Sunday, May 3, 2026
Home Blog Page 176

Anchorage homelessness consortium, run by Anchorage Assembly member Zaletel, got some bad news on its audit

The Anchorage Coalition to End Homelessness, the cornerstone of the Anchorage homelessness industrial complex made up of several nonprofits, is not doing a good job with its financial reporting and accountability, according to an independent audit of the group for 2023.

The audit uncovered significant problems with the group’s internal financial and governance controls, raising concerns about its ability to manage funds and maintain accountability as it works to combat homelessness.

The audit identified two primary issues: a material weakness and a significant deficiency in the organization’s internal controls. The material weakness points to a serious flaw that could undermine ACEH’s ability to reliably track and report financial data. According to the findings, this deficiency increases the risk of failing to prevent or correct noncompliance with regulatory or operational requirements, potentially jeopardizing the nonprofit’s credibility and effectiveness.

In addition, the audit highlighted a significant deficiency, less severe than the material weakness but still notable, indicating another gap in financial or governance controls. While this issue is not considered as critical, auditors emphasized that it warranted immediate attention from ACEH’s management to ensure the organization can fulfill its mission without further complications.

These findings were first reported by ProPublica.

ACEH, which serves as the lead agency for the Anchorage Continuum of Care and collaborates with local “stakeholders” to implement the Anchored Home 2023-28 plan, has a goal of making homelessness “rare, brief, and one-time.” But in fact, homelessness has worsened during its existence.

Between 2019 and 2024, annual point-in-time surveys show an increase in the number of people experiencing homelessness. The annual count recorded a 54% rise in Anchorage’s homeless population over five years. In January 2024, the year after the audit, Anchorage’s count identified over 1,700 people experiencing literal homelessness—living in shelters, transitional housing, or unsheltered—compared to a more stable range of around 1,800 to 2,000 statewide in the years prior to 2019.

ACEH receives funding from various sources, including the Municipality of Anchorage, the State of Alaska, and millions of dollars of federal taxpayer-funded grants.

“ACEH received 66% and 44% of its support and revenue from government support for the years ended June 30, 2023 and 2022, respectively. A significant reduction in this support would have a substantial impact on ACEH,” the audit says.

Total government grant revenue for 2023 was $2,637,770.

The material weakness, in particular, could have far-reaching implications. Such deficiencies often signal a need for stronger oversight, improved financial tracking systems, or enhanced staff training. If unaddressed, it could hinder ACEH’s ability to secure future funding or maintain trust among donors and partners.

Among items deficient were accounts payable, property depreciation, and financial reporting. The items were scheduled to be resolved in 2024.

“During our testing of payroll transactions, we noted a substantial number of transactions which we were unable to verify pay rates or a personnel action form indicating approved coding, as required by the Organization’s policies and procedures. The finance department lacked the necessary supervisory capacity to determine and approve personnel information essential to determine the accuracy of payroll expenses. For each of the major programs listed above we attempted to test four payroll transactions and management was unable to provide supporting documentation of pay rates or personnel action forms for nearly all transactions tested,” the audit noted.

More alarming is that the head of the agency is a member of the Anchorage Assembly — Meg Zaletel, who is the Assembly’s vice chair. The Anchorage Assembly has awarded millions of dollars to Zaletel’s group over the past few years.

Dig into the audit at this link.

Barbara Haney: Are Trump tariffs unconstitutional or congressionally authorized? An economist’s view

By BARBARA HANEY

I am writing in my capacity as a private citizen and as an economist to respond to some comments from a recent event titled, “Bridge the Divide” held at the Fairbanks North Star Borough Assembly Chambers. As a former faculty who taught political economy at UAF, I was unable to attend due to Open Meetings Act constraints. It would have been nice to be able to attend and directly address issues raised, but alas, state statute restricts the number of elected officials that can attend an event, and other assembly members had indicated to me that they were going. 

However, it is my understanding, based on media reports, that at that meeting an argument was advanced that President Trump’s tariff policies are unconstitutional. At first blush, that seems correct, but a bit of research and experience suggest the President is acting within his legislative authority. 

In 1890, Congress passed a tariff act that delegated authority to the President to establish tariffs on selected goods. In 1892, Field v. Clark, challenged the authority of the Congress to delegate powers to the president under the Tariff Act of 1890. The Supreme Court upheld the 1890 Act and the President’s role in fulfilling a Congressional mandate. 

