find out why the complaint against Westlake was buried, and who knew about it back in March. Some in the Legislature speculate that House leaders used the letter against Westlake in a form of vote extortion on HB 111, oil tax reform.
Meanwhile, today the Legislative Council Workplace Harassment Subcommittee started revising the Legislature’s Sexual and Other Workplace Harassment Policy, which was originally adopted in 2000.
(Adopted by Legislative Council on January 20, 2000) DRAFT – 2017 – 2018
Purpose:
It is the policy of the Alaska State Legislature to maintain a workplace that is free of all illegal discrimination. The Legislature as an employer will not tolerate, condone, or permit sexual harassment or harassment on the basis of sex, color, race, religion, national origin, age, mental or physical disability, marital status, change in marital status, pregnancy, or parenthood.
Employees who knowingly instigate or participate in harassment in violation of this policy will be subject to disciplinary action up to and including suspension or discharge. Supervisors and managers who knowingly permit harassment activity without taking corrective action will be subject to disciplinary action up to and including suspension or discharge.
Retaliation:
It is a violation of law and this policy to retaliate against a person who has opposed practices forbidden under AS 18.80.220 – 18.80.280. No person will be subject to retaliation for having complained of workplace harassment or for having assisted or participated in an investigation of alleged workplace harassment. Anyone who believes that he or she may have been the subject of retaliation should promptly report that the retaliation to the designated staff. or who has reported or participated in the investigation of an allegation of harassment.
Sexual Harassment Defined:
The Alaska State Commission for Human Rights defines sexual harassment as:
• Unwelcome sexual advances; or
• Requests for sexual favors; or
• Verbal/Physical/Visual conduct of a sexual nature when:
1. submission to the conduct is made an explicit or implicit term or condition of employment;
2. submission to or rejection of the conduct is used as the basis for an employment decision; or
3. the conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance or creating an intimidating or hostile work environment.
Examples of sexual harassment may include, but is not limited to, a range of subtle or overt behaviors and may involve individuals of the same or different gender. Depending on the circumstances, these behaviors may include, but are not limited to unwelcome: sexual advances or requests for sexual favors; Sexual jokes and innuendo; verbal abuse of a sexual nature; commentary about an individual’s body, commentary about an individual’s sexual prowess or sexual deficiencies; leering, whistling or touching; insulting or obscene comments or gestures; displaying, communicating, or distributing sexually suggestive objects, pictures, or messages in the workplace; and other physical, verbal, nonverbal or visual conduct of sexual nature.
A single incident may or may not constitute sexual harassment. Whether an action is sexual harassment will depend on the facts and determinations will be made on a case-by-case basis. Conduct or communications that might be welcome to one person may be unwelcome to another person. Conduct or communications that might have been welcome between two individuals at one time may become unwelcome at a later time. Other conduct or communications not expressly described in the examples, but which is substantially similar to examples, may violate this policy.
Workplace Harassment:
Workplace harassment is unwelcome conduct in the form of treatment or behavior that, to a reasonable person, creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive work environment. Workplace harassment includes discrimination based on a person’s protected class. Workplace harassment also includes unwelcome conduct that occurs outside of work during nonwork hours if the conduct creates a work environment that a reasonable employee would find intimidating, hostile or offensive. Workplace harassment does not include every minor annoyance or disappointment that an employee may encounter in the course of performing the employee’s job.
If You Witness or Experience Harassment:
If you witness or experience harassment and if you feel you are able to do so, you are encouraged to speak to the person who you believe is doing the harassing, point out the offensive behavior, and tell the person to stop. By taking this action you may be able to stop the harassment immediately. If it does not stop, or if you are reluctant to confront the person, you should report the problem using the procedure below. Managers and supervisors who witness or are aware of harassment must take action to stop the behavior and to report the alleged harassment to one of the persons noted in the reporting procedure below.
Reporting Procedure:
You do not have to be the person being harassed to report harassment. You may make a written or oral report of violations of the Policy on Sexual and Other Workplace Harassment to any of the following: your supervisor, manager, or director; the legislative EEO OfficerLegislative Affairs Agency Human Resources Manager; designated staff in the Office of the Senate President or the Speaker of the House; designated staff in the Senate or House Rules Committee Offices; staff in the Senate or House Minority Leader’s Office, or designated staff in the Senate or House Finance Committee Co-Chair offices. A list including the name, phone number, office number, and email address of each of the designated staff will be published on the Legislative Affairs Agency intranet site at the beginning of each Legislature.
