Wednesday, June 3, 2026
Home Blog Page 23

Josh Church: It’s Time to Open Alaska Again

4

By Josh Church, Candidate for Lieutenant Governor

My family came to Alaska in 1935.

As I write this, I am looking at a family history book. On one page is a line that reads, “The New Home of John Church and Paul Nelson,” with the Matanuska Valley circled.

In May of 1935, my ancestors boarded a train headed west. They traveled to Seattle and then set sail for Alaska. Like hundreds of other families during the Great Depression, they came north because the territory was opening land and opportunity to people willing to work and build a life.

The Matanuska Colony was part of a bold idea. America was struggling through the Depression, and leaders believed Alaska could offer a new start. Families were offered land and the chance to build farms and communities from the ground up.

And they did.

Those families built homes, raised children, and helped create the Alaska we know today.

But somewhere along the way, Alaska stopped thinking about growth.

Today, our population has stalled and in some places is declining. Young families leave for opportunities elsewhere. Businesses face high costs and heavy regulation. Instead of planning for growth, we spend most of our time managing decline.

A big part of the problem is land.

Roughly 99 percent of the land in Alaska is controlled by federal, state agencies or large corporations, leaving very little available for individuals and small businesses. For many Alaskans, the dream of owning an affordable piece of land to build a cabin, start a farm, or launch a business has become increasingly difficult.

That needs to change.

Alaska should once again be a place where people come north to build a future. We should be expanding land sales and land leases so families can build homes, farmers can start operations, and entrepreneurs can start businesses. Land should also be available for mining, timber, energy development, and industries that can grow Alaska’s economy.

Imagine what could happen if we sold just one percent of Alaska’s land over the next twenty years.

If that land sold for even $1,000 per acre, far below the value of many parcels, it could generate roughly $200 million per year in direct revenue to the state. When you consider the construction, equipment purchases, and new businesses that follow land development, the economic activity created could easily add another $400 million each year.

That would mean about $600 million in total economic impact annually, or roughly $12 billion in economic activity over two decades.

But the impact goes beyond numbers.

New landowners build homes. They start businesses. Families move in. Communities grow.

Growth also helps address problems we constantly debate in Alaska.

Take education. Our school funding system is based largely on the number of students enrolled. When enrollment declines, districts lose money and force conversations about school closures, program cuts, or layoffs. Buildings sit half empty, and budgets get tighter every year.

A growing population changes that conversation.

Growth also strengthens the broader economy. Alaska needs more workers, more entrepreneurs, and more families putting down roots. A shrinking state cannot sustain the future we want.

Opening land is only one part of the solution.

We also need to reduce unnecessary regulations that make it harder to start businesses or build projects in Alaska. We need to develop cheaper so families and businesses are not paying some of the highest power costs in the country. We should be encouraging industries like mining, timber, energy development, and even new technologies like data centers.

We should also continue improving how we manage the Alaska Permanent Fund. Even modest improvements in investment returns or reductions in fees could produce hundreds of millions of dollars in additional value for the state over time.

But the biggest change we need is a change in mindset.

For much of Alaska’s history, our leaders believed in growth. They believed the future of this state depended on people coming here to build lives and communities.

Somewhere along the way, we stopped thinking that way.

Alaska should not be a place where people are leaving. It should be a place people are moving to.

My family came here in 1935 because Alaska was open to them. They were given the chance to build a life and a future.

That opportunity should still exist today.

It is time to open Alaska again.

Bronsonchurch.com

Josh Church is a Fairbanks resident, a financial adviser rep, and a candidate for Lieutenant Governor, running alongside Candidate for Governor Dave Bronson.

This op-ed was voluntarily submitted by the Bronson-Church campaign and not solicited by Must Read Alaska. All candidates running for elected office are welcome and encouraged to submit articles for publication. Must Read Alaska unequivocally supports the election of a conservative candidate to the Office of Governor but does not endorse a particular candidate.

House Finance Committee Scrutinizes SB 64 Election Reforms

1

The Alaska House Finance Committee spent more than an hour questioning sponsors and the Division of Elections on SB 64, the sweeping elections reform package aimed at expanding ballot curing and tightening voter roll maintenance. The discussion revealed deep operational and legal concerns, particularly for rural Alaskans, around data privacy, and practical feasibility over ambitious deadlines.

Rep. Jeremy Bynum (R-Ketchikan) framed the discussion, reminding members that “rural Alaska” extends beyond Western regions to include areas like northern Prince of Wales with “no cell phone reception,” where mail delivery itself is challenging. He stressed that any cure framework must avoid favoring urban voters while disadvantaging those in remote communities. Division Director Carol Beecher confirmed the 10-day post-election cure window collides with mail realities: a notice mailed five days after election day leaves little margin for response. “We don’t believe that the mailing of it even from the day of election would necessarily allow the individuals in those communities to be able to send back the information required to cure the ballots,” Beecher testified.