In 1934, Congress delegated additional authority to the executive branch through the Reciprocal Trade Agreements Act of 1934. This act gave the president the ability to change tariffs rates by 50% and negotiate bilateral trade agreements without additional approval from Congress.

There are also other statutory provisions that allow the President to engage in unilateral tariff authority. Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 allows the President to modify tariffs if they compromise national defense.  These tariffs could be implemented without a sunset date. 

Then there is the Trade Act of 1974.  Section 122 allows the president to enact temporary tariffs to address large and serious balance of payments deficits or other situations that present fundamental international payments challenges.  Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974 allows the president to implement an 8-year tariff if the International Trade Commission determines a domestic industry issue is threatened by a surge of cheap goods. Section 301 of the 1974 act allows the President to act on recommendations by the United States Trade Representative (USTR) to authorize tariffs, up to 4 years, on foreign countries that restrict U.S. commerce in “unjustifiable,” “unreasonable,” or “discriminatory” ways. There are other provisions available to the president under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977.

Thus, it seems that the President is operating under the authority granted long ago by Congress. Of course, tariff law is hardly the bailiwick of a gender studies faculty that were presenting. That is something an economist would be most likely to have some familiarity. Too bad there wasn’t one on the panel. 

Barbara Haney received her PH.D in economics from the University of Notre Dame and formerly taught in the economics department at UAF.  Her opinions are her own. 

As Real ID deadline approaches, rules may differ for those with tribal-issued IDs

It’s one month away: Starting May 7, all US air travelers aged 18 and older will be required to present a REAL ID-compliant driver’s license or another acceptable form of identification, such as a valid passport, to board domestic flights and access certain federal facilities. The small commuter flights that buzz around Alaska are not impacted by this requirement, as passengers do not go through Transportation Security Administration screening.

The upcoming enforcement marks the culmination of the REAL ID Act, enacted by Congress in 2005 to enhance national security following the Sept. 11 attacks. The rollout has been, however, delayed five times.

A REAL ID-compliant license is typically distinguished by a star in the top right corner. To obtain one, applicants must visit the Department of Motor Vehicles and provide specific documentation, including proof of identity (such as a birth certificate or passport), proof of Social Security number, and two additional proofs of residency. The ID is manufactured out of state and mailed to the recipient, and it can take a few weeks.

In Alaska, while obtaining a REAL ID is not mandatory for non-commercial drivers, those holding a commercial driver’s license are already required to be federally compliant and must upgrade to a REAL ID at the time of license expiration, if not already compliant.

Air travelers who do not possess a REAL ID-compliant license by the deadline will need to present an alternative form of acceptable identification, such as a valid U.S. passport or some military id types to pass through TSA checkpoints. Failure to provide such identification may result in being denied access to flights or federal facilities like military bases or nuclear facilities.

Alaska has updated its identification cards. Both the standard ID cards and REAL ID-compliant cards feature the new design but are distinguished by specific markings. REAL ID cards will display a star symbol in the top right corner to indicate compliance, while standard ID cards will not have the star and will include the notation “Federal limits apply.”

A photo ID issued by a federally recognized tribal nation or Indian tribe, including Enhanced Tribal Cards (ETCs), is sometimes compliant. However, to meet federal requirements, the ID must be issued by the tribal government itself.

The standards to meet REAL ID with tribal cards are not necessarily the same as standards for other Americans. Although tribes issuing REAL ID-compliant IDs are supposed implement comparable processes, including secure document verification and production methods to prevent fraud, as outlined in the 2005 REAL ID Act and subsequent DHS regulations, tribes are not bound by the same regulatory frameworks as state licensing offices, and there is little to no federal oversight of tribal IDs.

Some tribes have negotiated agreements with DHS, allowing flexibility in how they meet the standards. IDs issued by village councils or other organizations may not meet the REAL ID requirements.

Congressman Begich focuses on youth suicide with bill to redirect science research

Anyone who has lost a family member to suicide knows how traumatic and everlasting the pain is. For families of youth who take their own lives, it can be an all-consuming and crushing lifelong burden that debilitates them.

Congressman Nick Begich and Congresswoman Laura Gillen of New York have introduced the Youth Suicide Prevention Research Act, a bipartisan initiative aimed at bolstering federal efforts to understand and combat the rising tide of youth suicide across the United States. The bill will not add to federal spending, but simply redirect research to a needed area.

The legislation, unveiled Monday, seeks to amend the existing Advancing Research to Prevent Suicide Act by directing the National Science Foundation to prioritize research into the effects of adverse childhood experiences and toxic stress—two factors widely recognized as significant contributors to mental health challenges.

