FASHION BEAT
We checked it out and yes, you can actually buy this “Anarchy Jacket” this season at high-end Barneys New York. It’s 50 percent cotton, 50 percent nylon, and comes with the anti-American graffiti pre-defined for the wearer, in case they run out of their own ideologies.
Must Read Alaska’s Comment section is open for additional graffiti that might be included on this jacket, which we note has gusseted shoulders and is dry-clean only.
By WIN GRUENING
SENIOR CONTRIBUTOR
The State Officers Compensation Commission (SOCC) was established by statute in 2009 to “review the salaries, benefits, and allowances of members of the legislature, governor, lieutenant governor, and each principal executive department head and prepare a report on its findings at least once every two years.”
In the eight years since, the SOCC has met 6 times and each time either made no recommendation or recommended an increase in compensation.
That is, until Wednesday, Oct 25.
On that day, SOCC met for the first time in two years in a downtown Anchorage office building with four new commissioners. The only other person in the room was Department of Administration Division Director, Kate Sheehan, acting as Secretary and providing administrative support.
Commissioners were given information comparing salary, benefit, and allowances with other states for various executive branch positions and legislators as well as historical information related to executive branch and legislative branch compensation in Alaska.
The meeting was recorded and although an open teleconference line was available, no one called in and no one else attended. The sole public comment was a letter from Alaska Rep. Les Gara requesting the committee consider modifying the per diem rate of legislators.
The meeting lasted one hour and 41 minutes. The first half of the meeting was taken up with administrative matters and an explanation of the available reports.
Then, newly-elected Chair Glenn Clary suggested first reviewing executive branch compensation.
With little discussion, several motions were made and unanimously passed to make no recommendation regarding the Governor’s, Lt. Governor’s, and department head level salaries. In effect, the commission recommended executive branch compensation remain at current levels.
Approximately one hour into the meeting, discussion began on legislators’ compensation. Commissioner Duane Bannock proposed for “theatrical purposes” to reduce legislator base salaries by 15%. He further stated it was well-known that “keeping your job is the new raise” and this “sends a statement”.
Chair Clary opined that legislative pay was largely “supplemental income” to legislators and since Alaskans were impacted by a 50% reduction in their Permanent Fund Dividend it followed that “it’s ok to reduce (legislative compensation).”
Despite legislators’ base salaries being frozen at $50,400 since 2010, a final amended motion recommending a 10% reduction passed unanimously.
Apparently the SOCC felt it was within their purview to “send the Legislature a message” even though their only mandated responsibility is reviewing and recommending whether compensation is equitable.
Ironically, the Governor’s salary was validated with little comment despite the Governor’s role in slashing the PFD. Furthermore, the executive branch hasn’t cut any state salaries and, in fact, has continued to negotiate raises for various executive level employees as well as merit increases for rank-and-file employees.
The remainder of the meeting was spent discussing per diem levels legislators receive while in session. Again, Commissioner Bannock and Chair Clary dominated the discussion insisting per diem payments (currently set under Federal guidelines) were too high since they exceeded actual lodging and meal expenses incurred by legislators.
Commissioners settled on a recommendation for legislators to follow the Alaska State Administrative Manual which governs all other state employees when traveling on business. This meant, except for a small meal allowance, legislators would only be reimbursed for actual lodging and living expenses.
Recently, legislator per diem payments ranged from $213/day to $295/day while in session and, under current guidelines, could be spent on food, lodging, or any other legislator expense. Up to now, although not labelled as such, the portion of payments exceeding expenses has always been acknowledged as a form of compensation.
According to National Conference of State Legislatures survey data, this is not an uncommon arrangement as over half of state legislatures in the country currently approve similar per diem payments.
Yet SOCC commissioners gave this no consideration and concerned themselves primarily with whether this would save money. The net effect of both recommendations, should they become law, could reduce legislators’ compensation by nearly 25% by some estimates.
While saving public money is laudable, what’s the real message SOCC is sending?
Many legislators spend over 180 days a year in sessions or hearings – some scheduled with minimal notice. Most legislators are required to move their households twice a year, find housing, set up housekeeping, literally shut down their businesses or take job-related leaves of absence, maintain constituent relations, and continue to serve the public in a variety of ways.
Legislators are rarely recognized for their public service despite their sacrifice of family life and livelihoods.
The Commission action is nothing less than a clear sign we no longer believe in a citizen legislature.
Unfortunately, this would result in a legislative body comprised of the retired and independently wealthy – or unemployables who see the job as a promotion.