Sponsor staff David Dunsmore pointed to Section 24, noting the bill expands review to 12 days pre-election and requires notification within 24 hours by phone or email (if available) and 48 hours by mail. He acknowledged the bill does not dictate review board meeting frequency, leaving it to regional volume. Beecher emphasized operational flexibility: “It is somewhat fluid,” with Anchorage meeting more often and Nome perhaps only once or twice. Members expressed reluctance to codify rigid schedules that could waste resources in low-volume areas.

Feasibility dominated discussion around effective dates. Section 35 sets July 1, 2026, for most provisions, while Section 34 delays the “true source” tracking to January 1, 2027. Beecher warned of “nearly impossible” compliance for an online ballot tracking system with multi-factor authentication in only 49 days before the August primary. The Division has two IT staff and must prioritize the voter registration system during peak season. “We would be in violation… right away because we cannot do an online system in that short of a time,” she stated plainly.

Rep. Andy Josephson (D-Anchorage) explored staging—manual outreach in 2026, electronic tracking later. Beecher confirmed a manual process is “possible” but auditability would rely on basic logs like Excel, risking disputes. Rep. Alyse Galvin (NA-Anchorage) pressed on volume: roughly under 1,000 curable ballots statewide in 2024, with 512 tied to witness signatures. Beecher noted rural rejection rates are far lower than Anchorage, but mail-only cures remain problematic. Digital returns (fax or imaged) could help, yet the statute as written demands timely receipt within 10 days.

Legal tensions surfaced on witness signatures. Beecher flagged conflict with AS 15.20.081(d), which twice requires contemporaneous witnessing. “We’re not sure how that is possible,” she said. Dunsmore countered that Sections 22 and 24 allow cured ballots at state review, with government ID verification providing stronger identity assurance than a witness. The committee left reconciliation to further drafting.

Privacy and data sharing drew conservative scrutiny. Rep. Will Stapp (R-Fairbanks) confirmed Alaska’s ERIC participation (roughly 26 states) involves hashed voter and DMV data, with no direct state-to-state sharing. Beecher noted AS 15.07.195 authorizes it. Rep. Jamie Allard (R-Eagle River) questioned public voter list contents and potential DOJ access via DOR. Beecher cataloged public fields: name, addresses, party, precinct, voting history, and ascension number (a public tracking field, not voter ID). Confidential data includes DOB, SSN, and driver’s license numbers. Dunsmore and Sen. Bill Wielechowski (D-Anchorage) affirmed improper sharing would violate state and federal law.

PFD data provisions sparked further debate. Section 28 expands data for roll maintenance, while Section 30 would bar using PFD mailing addresses for updates. Beecher questioned utility of certain fields and noted current practice allows silent mailing-address updates. The committee flagged potential drafting issues on page three’s “and/or” logic for notice triggers, with Dunsmore committing to clarify with legal to ensure independent criteria.

Rep. Frank Tomaszewski (R-Fairbanks) asked the core rights question: “When exactly do I lose my ability to vote?” Dunsmore explained inactive status under National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) after non-response, but voters retain rights via question ballots and reactivation upon residency affirmation. Beecher noted current two-notice process can take up to eight years for full removal.

Lawmakers signaled caution before advancing major election changes that could disproportionately burden remote Alaskans or strain limited state resources.

Structural Chokepoints in Alaska K-12 Part 4: GO Bonds 

By Michael Tavoliero

In larger cities, the ceiling on reform is reinforced by school general obligation (GO) bond debt. Major school projects are financed with voter‑approved GO bonds backed by the municipality’s full faith and credit and repaid through dedicated property taxes. Once issued, debt service becomes a hard, non‑discretionary claim on the tax base. 

At the same time, school operations are locked into PERA’s mandatory bargaining regime and governed by boards elected in low‑turnout, off‑cycle elections. Labor costs, which dominate operating budgets, cannot be structurally renegotiated outside PERA, while GO bond obligations keep debt and mill rates near their caps, pre‑committing a large share of every education dollar to long‑term debt service and a state‑mandated labor framework voters cannot change. 

In this environment, talk of “school choice,” “innovation,” or “performance reforms” is largely illusory. Rigid board terms and election timing block broad course corrections; PERA’s school‑only, no‑exit rule fixes operating costs; and existing GO bonds fix capital costs and tax rates. The result is almost no fiscal room to maneuver and, in practical terms, a non‑stop freeway to public funds for special‑interest use: taxpayers keep the system funded and solvent, while voters are reduced to ratifying how to manage a balance sheet and a set of contracts that they never had a chance to redesign. 