The bill comes as a response to the known problem of youth suicide in Alaska, where the rate among adolescents aged 15–19 is 30.2 per 100,000, nearly triple the national average of 10.2 per 100,000.

“I have heard from far too many Alaskan families who have been impacted by youth suicide. It’s a deeply personal and heartbreaking reality for many of our communities,” Congressman Begich said. “By expanding federal research into how early childhood trauma and stress contribute to mental health struggles, we can take meaningful steps toward prevention. I’m proud to support this bipartisan effort that makes our youth and their futures a top priority.”

Adverse childhood experiences include abuse, neglect, and household dysfunction. Along with prolonged exposure to highly stressful situations, youth are at risk for depression, substance use disorder, and suicide. These issues disproportionately affect regions like Alaska, where geographic isolation, economic challenges, and limited access to mental health resources compound the problem, and where there is are subcultures of substance abuse.

The Youth Suicide Prevention Research Act builds on the framework of the Advancing Research to Prevent Suicide Act by broadening the NSF’s research mandate. The expanded focus aims to provide a deeper understanding of how early life challenges shape long-term mental health outcomes, equipping policymakers and communities with the tools to develop targeted interventions. Notably, the legislation achieves this without requiring additional taxpayer funding, making it a cost-effective step toward addressing a national public health priority.

For Alaska, where the stark disparity in youth suicide rates has long been a call to action, the bill represents a glimmer of hope, albeit one that could take years to yield results.

Power the Future calls for restocking Strategic Petroleum Reserve with low-cost oil

By DAN McCALEB | THE CENTER SQUARE

An energy worker advocacy group is calling on the Trump administration to refill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve now that oil prices have fallen to four-year lows.

Former President Joe Biden drained the reserve of more than 40% of its capacity when gas prices reached record highs, averaging more than $5 a gallon across the U.S. in June 2022.

With the price of a barrel of crude oil at about $61, Power The Future says it’s the right time to restock the reserve.

“This drop in oil prices is not only potential good news for Americans at the pump, it also provides a window to strengthen our national energy security,” Daniel Turner, founder and executive director of Power The Future, said Monday.

he Strategic Petroleum Reserve was created in 1975 after member countries of the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries placed an embargo on oil production and distribution, leading to oil shortages and higher costs. The stock pile of oil in the reserve is meant to protect the U.S. from similar supply disruptions.

“Joe Biden left America weaker by not refilling the SPR, but today’s prices provide an opportunity to fix yet another one of his failure,” Turner said. “The SPR can now be refilled while giving taxpayers a break and it can be purchased tariff-free because we’ll use all American-made energy.”

​Dan McCaleb is the executive editor of The Center Square.

Agreement reached between ConocoPhillips and Santos for gravel road access in Kuparuk River Unit

An agreement has been reached between Oil Search (Alaska), a subsidiary of Santos, and ConocoPhillips Alaska for the use and maintenance of the Kuparuk River Unit Road. The agreement resolves a years-long dispute over the gravel road access within the Kuparuk River Unit to fields like Pikka, Quokka, and Horseshoe.

Located 40 miles west of Prudhoe Bay, Kuparuk River Unit is the second-largest oil filed in America, built by Arco Alaska on state-owned land and operated by ConocoPhillips.

The roads are critical for accessing the projects on the North Slope.

Pikka, a project of Oil Search, is to the west of Kpaus, and to get to it, the company needs to use the Kuparuk Road System, as building a new road network is impractical and costly.

But ConocoPhillips has been spending $10-20 million annually to maintain the roads, which would cost over $1 billion to build in today’s dollars. ConocoPhillips offered the use of the roads for $95 million over 20 years, but Santos argued that $60 million was a fair amount, and said that state ownership of the land entitled the company to use the roads without high fees.

The conflict arose after the informal arrangement had been used from 2019 to 2022. As Pikka moved toward full-scale development, ConocoPhillips sought more formal compensation, with an anticipation that use of the roads would increase.

Oil Search (Santos) sought a permit from the Alaska Department of Natural Resources to use the road without paying ConocoPhillips, and DNR granted the permit, based on an assertion that it has authority over the land and that the public interest would be served by granting access. ConocoPhillips appealed the decision, arguing that it was, in essence, underwriting the expenses of another company.