Is that the Alaska legislature you really want?
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.
CRIMES OF SB 91
From Legislative Affairs Agency legal team, here is the list of Class C felonies that has Alaskans alarmed about leniency for certain crimes under SB 91. SB 54 reimposes harsher penalties for some of these crimes, and is being debated today on the House floor in legislative Special Session. The Senate passed SB 54 in April, but House Democrats have sought to preserve SB 91 and did not allow even a hearing on SB 54 during regular session.
#ITAXALASKA
Alaska is not one of the two dozen states that require registration of airplanes. That’s a federal function and there’s not been a need to duplicate it in the 49th state.
Until now.
A new state registration system being proposed by Gov. Bill Walker would put every plane in a database and create a platform for an airplane tax.
Walker is looking to place a $150 tax on private airplanes of any size — whether Cessna 150s or 750s, single engine or turbo props — and a $250 tax on commercial aircraft of any size.
Think of it as a user fee — that’s what the Walker Administration says it is.
The Walker Aircraft Registration Tax, or WART, as critics are calling it, is expected to raise between $1.3 million and $1.5 million a year, a fraction of the motor fuel tax that is also being proposed by the Walker Administration earlier this year, which would raise as much as $80 million a year. Aviation fuels are included in that tax.
The aircraft registration program will cost $30,000 a year to administer. That is the equivalent of a half-time administrative assistant position in the Department of Transportation. There is no enforcement mechanism being created by the regulation, and the state thinks that aircraft owners will pay the fee via the honor system. No penalty will be imposed for ignoring the WART.
A poll conducted by the Alaska Airmens Association and the National Business Aviation Association showed that pilots in Alaska actually favor the motor fuel tax increase over either a registration fee or landing fees, “although a significant number of people responding commented that they opposed any increased fees or taxes.”
It looks like airplane owners are going to get both registration taxes and fuel tax.
In Anchorage, the municipality already charges between $75 and $150 to aircraft owners annually, and a $25 a month late fee. This would mean Anchorage aircraft owners will pay double taxation on their airplanes.
In Juneau, the borough owns and operates the airport, and charges a tax on commercial airlines.
WHAT ABOUT THAT PROPOSED AVIATION FUEL TAX INCREASE?
Senate Bill 25 and House Bill 60, introduced by Walker during the past legislative session, would triple the motor fuel tax, including maritime and jet fuels. Under the governor’s plan, the tax on aviation fuel in 2017 would have gone from 3.2 cents to 6.4 cents for jet fuel and 4.7 cents to 9.4 cents a gallon for aviation fuel. Then in 2018, the tax would have risen again.
Those bills are still alive for consideration in January, 2018 during regular session. The funds generated would be placed in the general fund for distribution throughout the state’s many needs, not just airport maintenance.
REGISTER, PAY STATE, RINSE, REPEAT
As the new regulation-based tax is currently proposed, much of the largest commercial airlines that frequent Alaska would be exempt because they are based out of state.
However, in-state airlines such as Ravn and Grant Aviation, Alaska Seaplanes out of Juneau and Taquan Air of Ketchikan, would be required to pay the tax, whether or not they use airstrips or waterways.
According to DOT, the tax is needed because aircraft owners should help pay for the cost of the aviation system. Commercial rates are set higher as they use the system on a daily or weekly basis, where as weekend pilots or experimental plane enthusiasts put little pressure on the system, according to DOT.
Nonprofits and faith-based groups such as Samaritan’s Purse or Bible camps that own aircraft based in Alaska would not be exempt from the tax. Senior citizens who own planes will not get an exemption, either. Any plane that is operable will be taxed under the proposed regulation, and that tax could be increased — or eliminated — in future years without going through the statutory process.
According to the FAA, there are 7,933 active pilots and 9,346 registered aircraft in Alaska.
Alaska has 400 public airports, 282 land-based, 4 public heliports, 114 seaplane bases, with a total of 747 landing areas (private, public, and military). Lakes, gravel bars, and frozen tundra areas number in the thousands, and are widely used by pilots. Seaplane bases number 114.
Alaska has 306 certified air carriers providing scheduled and on-demand services. Some, like Alaska Air and Delta, are based out of state, the FAA states.