APOC compliance and who can realistically run a bond campaign 

Formally, APOC’s regime is neutral in GO bond fights; both sides face the same rules. In practice, pro‑bond campaigns are run or backed by organizations that already know APOC, have counsel or bookkeepers, and can spread compliance costs over many elections. Anti‑bond or “restructure instead of borrow more” efforts are usually one‑off citizen campaigns that start at zero, risk APOC mistakes, and face late fees or civil penalties. 

The result is a scheme that chills reformers while barely touching institutional actors. APOC does not forbid opposition; it simply makes sustained, organized opposition much more costly for those least able to bear that cost. 

Use of school property for bond advocacy 

Formally, districts are supposed to be “informational, not advocacy” in their communications about bonds. In practice, “informational” town halls in school gyms, district‑produced slides, robocalls, flyers in backpacks, and banners on school property often read like “vote yes” messaging. Opponents typically cannot use the same facilities with the same ease, timing, or implicit district endorsement. 

Without true viewpoint neutrality in access to facilities and communication channels; staff time, design, and district platforms function as in‑kind campaign support for one side, even if no money is directly transferred to a “Yes on the Bond” committee. That raises equal‑access and equal‑rights concerns and deepens the sense that GO bond campaigns are structurally tilted toward insiders. 

Special‑interest money and the “structural ceiling” 

When GO bonds are on the ballot, labor and construction interests have a direct financial stake: more bonds mean more projects, more contracts and jobs, and higher protected operating baselines. Pro‑bond groups can comply with APOC, buy media, and coordinate messaging. Citizen opponents carry the same legal risk and paperwork burden with a fraction of the resources. 

The combination of APOC rules, off‑cycle school elections, the PERA carve‑out, and GO bond incentives creates a “closed loop” in which insiders can reliably pass bonds while structural critics are procedurally handicapped. Voters are rarely choosing among competing long‑term fiscal visions; they are reacting to a series of pre‑packaged yes/no measures backed by the only actors who can afford to campaign repeatedly and who directly or indirectly benefit from the outcome. 

GO bonds, tax caps, and the illusion of fiscal choice 

When GO bond debt, PERA, and board rigidity keep mill rates at or near their caps, what “choice” is left? Once labor costs are structurally inelastic, GO bonds lock in decades of debt service, and board terms make policy direction slow to change. Ordinary voters are not really deciding among broad alternatives for K–12. They are mostly ratifying debt and labor commitments already locked in by prior boards and insiders. 

In that context, talk of “new initiatives,” “choice,” or “innovation” becomes misleading. There is almost no fiscal room for true innovation without touching the protected cost structure. The state sells Alaskans a sense of influence in K–12 while the real levers remain statutorily and financially bolted down. 

Previous in Series

Structural Chokepoints in Alaska K-12 Part 1: The Myth of School Choice

Structural Chokepoints in Alaska K-12 Part 2: Constitutional Tension

Structural Chokepoints in Alaska K-12 Part 3: Reform Recycling 

House Grapples with HB 289 Supplemental Funding: Clash on CBR Draw as Bill Returns to Rules Committee

3

The Alaska House of Representatives convened for a full session debate over Senate amendments to HB 289, a critical supplemental budget measure. What began as a near-unanimous concurrence vote quickly unraveled when the required supermajority for a Constitutional Budget Reserve (CBR) draw failed, prompting leadership to rescind the action and return the bill to the Rules Committee.

Rep. Andy Josephson (D-Anchorage), explaining the Senate changes, noted the original House version contemplated roughly $490 million in CBR authority, including headroom. The Senate trimmed it to $373.6 million focused on four urgent items: $75 million in disaster relief, $99 million for fire suppression, $70.2 million in Department of Transportation capital match funds, and $129.7 million to recapitalize the Higher Education Investment Fund. “These items are all important, need to be funded now,” Josephson urged, emphasizing the bill used a direct CBR transfer without additional headroom or broader agency spending.

Debate quickly highlighted tensions between immediate action and waiting for updated revenue data expected March 13. Rep. Will Stapp (R-Fairbanks) appreciated the Senate’s focus on essentials but questioned the timing. “I find it really interesting that we’re taking up this item the day before we actually know how much money we have and what the size of our deficit is,” he said, noting the previously assumed $51 million current-year deficit had never materialized given sustained higher oil prices. He committed to supporting the bill’s substance while opposing the CBR draw.

Rep. Jeremy Bynum (R-Ketchikan) expressed disappointment that the Senate had transformed the measure from targeted CBR authority with $30 million headroom into an unconditional direct transfer. Rep. Schrage (NA-Anchorage), voiced frustration at shifting goalposts, warning of uncertainty for contractors and students relying on the Alaska Performance Scholarship. Industry leaders had texted concerns that delayed funding jeopardized hundreds of millions in summer road work.