Santos and ConocoPhillips have now settled the dispute by signing a Kuparuk River Unit Road Use and Maintenance Agreement, retroactive to Jan. 2. Santos will withdraw its legal appeal.

The agreement ensures that Oil Search can proceed with Pikka, which could add 120,000 barrels a day to the Trans Alaska Pipeline System, at peak production.

ConocoPhillips issued a statement: “ConocoPhillips Alaska is pleased to have signed a commercial agreement with Santos for the use of the Kuparuk River Unit (KRU) road system. The long-term road use agreement follows precedent and recognizes the long-standing custom and practice on the North Slope for operators to enter into commercial agreements governing third-party use of private improvements and facilities, including the KRU road system.”

Amanda Thompson: Red shirts and identical talking points were the NEA’s orders at Anchorage town hall

By AMANDA FAITH THOMPSON

Due to the unfair treatment I had witnessed toward my children’s charter school by the Anchorage School Board and my recent job displacement that seemed entirely like a publicity stunt, I resolved to attend Saturday’s legislative town hall at University of Alaska . As I turned the corner to enter the Cuddy Center, I encountered a barricade. 

The Anchorage Education Association, an affiliate of the NEA, had organized a protest group that made entry to the town hall impossible unless you crossed far behind their red-shirted, borg-like lineup or directly in front of their barricade. I asked ASD School Board members Kelly Lessens and Carl Jacobs, who were part of the protest, to move aside so we could pass through.

I somehow made it past the megaphone that Region VI Director AEA President Corey Aist was blasting and went to sign up to testify. A few conservative teachers had taken time out of their Saturday to show up, and we sat together in a sea of NEA-compliant red shirts. We had all personally experienced ASD making unwise and financially unsound decisions with the district’s nearly $1 billion budget,  to the detriment of our students and the disbelief of our colleagues. We discovered the following:

  • ASD needs accountability in its spending choices. Did you receive the slew of “rightsizing” or “Academies of Anchorage” emails, only to see the ASD Board vote against their own rightsizing recommendations and Academies planning? We did, and it left us dumbfounded. Did they just waste a $5 million grant? What was their Plan B? Regarding school closures, had they no other source of income on the books to support keeping schools with low enrollment open? I’ve attended the last four months of School Board meetings and work sessions, which showed me they had no plans for improving dismal student test scores and absenteeism or for expanding career choices for students.
  • The Permanent Fund dividend should not be the piggy bank for unaccountable spending. Many of our students’ families depend on these funds to pay for things they cannot otherwise afford. I personally could not have attended college without a statutory PFD. There is no specific fiscal note on HB 69; they haven’t explicitly stated how they are paying for it. Trust me, they are coming after poor families’ PFDs.
  • NEA is in charge of Anchorage education and acts like a bully. I’m not saying individuals within the group are bullies; I’m saying the way they act as a whole is bullying. As a fellow teacher testified, I felt a disconnect in people’s thinking. NEA rally folks called for more education funding but did not demand accountability in its spending. They couldn’t see that they were just being used as puppets for a district and union that was lousy at budgeting.
  • The majority of people testifying parroted back union propaganda.

I receive emails in my work email asking me to attend their union events. At new hire orientation, we are not presented with alternatives. Since de-enrolling from the union and joining another advocacy group, I’ve saved thousands of dollars, gained support, and cleared my conscience.

We were shocked to see so many people testify exactly according to NEA Alaska’s talking points, as if all reason had flown out the window. One man kept repeating how he longed to have himself and everyone taxed. Government does some things well, like arresting mass murderers, but it is pretty lousy at addressing issues like homelessness or education without accountability. Have you driven by the Inlet View School construction site? At the very moment when ASD needs to be refining its spending and building use, they are constructing a huge school downtown next to a usable old school that voters rejected rebuilding several times. How many homeless villages in our beloved parks can you point out?

I was also surprised to see so many fellow displaced colleagues I recognized who were wearing NEA red. They didn’t seem to make the connection that the union they pay $1,200+ per year to actually worsens their plight. NEA roars for a 15% pay raise across the board for one year. Where is that money coming from? ASD has already announced that elementary classes will have over 30-40 students per classroom at some schools. They have to increase class sizes if the union secures a pay raise. They guilt-trip legislators, like an abusive boyfriend guilt-tripping his girlfriend’s family. Unions demand things that aren’t funded and then rally folks to come enmasse to decry their self-proclaimed budget. I can’t budget like this as a single mom; I have to count my incoming income first.