It is important for harassment to be reported as soon as possible. Reports of harassment that are reported after a lot of time has passed are hard to be substantiated as witness tend of forget the specifics of the event over time. Another factor is that surveillance recordings are only maintained for 30 days before being copied over.
Violation of AS 18.80.220 – 18.80.280 is also a violation of the Legislative Ethics Act, and complaints may be pursued through the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics.
Investigations:
All reports or complaints will be taken seriously and investigated to determine if there has been a violation of this policy. Investigations will be performed by the Legislative Affairs Agency Human Resources Manager or their designee unless there is a conflict of interest or the appointing authority requests an independent outside investigator. Cost for the independent outside investigator will be borne by the appointing authority. When an investigatory report is completed it will be presented to the appropriate appointing authority. If an outside investigator is utilized a copy of the final report, in its entirety, will be provided to the Legislative Affairs Agency Human Resources Manager at the time it is presented to the appointing authority. The conclusion section will be presented to the complainant and alleged harasser. If the investigation reveals conduct in violation of this policy by a Legislator, the matter will be referred to the appropriate legislative body for resolution. If the investigation reveals conduct in violation of this policy by an employee, manager, or supervisor, appropriate action will be taken.
Confidentiality:
All complaints and reports will be considered confidential for purposes of public records. The Legislature will maintain confidentiality as much as possible but cannot guarantee absolute confidentiality. Absolute confidentiality is not possible since through the course of an investigation the investigator will need to discuss names, places, events, and other pertinent questions with witnesses and others whom the investigator feels may add value or insight into the outcome of the investigation. However, all effort will be to maintain confidentiality to the extent possible.
Training:
Appointing authorities will ensure that each of their employees will be trained in this sexual and other workplace harassment policy at least once each legislature. This training will be in coordination of the training provided with the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics and considered required under the Ethics Act. Designated staff will be provided additional training regarding the proper way to handle a complaint once it has been received.
Discipline:
Even if a complaint is unsubstantiated corrective action may still be appropriate. Just because an action does not fit the definition of sexual or other workplace harassment does not mean that the actions are appropriate for a professional work environment. Discipline will depend on the severity of the infraction. Discipline can range from verbal warnings and training up to and including dismissal.
Elected Officials:
Investigatory reports for elected officials will be distributed as follows: • Senate majority member will be presented to the Senate President. • Senate minority member will be presented to the Senate Minority Leader with a carbon copy to the Senate President. • Senator member unaffiliated will be presented to the Senate President. • House majority member will be presented to the Speaker of the House. • House minority member will be presented to the House Minority Leader with a carbon copy to the Speaker of the House. • House member unaffiliated will be presented to the Speaker of the House.
When an investigator interviews a majority member or an unaffiliated member, the respective Presiding Officer of his/her designee may be present. When an investigator interviews a minority member the respective Minority Leader or his/her designee may be present.
Appointing Authority:
Appointing authorities for the Legislative Branch is set out in statute and/or policy as: • The appointing authority during session for house and senate employees is their respective Rules Chairman. • The appointing authority during interim for house and senate employees is their respective Presiding Officers. • The appointing authority for select staff in the finance committees are hired by their respective Finance Co-Chairmen. • The appointing authority for employees hired by a permanent interim committee is their respective committee chairman. • The appointing authority for the Legislative Affairs Agency is the Executive Director. • The appointing authority for the Legislative Finance Division is the Legislative Fiscal Analyst. • The appointing authority for the Ombudsman’s Office is the Ombudsman. • The appointing authority for the Office of Victims’ Rights is the Chief Victims’ Rights Advocate.
Rep. Dean Westlake, now accused by a woman in Kotzebue of fathering a child with a teenager when he was in his late 20s, won’t be prosecuted, at least by the State of Alaska.
The Department of Law, in an email today, said it cannot prosecute based on the allegations of an incident that occurred in 1988; because it is legally barred by the statute of limitations that was in existence when the crime allegedly occurred.
“In this case, that would be the law that was in existence 30 years ago,” said Cori Mills, spokeswoman for the Department of Law.
“What we found in our research is that any applicable statute of limitations has long run out for allegations of sexual abuse of a minor that occurred in the late 80’s. Therefore, even if there was evidence to pursue the case, we could not bring charges this far away from the original incident giving rise to potential criminal allegations,” she said.
KTVA’s Liz Raines was the first to report on the decision.