Rep. Kevin McCabe (R-Big Lake) provided historical context, reminding members that the DOT “meet the match” shortfall stemmed from prior legislative reappropriations that became encumbered and an executive veto. Rep. Ashley Carrick (D-Fairbanks) read from DOT projections: 91 projects valued at $670 million to $1.1 billion, plus 24 shovel-ready initiatives up to $314 million, all hinging on the $70 million match to leverage a favorable nine-to-one federal ratio. “What a shame,” she warned, stressing the private-sector stakes.

Optimism emerged from Rep. Justin Ruffridge (R-Soldotna), who favored concurrence today but deferring the CBR vote. “The exciting thing is, is that we absolutely, with concurring on this bill today, have the opportunity to fund all of those things and not draw a dime out of our savings account,” he said, citing consistently strong oil prices above the $65-per-barrel budget assumption. Rep. Zack Fields(D-Anchorage) pushed back sharply against any gamble: “There is no way I would ever vote to gamble the future of our construction, oil and gas industry on months of oil prices in the most volatile market.” He clarified the bill only authorizes a draw if necessary, providing a backstop without immediate spending.

Minority Leader Rep. DeLena Johnson (R-Palmer) questioned the rush, arguing a multi-billion-dollar decision should wait for facts arriving within 24 hours. Rep. Mears (D-Anchorage) cautioned against crystal-ball predictions, urging action on known needs. Rep. Mike Prax (R-North Pole) acknowledged the desire to wait but supported funding for construction certainty while urging faster progress on pending healthcare provider recruitment bills to address rural shortages.

The House first concurred in the Senate amendments 40-0. The subsequent CBR appropriations motion, requiring a supermajority, failed 22-18. Leadership then moved to rescind concurrence, which passed 21-19 over objection. A final motion returned HB 289 to the Rules Committee, also 21-19. The bill now awaits further review once the revenue forecast is released.

The House adjourned until Monday, March 16, at 10:30 a.m., with public testimony on the operating budget and State Affairs Committee meetings scheduled immediately after.

While the substance of HB 289 enjoyed broad support, the procedural reset ensures lawmakers can incorporate fresh revenue projections before committing savings. With summer construction season looming and federal matches at stake, the coming days will test whether bipartisanship can produce a fiscally responsible path forward that safeguards Alaska’s economy without unnecessary reliance on reserves.

Joint Education Committees Review Education Board’s 2026 Annual Report: Early Literacy Gains, Chronic Absenteeism, Teacher Turnover, and Data Dashboard Delays

1

The House and Senate Education Committees convened a joint session to receive the Alaska State Board of Education and Early Development’s required 2026 annual report, covering January through December 2025. Presented by Board Chair Sally Stockhausen and Commissioner Dr. Deena Bishop, the briefing detailed progress under the five strategic priorities of Alaska’s Education Challenge while exposing persistent challenges in attendance, workforce stability, and public transparency.

The report fulfills AS 14.07.168, requiring an in-person legislative update on statewide education efforts. Stockhausen outlined Board actions taken after public comment, including updated teacher certification rules, early education flexibility, the new Office of Education Advocacy, and regulations supporting Alaska Native language literacy. The Board also endorsed an alternative certification pathway for military-affiliated adults and renewed or approved charter schools. These steps align with the 2017 Education Challenge framework, which organizes long-term improvement around early literacy, career and technical education, closing achievement gaps, educator workforce strength, and student safety.

Strategic Priority One drew significant attention. The 2017 indicators called for doubled proficiency in grades 3–5 English language arts and math, improved K–3 reading measures, and at least a 20 percent reduction in absenteeism. DIBELS screening data showed strong kindergarten gains: students meeting benchmark rose from approximately 24 percent at the start of 2023–2024 to 60 percent by year-end, with similar upward movement the following year. Commissioner Bishop emphasized early intervention efficiency, noting a 15-minute daily support in kindergarten equals 45 minutes to an hour in third grade for comparable catch-up.

Yet chronic absenteeism remains a stark concern. Roughly 45 percent of K–12 students miss 17 or more days annually, far exceeding the 20 percent reduction target. Senator Rob Yundt (R-Wasilla) described the rate as “close to fifty percent; in the high forties,” questioning why existing statutory tools for districts remain underused. Bishop clarified absences include all reasons—excused, unexcused, medical, or school-sponsored—and vary by community and grade, with kindergartners, first-graders, and twelfth-graders showing highest rates for different reasons. Representative Rebecca Himschoot (NA-Sitka) asked whether school-sponsored travel is separated in reporting; Bishop committed to follow-up, noting inconsistent district categorization under federal ESSA rules.

The Alaska Reads Act implementation received praise for structured parent engagement. Individual Reading Improvement Plans (IRIPs) for far-below students trigger monthly updates and documented third-grade progression discussions. Far-below students advancing to fourth grade receive mandated summer tutoring. Bishop described the law as “one of the best pieces of legislation in my lifetime,” crediting consistent family communication and before- or after-school interventions that avoid displacing other subjects. Cohort trends revealed summer learning loss but net positive movement from kindergarten into first grade. Representative Story requested future reports include such cohort summaries to track durable gains, which Bishop agreed could take a decade based on other states’ experience.