For everyone who stayed home this April election just because Trump wasn’t on the ballot or felt hopeless, I ask you to consider writing your Republican legislators (look them up at Akleg.gov). Tell them that you support accountability in education and oppose using our PFDs to fund it.

This recent school board election is lost, but we still have legislators who can stand firm with the governor’s initiatives for accountability in school funding. It’s up to you to act.

Amanda Thompson is an Anchorage educator.

Texas Senate passes bill prohibiting the changing of sex designation on birth certificates of transgenders

By BETHANY BLANKLEY | THE CENTER SQUARE

The Texas Senate passed a bill to prohibit individuals in Texas from changing their biological sex on their birth certificates in most cases. It was filed after some judges and school officials appear to be circumventing state law that bans biological men and boys from participating in women’s and girls’ sports.

The Texas Senate passed SB 406 filed by state Sen. Mayes Middleton, R-Galveston, who also authored bills to protect women and girls in sports, bathrooms, locker rooms and other spaces.

Alaska has no such law protecting the accuracy of birth certificates and has not passed legislation protecting girls’ athletics from transgender intrusion.

In fact, Alaska allows individuals to amend the gender marker on their birth certificates. The Alaska Department of Vital Records will update the sex designation upon receiving documentation, such as a letter from a licensed medical provider, such as a physician, social worker, or psychologist, attesting to the individual’s gender transition or identity, or a court order certifying the change. The amended birth certificate will note that the sex designation has been changed, but the state does not issue an entirely new certificate replacing the original. This means Alaska’s vital records align with an individual’s gender preference, even if there is no surgical intervention.

The Texas legislation, SB 406, would amend the state Health and Safety Code to require birth certificates to state an individual’s biological sex at birth, “as determined by their sex organs, chromosomes, or endogenous profile.” It would prohibit birth certificates from being issued that change the biological sex of an individual unless there is a clerical error, the original birth certificate doesn’t list the person’s biological sex at birth, or for a few other reasons.

The bill “ensures Texas birth certificates remain accurate, consistent, and reflective of biological reality,” Middleton said after the bill passed. “A birth certificate, like a death certificate, is a snapshot in time that records accurate vital statistics existing at birth. A birth certificate states God given sex, either XX or XY.”

He also pointed to President Donald Trump’s executive order stating there are only two biological sexes, male and female, “which expressly excludes gender identity,” he said. He also pointed to Gov. Greg Abbott’s directive to state agencies to follow Trump’s executive order and disregard court orders to change an individual’s biological sex on their birth certificates and driver’s licenses.

Last month, Attorney General Ken Paxton issued a legal opinion arguing that state district courts don’t have the constitutional authority to direct government agencies to change a person’s biological sex on government-issued identification documents, including driver’s licenses, birth certificates, and ID cards that is contrary to their biology. He also directed state agencies to correct and reverse any documents they may have altered related to gender, The Center Square reported.

The Senate also passed Middleton’s bill after Paxton sued Dallas ISD after finding “alarming evidence” that its administrators “had implemented an unwritten policy of encouraging students to alter their birth certificates to play sports” in violation of state law, The Center Square reported.

They reportedly did so after Abbott in 2021 signed a bill into law to prohibit K-12 students from competing in interscholastic athletic competitions designated for the opposite biological sex. In 2023, he also signed another bill into law prohibiting biological men from competing on a team or as an individual against women in college sports, authored by Middleton, The Center Square reported.

SB 406 “closes a loophole courts created with no authority to try and change vital statistics from the time of birth,” Middleton said. 

He also said that judges changing biological sex on birth certificates “could potentially undermine the integrity of sex-specific sports categories. After passing the Save Women’s Sports Act in the 88th legislature to ensure fairness and opportunity for all Texan women, there are concerns that individuals may attempt to circumvent these laws by amending their birth certificates to reflect a gender ideology and not biological sex.”

SB 406 isn’t about “restricting anyone’s personal expression,” Middleton said, but is “about ensuring that legal documents reflect accurate statistics and that our laws can be effectively enforced. By keeping birth certificates fact-based, we are taking another step to preserve the fairness and integrity of women’s sports and other sex-based protections, as well as safety for women in private spaces.”

The bill passed along party lines and was sent to the Texas House.

In the Texas House, a bill was also filed that would make it a felony for individuals who knowingly make a false or misleading verbal or written statement to a governmental entity or their employer by claiming to be a gender that is contrary to their biological sex.