The proposed tax is now open for public comment and public meetings are planned for November:
Nov. 9: 1st Floor Conference Room
Alaska DOT&PF 2-4 pm
3132 Channel Drive, Juneau
Nov. 14: Airport Response Center
Fairbanks International Airport 2-4 pm
5195 Brumbaugh Blvd, Fairbanks
Nov. 20: Central Region Main Conference Room
Alaska DOT&PF 2-4 pm
4111 Aviation Ave, Anchorage
Comments may also be submitted by mail to:
Rich Sewell, Aviation Policy Planner
Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities
PO Box 196900
Anchorage, AK 99519
Or via email to: [email protected]
Comments must be received by 5:00 pm Alaska Standard Time on January 5, 2018.
[Click here to find out more details about the new airplane tax.]
[Click here to read FAA fact sheet on Alaska aviation]
Attorney General Jahna Lindemuth today appealed to the Alaska Supreme Court in the case of Alaska Democratic Party v. State of Alaska, which challenged a state statute requiring candidates who run in a political party’s primary to be actually registered as voters in that party.
The Alaska Democratic Party filed a suit against the State to be allowed to run unaffiliated candidates in its 2018 primary.
In October, Juneau Superior Court Judge Philip Pallenberg ruled the statute unconstitutional as it violates the Alaska Democratic Party’s First Amendment “freedom of association” with candidates who are not actual Democrats.
Lindemuth today said the matter is important enough to take to the Alaska Supreme Court for further review.
“We don’t agree with the superior court that the party membership requirement in state statute places an unconstitutional burden on political parties,” she said in a statement.
This story will be updated.
WATCH HIS TESTIMONY IN THE SENATE
At times the footprint of the proposed drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is described as no bigger than a dime on a football field.
Alaska Congressman Don Young used a different tactic to explain it. He took out a blue marker and put a dot on his nose while testifying before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee to advocate for oil and gas development in the 1002 Area of ANWR.
Young said technology has improved so much that no more than 2,000 acres ( or 3 square miles) of the 19 million acre refuge would be required to develop the 20 billion barrels of oil estimated to be in the coastal plain.
After Young drew the dot on the tip of his nose, he remarked: “You see anything different on my nose right now? This little dot on my nose – I weigh 225 lbs. – this little dot is what we’re talking about in surface impact in the 1002 Area. That’s a potential for approximately – early estimates were 10 billion barrels – and now estimates are probably around 20 billion barrels of oil.”
THEY’RE STABBING AT THE VEIL, AT LEAST
The best advice anyone can give Erin Austin today is: Get a lawyer.
[Editor’s note: No one has impugned Erin Austin’s professional work in these proceedings. She is represented as an employee of the Binkley Company.]
The former financial officer for Alice Rogoff’s collection of shell companies is getting the cold shoulder from her former boss, Rogoff, who is saying that she (Rogoff) had no idea that money was being moved around from one limited liability corporation to another to pay bills for the Alaska Dispatch News.
The Chapter 7 bankruptcy hearing for Rogoff took place at the Historic Courthouse on 4th Avenue in Anchorage on Thursday. Rogoff, with a wolf-ruff parka draped over her chair, was classically noncommittal in answering the questions of some of the creditors.
All these transactions that the creditors were asking about were done by Erin Austin, Rogoff said, and she just knew nothing about it.
Here are the main takeaways from the meeting, which lasted about an hour:
[Read: Craig Medred breaks it down further]
WALKER APPROVAL RATING SINKS
Gov. Bill Walker’s approval rating is 40 percent, and his disapproval rating is 47 percent, according to a compilation of recent polls from July through September. In political parlance, he is “upside down” on his approval ratings.
The hottest general election contests in 2018 are expected to be Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico and Ohio, wrote Ron Faucheux, president of Clarus Research Group, a research and polling company based in Washington DC.
All 10 of the top 10 governors in terms of approval ratings are Republicans. Of the bottom 10, 7 are Republicans, 2 are Democrats and 1 — Walker — is an an undeclared. Seven governors are approved of less than Walker.