Strategic Priority Three on closing achievement gaps highlighted AK STAR results showing statewide English language arts proficiency at 32.7% and math at 32.2%. District-level data varied widely, with some smaller rural schools outperforming expectations. Bishop stressed that high-quality teaching and principals remain the strongest levers, citing Skagway’s success tied to exceptional classroom instruction. The Board is developing separate SMART goals for math, acknowledging the original assumption that reading gains would automatically lift math was unrealistic. “You have to actually teach math to improve math,” Bishop stated plainly.

Workforce stability under Strategic Priority Four emerged as the most pressing issue. ISER data show teacher turnover rising from 21% in 2013 to 28% in 2024, with principal turnover climbing from 28% to 35%. Rural-remote areas face acute strain: 31% teacher turnover and 55% principal turnover. First-day vacancies tripled from 139 in 2019 to 458 in 2024 before easing to 313 in 2025, while emergency-certified teachers fluctuated, reaching 209 in 2025. The state relies on 465 visa educators (280 H-1B, 180 J-1) to fill gaps. Both chambers passed resolutions supporting H-1B and J-1 pathways; Bishop reported ongoing coordination with the congressional delegation to address federal barriers, including an unaffordable $100,000 threshold.

The defunding of the Alaska Educator Recruitment and Retention Center (ARC) after a step-down contract drew pointed concern from Rep. Himschoot, who noted roughly 500 international teachers require targeted induction support beyond Title II-A mentoring. Bishop clarified international hiring fell outside ARC’s scope and was handled separately by districts, but acknowledged broader TRR playbook implementation gaps remain. Grow-your-own pathways through Educators Rising and registered apprenticeships show promise, with participation nearly doubling and some rural students entering paid aide roles while pursuing degrees.

Strategic Priority Five on safety and well-being featured Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) expansion to 45 schools in 14 districts, trauma-engaged “Transforming Schools” distribution of 15,000 copies, and the “Strive for Five” attendance campaign. HB 57’s device restrictions during instructional hours aim to reduce distractions. Support for students displaced by Typhoon Merbok included Anchorage School District coordination and approximately $450,000 in federal trauma grants.

Transparency and Board capacity surfaced repeatedly. Chair Loki Tobin (D-Anchorage) noted difficulty navigating DEED’s website for data and pressed for a public dashboard promised under the Reads Act. Bishop admitted progress “hasn’t come to fruition” and committed to a status report and resource request. Representative Ted Eischeid (D-Anchorage) asked for a self-reflective grade on the Board’s performance; Stockhausen declined to assign one but highlighted literacy gains and apprenticeship potential while noting work remains. The Board plans SMART goals aligned to the five priorities, with public comment forthcoming.

Mount Edgecumbe High School governance drew focused discussion. Rep. Himschoot questioned oversight feasibility for the statewide boarding school and requested frequent updates. Stockhausen announced the Board would vote that day on forming an ad hoc committee to guide short-, mid-, and long-term actions, pledging coordinated legislative briefings.

The meeting closed with appreciation for the Board’s service. Chair Tobin emphasized the Legislature’s reliance on the Board for day-to-day oversight and reiterated the need for accessible data to inform policy. Upcoming sessions include a dedicated teacher recruitment and retention hearing and Task Force on Education Funding discussions on transportation and after-school programs.

Senate Finance Committee Examines Looming IT Modernization Costs and Defined Benefits

0

The Alaska Senate Finance Committee opened its afternoon session with a frank discussion of statewide information technology modernization needs and the potential fiscal consequences of HB 78, the proposed defined-benefit retirement option. Chair Bert Stedman (R-Sitka) reordered the agenda after OMB redirected retirement presenters, prioritizing an OMB/Office of Information Technology briefing before resuming HB 78 details. Legislative Finance’s analysis was deferred to March 12 to allow thorough review of complex material.

OMB Director Lacey Sanders and Chief Information Officer Bill Smith outlined the scale of the challenge. Modernization is “not cosmetic work. It’s deep foundational work,” Smith explained, involving core business applications, user interfaces, and infrastructure layers. Decades-old legacy systems carry undocumented business rules, massive data volumes, and compliance risks that force agencies to operate dual systems during transition. “We have to keep the old while building the new,” he noted, highlighting duplication costs and data-cleaning demands that stretch timelines.

Governance tools include the Investment Review Board (IRB), which vets projects over $25,000 for security and standards, and the new IT Application Modernization Council, modeled after DOT’s facilities council. The council will rank needs by mission criticality, technical condition, and department impact, feeding OMB a prioritized list for FY28. Recent wins include rapid cloud migration (Azure and Oracle environments), cybersecurity platform upgrades that reduced critical incidents, and the Department of Public Safety’s Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) modernization, which moved off mainframes after five years.