Whether the matter can be taken up by tribal court is another thing. Tribal courts have no known limitations relating to statutes of limitations. Earlier this year, Gov. Walker’s attorney general wrote an opinion that granted broad authority to tribes as sovereign nations, with their own laws.
“These are matters that involve the ‘internal affairs’ of tribal citizens and those that go to the core of ‘tribal sovereignty,'” she wrote.
Much of Attorney General Janha Lindemuth’s opinion has not been tested in court.
Alaskans are on the verge of seeing the oil-rich coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) opened to leasing for the first time — a three-decades-long quest that was, until now, stifled by environmentalists and the blocking-and-tackling tactics of Democrats in Washington, DC.
The compromise tax reform bill agreed to this week by Congress includes language directing the U.S. Department of the Interior to offer two lease sales in the 10-02 area of ANWR within the coming 10 years.
Our own Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Rep. Don Young won seats on the bipartisan and bicameral conference committee that successfully merged the competing Senate and House versions of tax reform and repelled attempts to strip out the ANWR provision by opponents of drilling. Sullivan, while not a member of the conference committee, has been an outspoken proponent of permitting oil and gas activity on the coastal plain.
Once the Senate and House sign off on the final tax reform package, there’s little doubt President Trump will sign it when it reaches his desk. The ANWR language is one of the biggest ways lawmakers covered the costs of reducing the corporate tax rate to 21 percent and doubling the standard deduction and child tax credits.
Before the end of this month, the 70 percent of Alaskans who, like myself, support oil and gas activity in ANWR should be able to check off one of the biggest items on our Christmas lists.
This is a big win that will help reinvigorate an economy in its third year of recession. ANWR is that giant box under the tree on Christmas morning, not a stocking stuffer.
We should remember to send a thank you card to Trump. Don, Lisa, Dan and the hundreds of Alaskans have fought long and hard to access our oil reserves under the Arctic coastal plain. The fact that Trump is in the Oval Office has been the deciding factor. Congress approved opening ANWR once before in 1995, but it was vetoed by President Clinton. Elections, as they say, have consequences.
Trump is fast becoming Alaska’s new best friend. Trump and members of his administration, including Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, have thrown their support behind resource development projects here and across the nation as part of the president’s plan to make America energy dominant. In addition to ANWR, the administration has offered unprecedented access to the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska and is poised to unveil a proposed new five-year offshore leasing plan that is expected to include acreage in both the Chukchi and Beaufort seas — federal waters the previous administration removed from the current plan.
Opponents of drilling were quick to jump on the recent results of the Interior Department’s lease sale in the NPR-A as evidence of low industry interest in our state. The Bureau of Land Management’s offering of 16,100 square miles in NPR-A received seven bids totaling roughly $1.2 million. But critics ignore a key difference between NPR-A and ANWR. The geology east of Prudhoe Bay is far more favorable to finding another giant conventional oil reservoir than the western half.
The lack of infrastructure in the NPR-A is another reason for the poor results. It wasn’t that long ago that our federal government tried to restrict access to the reserve to helicopter-only, so its little surprise that industry is being cautious and focusing on exploring areas around existing leases.
By contrast, interest in state-owned lands on the North Slope earlier this month brought in a record-breaking $21 million, or an average bid of $110 per acre. The takeaway: interest remains high in Alaska’s resources if the geology is favorable and the access is predictable.
Another essential piece of the puzzle is state tax policy and whether it encourages outside investment. The state has made seven significant changes to the way it taxes the oil industry in the past 12 years. Tax policy and regulatory uncertainty matters a great deal to company executives who must decide how best to invest, especially in remote Alaska where it can take billions of dollars to develop a project.
We are mired in recession and confidence in the local economy slips a little more each quarter. October marked the 25th consecutive month of job losses — the same number of months of job losses that Alaska saw during the recession of the mid-1980s. The difference this time is that we have not yet found the end of the tunnel.
Amid all the doom and gloom, there is hope. Trump is setting the stage for new opportunities that could jump-start our economy. When we look back, opening ANWR will be a lasting symbol of the Trump presidency and, hopefully, the start of a brighter future for Alaska.
If we do our part with policies that encourage investment and give industry the chance to discover new oil, we can put Alaska back on the path to a sustainable economy. We must be resolute in our support for opening ANWR to capitalize on this moment. Such a significant development would not only increase throughput in the pipeline but would also likely lead to projects in other parts of the oil patch, sparking a broader economic recovery with benefits that would be felt across the state.
Gail Phillips served in the Alaska House of Representatives from 1991 to 2001 and was Speaker from 1995 to 1999. She lives in Anchorage.