Middleton also authored one of two companion bills filed in the Texas Senate and House to prohibit individuals from using state-funded facilities that are designated for use by the opposite sex. It bans biological males from using state-funded women’s facilities like in jail or prison cells, domestic violence shelters, public bathrooms, locker rooms or other facilities, The Center Square reported.

Kevin McCabe: Alaska legislative fiscal notes, a cornerstone of honest government, are under threat

By REP. KEVIN MCCABE

In the Alaska legislative bill process, fiscal notes aren’t just paperwork, they are foundational to the legislative process. They tell us, in dollars and cents, what a proposed bill is going to cost the state. That’s not an optional requirement, its the law, laid out clearly in AS 24.08.035.

These fiscal notes are supposed to be drafted by the state agency most impacted by the bill, giving legislators the facts they need to make informed decisions. But recent developments surrounding HB78 (defined benefits for state employees) and last year’s HB173 have me questioning whether that law is being followed; and whether the process is being compromised.

Let’s be clear. Fiscal notes are meant to protect us from budgetary surprises down the road. They’re there to highlight what a bill will really do to our budget and whether it’s going to save money or cost us more. That only works if the notes are written by professionals who have the right data and the right experience. When that process gets usurped or twisted, and the wrong people are involved, or there’s bias at play, it undermines the whole point. 

And frankly, I’m seeing red flags on HB78.

The buzz at the Capitol is that the fiscal note for HB78 (the defined benefits bill) didn’t come from the proper agency, but from a legislative staffer.

If true, that’s a blatant violation of AS 24.08.035. Staffers aren’t impartial experts. They’re often tied to the bill sponsor or the committee, and while they’re hard-working folks, they don’t have the authority or the objectivity to do this job. What we then end up with is something that’s been referred to as a “deep fake” fiscal note. And in this day and age, where misinformation runs rampant, that should concern all of us.

If a staffer generated fiscal note hides the real cost of a bill like HB78, we could end up blindsided, and future legislators could end up dealing with a programmed increase that the state coffers are ill equipped to handle. That’s a threat to responsible government, and it erodes the trust people have in the legislative process.

Now let’s talk about last years HB173 – the so-called “little Davis-Bacon Act.” This one raised the threshold for public construction projects under wage regulation from $25,000 to $150,000. That change makes a lot of sense for our small towns and villages as it reduces red tape and helps projects move forward more affordably. For small villages and cities that bill would have been a game changer. But here’s the issue: I’ve heard that the fiscal note for HB173 may have been drafted or influenced by current or former union members within the Department of Labor.

Technically, the agency involved was the right one. But if the folks writing the fiscal note have a union background – and the bill directly affects union interests – that’s a serious conflict of interest. Even if the numbers are accurate, the perception of bias alone damages credibility. And when you slap a big, inflated fiscal note on a bill that’s supposed to be fiscally conservative, it muddies the waters and discourages smart policy. We cannot afford that kind of manipulation by state agencies. We have got to get serious about protecting the integrity of this process. When fiscal notes are compromised, we face real risks such as:

  • They can lead us down a very wrong path.
  • They can reflect personal or political bias, rather than cold hard facts.
  • They can leverage a vote from a fiscal conservative not to vote for a bill simply because of the expense. 
  • And most dangerous of all, they chip away at the public’s trust.

If HB78’s defined benefits fiscal note were actually staff generated, it might have huge hidden costs left out to help the bill pass. If HB173’s fiscal note was influenced by union ties, it might’ve exaggerated the costs to make it seem more expensive to get conservatives to vote against it. Either way, legislators are left flying blind when the bill comes for a vote.

Here’s what we need to do:

  • Enforce the law. AS 24.08.035 says fiscal notes must come from state agencies. Period. No shortcuts, no loopholes.
  • Consider establishing an independent legislative budget office – something neutral and professional, to review or even draft fiscal notes.
  • Increase transparency. If someone working on a fiscal note has ties that might affect their objectivity, those affiliations should be disclosed.
  • Create strong guidelines to prevent conflicts of interest. Anyone with a direct stake in a bill’s outcome should be nowhere near its fiscal note.

The bottom line is this: Fiscal notes aren’t just technical documents. They’re a cornerstone of honest government. And if our actions let rumors and bias creep into this process, we’re failing the Alaskans who trust us to be good stewards of their money. We owe it to Alaskans to fix this, and we owe it to the institution we serve to demand better.

Rep. Kevin McCabe is a legislator from Big Lake, Alaska.