Sanders acknowledged “sticker shock” from large replacement estimates—such as $58 million for the Department of Labor’s Unemployment Insurance mainframe and urgent needs for the Department of Family and Community Services’ antiquated ORCA system, which faces federal compliance deadlines. A Department of Administration payroll RFI is underway to address broader processing issues. The committee pressed on funding strategy. Stedman reminded the panel that bond financing suits long-lived assets whose useful life exceeds debt terms. Sanders confirmed project-by-project life analysis would precede any capital request, but added that with oil-price volatility and no comprehensive fiscal plan, “a request for several hundred million dollars would just be added to the budget” remains unlikely.

No formal funding ask advanced. Stedman noted the committee would be “reluctant to put tens of millions of dollars down on the table… without a direct request from the administration” given veto risk. Sanders committed to evaluate bond suitability and return with sequencing when ready. Senator Jesse Kiehl (D-Juneau) and Senator James Kaufman (R-Anchorage) raised cloud prudence and AI obsolescence risks; Smith affirmed Alaska’s hybrid “Cloud Smart” approach and incremental AI adoption via enterprise tools, including over 1,000 licensed AI agents for documents and email, plus secure internal chatbots.

The committee then resumed discussion on HB 78, the defined-benefit restoration bill. Division Director Kathy Lea and CFO Christopher Novell, with actuary David Kershner of Gallagher, illustrated FY2030 impacts. Under statutory 22% employer caps for PERS (12.56% for TRS), HB 78’s higher normal costs crowd out contributions to legacy unfunded liabilities. Non-state PERS employers currently allocate $173 million of their 22% toward the $275 million legacy past-service target; under HB 78 that drops to $151 million, shifting $22 million more to the state. TRS sees a $3 million shift. State-as-employer totals rise accordingly—PERS from $415 million to $453 million, TRS from $278 million to $285 million.

Lea described the dynamic as a “hidden cost”: legacy DB plans were never fully closed in funding mechanics, so residual capacity under the cap helps amortize past service. HB 78 raises employer normal costs, compressing that residual and increasing the state’s backfill “forever till it’s paid off,” Stedman observed. Kershner walked through the math, confirming the mechanics while noting no guarantees against future shortfalls. Even with HB 78’s 90% funding floor and 7.25% assumed return, adverse experience could extend full-funding timelines beyond the projected 2039 date, mirroring legacy PERS history that saw funded status fall from near 100% to about 69% in the early 2000s.

The Chair emphasized public clarity, directing presenters to minimize acronyms and translate mechanics into plain dollars. No action was taken on HB 78; the session built shared understanding of cost drivers and risks ahead of Legislative Finance’s March 12 analysis. Follow-up requests include current-year monetary examples of the shift, risk-sharing triggers under varied returns, and plain-language materials.

University of Alaska’s FY27 budget request begins as a full subcommittee at 9:00 AM March 12, followed by sponsor remarks and capital requests.

“Our fiscal situation continues to be unstable… without a fiscal plan at this point, it’s unlikely that a request for several hundred million dollars would just be added to the budget,” Director Lacey Sanders stated, underscoring the administration’s measured approach.

The briefing reflected conservative principles of disciplined governance, transparent cost analysis, and reluctance to commit taxpayer dollars absent clear prioritization and long-term fiscal stability.

Council for a Secure America Highlights Alaska’s Pivotal Role in U.S. Energy Dominance and National Security

1

State lawmakers and staff gathered today for a lunch-and-learn briefing hosted by Representative Kevin McCabe’s (R-Big Lake) office featuring the Council for a Secure America (CSA). The session underscored Alaska’s longstanding contribution to American energy independence and its strategic importance amid ongoing Middle East tensions, including Iranian missile strikes on U.S. allies and Abraham Accords partners.

Staffer Elesheva Almeida welcomed attendees, noting the informal setting while emphasizing Alaska’s “very unique role” in global stability and energy. Executive Director Jennifer Sutton of CSA, delivered a detailed historical and geopolitical overview. Sutton traced the origins of U.S. energy policy to the 1973 Yom Kippur War and Arab oil embargo, which quadrupled prices from $2.90 to $11.65 per barrel and exposed 35% import dependence, triggering gas lines, inflation, and recession.

Congress responded swiftly with the Trans-Alaska Pipeline Authorization Act, passed in November 1973. Construction began in 1974, and the pipeline—now known as TAPS—opened on May 31, 1977. Prudhoe Bay’s 1968 discovery enabled this infrastructure, which has since transported more than 18 billion barrels. Alaska production peaked near 2 million barrels per day in 1988, supplying roughly 25% of U.S. oil at its height. “Alaska was there first,” Sutton told the group, framing TAPS as a direct policy response to the 1973 crisis that placed the state “at the geopolitical center of U.S. national security and energy dominance.”