TOP RANGE – APPROVAL/DISAPPROVAL
1. Massachusetts, Charlie Baker (R): 69%/17%
2. Maryland, Larry Hogan (R): 66%/18%
3. Arkansas, Asa Hutchinson (R): 63%/19%
4. Alabama, Kay Ivey (R): 62%/12%
5. North Dakota, Doug Burgum (R): 62%/17%
6. Nevada, Brian Sandoval (R): 61%/21%
7. Vermont, Phil Scott (R): 60%/21%
8. New Hampshire , Chris Sununu (R): 59%/22%
9. Wyoming, Matt Mead (R): 59%/23%
10. South Dakota, Dennis Daugaard (R): 59%/25%
MIDDLE RANGE – APPROVAL/DISAPPROVAL
11. Texas, Greg Abbott (R): 58%/25%
12. Tennessee, Bill Haslam (R): 57%/23%
13. Montana, Steve Bullock (D): 57%/26%
14. Georgia, Nathan Deal (R): 56%/24%
15. Nebraska, Pete Ricketts (R): 56%/29%
Utah, Gary Herbert (R): 56%/29%
16. Mississippi, Phil Bryant (R): 55%/27%
17. Ohio, John Kasich (R): 55%/30%
18. New York, Andrew Cuomo (D): 55%/33%
19. Colorado, John Hickenlooper (D): 54%/30%
20. Florida, Rick Scott (R): 54%/34%
21. Indiana, Eric Holcomb (R): 53%/21%
21. Indiana, Eric Holcomb (R): 53%/21%
22. Louisiana, John Bel Edwards (D): 53%/32%
23. Minnesota, Mark Dayton (D): 52%/34%
24. South Carolina, Henry McMaster (R): 51%/21%
25. Delaware, John Carney (D): 51%/27%
26. Idaho, Butch Otter (R): 51%/35%
27. North Carolina, Roy Cooper (D): 50%/28%
28. Oregon, Kate Brown (D): 50%/34%
29. Missouri, Eric Greitens (R): 49%/29%
30. Virginia, Terry McAuliffe (D): 48%/31%
31. Washington, Jay Inslee (D): 48%/33%
32. California, Jerry Brown (D): 48%/37%
33. Hawaii, David Ige (D): 47%/39%
34. Arizona, Doug Ducey (R): 46%/33%
35. Pennsylvania, Tom Wolf (D): 46%/38%
36. Iowa, Kim Reynolds (R): 45%/27%
37. Kentucky, Matt Bevin (R): 45%/41%
38. Wisconsin, Scott Walker (R): 44%/48%
39. Maine, Paul LePage (R): 42%/52%
BOTTOM 10 – APPROVAL/DISAPPROVAL
40. West Virginia, Jim Justice (R): 41%/46%
41. Rhode Island, Gina Raimondo (D): 41%/47%
42. Alaska, Bill Walker (I): 40%/47%
43. Michigan, Rick Snyder (R): 37%/50%
44. New Mexico, Susana Martinez (R): 37%/52%
45. Illinois, Bruce Rauner (R): 30%/55%
46. Oklahoma, Mary Fallin (R): 30%/58%
47. Kansas, Sam Brownback (R): 24%/66%
48. Connecticut, Dan Malloy (D): 23%/68%
49. New Jersey, Chris Christie (R): 18%/77%
Lt. Gov. Byron Mallott tends to go long in his remarks. As a Tlingit elder, he holds forth when given the microphone. It can be tedious. But you don’t interrupt a Tlingit elder when he’s holding forth.
Unless you are Sen. Maria Cantwell of Washington State, especially if Mallott, a fellow Democrat, is not supporting her position of keeping the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge off-limits to drilling.
IRONY OR NO IRONY?
During today’s testimony in front of the Senate Energy Committee, Mallott was answering a question posed by Sen. Al Franken, D-Minnesota, who wanted Mallott to answer if he found it ironic that Alaska, impacted by climate change more than any other state, was supporting “drilling in the habitat of the food source for an indigenous people. Do you disagree that there’s some irony here?”
Franken had gone on too long, and his time had expired, but committee Chairman Lisa Murkowski said she would allow Mallott to answer.
“I disagree,” Mallott said. “We need to continue to evolve our petroleum-based economy as we also seek to be responsive to our climate change reality. Nobody knows that better than we do. We live with it every single day. It will take decades for us to withdraw from reliance on a petroleum-based economy.”
“And for us in the meantime to rely on sources on our own raises national security issues, it raises economic issues, it raises issues that impact us in Alaska very directly…” Mallott said.
Mallott went on for a couple of more sentences when Sen. Cantwell, the ranking Democrat on the committee, blurted out: “Madam Chair, Madam Chair, I think there’s going to be two votes at noon. And there’s several of our colleagues who have been here …. I hope we can get a short summation so we can move on.”
Mallott responded: “Sure. I disagree that it’s ironic. It’s in the national interest, it is in Alaska’s interest, and it is the world’s interest that we allow this kind of development to take place.”
Later in the hearing, Mallott said with a sense of irony:
“I am a Tlingit Indian, and when people ask me to be brief, I’m doing my damnedest.”
That rejoiner to Cantwell is now part of the Congressional Record.