Sutton connected this foundation to today’s realities. The Lower 48 shale revolution doubled crude output from 5 to 11 million barrels per day, slashed net imports from 12 million barrels per day in 2008 to near zero by 2020, and boosted natural gas production over 70%. The 2015 repeal of the crude export ban shifted America from price taker to price stabilizer. This domestic strength, Sutton argued, enabled the Abraham Accords and allowed both Republican and Democratic administrations to respond decisively to regional crises without economic vulnerability.

Current events underscore the stakes. Iran has launched over 500 ballistic missiles at Abraham Accords nations and OPEC partners including the UAE, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Bahrain. Seventy percent of Iran’s government revenue historically derived from oil sales, with China purchasing 90% of those exports. Sutton noted shadow fleets and sanctions evasion fund proxies such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis. The Strait of Hormuz carries 20% of global oil and 25% of LNG—roughly 21 million barrels per day—yet U.S. resilience means any disruption impacts America far less than China, which sources about 13% of its oil from the region.

CSA focuses on rapid-response educational primers, polling, and fact-based briefings rather than legislation. Sutton highlighted open-source analysis drawing from sources across the spectrum and offered one-pagers summarizing Iran’s oil flows, regional alignments, and energy security dynamics. She invited Alaska stakeholders to a potential North Slope delegation, mirroring CSA trips to the Bakken, Oklahoma, Texas, and Wyoming, so “the people of Alaska could tell their story.”

A geologist attendee raised diversification, noting ANWR potential may represent less than a year of U.S. consumption amid high demand. Sutton endorsed “energy addition”—all domestic forms of energy viewed through a national security lens—while prioritizing American technology and supply chains. “A Chinese solar panel is not going to make America safer at the expense right now of drilling in certain states,” she said, stressing U.S.-based innovation in AI and data centers.

Sutton clarified CSA’s emphasis on the U.S.-Israel relationship: Israel remains America’s strongest democratic ally in the Middle East, sharing values and strategic interests. Israel’s own natural gas discoveries have reshaped its regional diplomacy, enabling cooperation with neighbors including Egypt during the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The Abraham Accords, she noted, exemplify how U.S. energy strength plus strong alliances advance peace and prosperity.

Attendees left with a clearer picture of Alaska’s foundational contributions to national security and the ongoing opportunity for the state to lead in LNG exports to Asia, potentially displacing adversarial supply chains to markets like South Korea and Japan.

“The Abraham Accords would never have happened without U.S. energy dominance,” Sutton stated, underscoring how domestic production enables decisive American diplomacy.

The session reinforced Alaska’s position not merely as an energy producer but as a strategic exporter of national security at a pivotal global moment.

House Finance Closes FY27 Budgets for Key Departments; Hears Industry Concerns on HB280 Digital Tax Overhaul

0

The Alaska House Finance Committee wrapped up a marathon afternoon of subcommittee closeout reports and began formal hearings on House Bill 280, the state’s proposed shift to market-based sourcing for corporate income taxes.

David Jiang, staff to Rep. Alyse Galvin (NA-Anchorage), presented the Department of Commerce, Community, and Economic Development (DCCED) closeout totaling $197,193,100 for FY27. The subcommittee achieved a net-zero change from the governor’s amended request by boosting Unrestricted General Funds (UGF) $2.1 million (13.2%) while trimming Designated General Funds (DGF) by the same amount. Positions stayed flat at 596. Key accepted increments included $2,238,800 UGF to restore Alaska Gasline Development Corporation (AGDC) operations and $1,306,200 UGF as stop-gap funding for the Railbelt Transmission Organization (RTO) until the Regulatory Commission of Alaska (RCA) finalizes its open-access tariff.

The panel spent significant time on Item 10—professional licensing investigations. The governor sought $4.2 million via a transfer from professional licensing receipts to business licensing receipts. The subcommittee halved the amount to $2.1 million and switched to direct UGF for greater transparency, noting that program receipts would have functioned as an indirect UGF appropriation. Legislative Fiscal Analyst Rob Carpenter explained the remainder would continue coming from licensing fees, with historical averaging and carry-forward authority to smooth shortfalls. State Auditor Kris Curtis flagged potential compliance issues, reminding members that statutes require each board’s fees to cover regulatory costs exactly—a policy dating to 1992.

Rep. Jamie Allard (R-Eagle River) questioned the addition of two permanent full-time positions for federal disaster grant management when DCCED carries 67 vacancies. Carpenter noted conceptually that reallocation is possible, but these roles stem from burdensome new federal grants. Rep. Galvin recalled subcommittee discussion assuming continued climate-related emergencies. Rep. Jeremy Bynum (R-Ketchikan) pressed whether the Capital Improvement Project (CIP) funded positions would become a future UGF burden once grants expire; the increments were built as permanent rather than temporary.

The Office of the Governor’s $32 million budget (primarily $31 million UGF) and the Legislature’s $96 million budget passed with minimal changes. The legislative budget included $912,000 for travel, $750,000 to restore special-session funding to $1 million, and $855,000 for Gavel to Gavel coverage to replace lost federal dollars. Executive Director Jessica Geary confirmed the program could not continue without the state backfill. Rep. Allard requested future reports include point-in-time vacancy counts; Remond Henderson agreed to add them.

Department of Revenue closeout totaled $485.5 million. The subcommittee denied the governor’s request for a single APFC appropriation, keeping three separate lines for investment management fees, non-state facilities rent, and IT licensing. In a pointed policy statement, lawmakers created a new “APFC Anchorage Operations” appropriation and immediately zeroed its $34,000–$35,000 lease funding to signal strong opposition to opening the Anchorage office. Henderson noted the move could spark a constitutional clash over legislative versus executive authority.

HB280 – Apportion Taxable Income and Digital Business

The committee then turned to HB 280. Scott Mackey of CTIA, the Wireless Association. testified first, urging a statutory carve-out to preserve cost-of-performance sourcing for telecom services. “Cost of performance is the sourcing methodology that most fairly reflects how the industry earns its income,” Mackey stated, citing recent carve-outs in Idaho (2024), Kansas, and Arkansas (2025). He emphasized Alaska telecom providers’ significant in-state capital investment and employment, warning that market-based sourcing would trigger immediate financial-statement hits under deferred-tax accounting.

Karen Boucher of the Financial Institution State Tax Coalition, representing the Alaska Bankers Association, requested adoption of the Multistate Tax Commission (MTC) model for banks. She argued the Division of Taxation lacks statutory authority under UDITPA to issue special regulations for financial institutions and warned that HB 280’s narrow receipts definition would exclude core lending and hedging income, reducing Alaska-taxed revenue. Boucher offered concise statutory language: financial institutions apportion income using the general corporate formula while directing the Division to update its regulation to the MTC’s broad definitions.

Melissa Patak of the Motion Picture Association sought customer-location (advertiser home-state) sourcing for broadcast and cable advertising revenue. She listed 14 states already using this approach and assured members the change would not materially alter the Department of Revenue’s revenue estimate.

The committee set HB 280 aside for further drafting and fiscal modeling of proposed amendments. Action items include OMB clarification on DCCED’s new grant positions, a five-year board-by-board licensing cost analysis, and legal guidance on fee reductions when UGF supplants investigations.

The next meeting is scheduled for March 11 at 9 a.m. to advance the operating and mental-health budget substitutes.

House Transportation: Alaska Railroad Highlights Self-Sustaining Model, LNG Readiness and Major Projects; Advance Northern Continental Corridor Resolution

0

The Alaska House Transportation Committee received a detailed briefing today from Alaska Railroad Corporation (ARRC) leadership on the railroad’s unique public-corporation structure, operational performance, capital investments, and preparedness for the Alaska LNG project. The session also featured the introduction of House Joint Resolution 42 (HJR 42), which expresses legislative support for the Northern Continental Corridor (NCC) rail link to the Lower 48. The meeting underscored the ARRC’s role as a self-sustaining economic engine while spotlighting opportunities for expanded rail infrastructure amid federal defense priorities.

ARRC President and CEO Bill O’Leary and External Affairs Director Megan Clemens opened the presentation by outlining the railroad’s history and governance. Established as a public corporation in 1985 after the federal government transferred the aging 700-mile system, the ARRC operates independently from the state general fund. All net income is reinvested into infrastructure, preventing reliance on legislative appropriations. O’Leary described the model as “ingenious,” noting that the railroad’s obligations cannot become state liabilities by statute (AS 42.40). The seven-member board is appointed by the governor, with staggered five-year terms; all current members were appointed or reappointed by Governor Dunleavy.

Operational highlights included nearly 4 million tons of freight moved in 2025 (up 300,000 tons year-over-year) and approximately 500,000 passengers annually. Freight revenue remains the largest business line at roughly 44 percent, bolstered by interline growth with Lynden barges supporting North Slope activity. The ARRC manages 36,000 acres of land—half leased at fair market value—providing stable revenue that buffers market volatility. Strategic goals adopted in 2024 emphasize safety, revenue growth, expense control, capital execution, and rail/real estate expansion.

Clemens detailed ongoing capital projects funded internally and through federal grants. The $137 million Seward Passenger Dock, supported by a 30-year usage agreement with Royal Caribbean Group, is on track for completion in May 2026 and will operate as an open double-berth facility. A companion $50 million shore-power project is advancing. Other initiatives include freight dock lengthening in Seward, Whittier Tunnel expansion for double-stack service, an annual $25 million track rehabilitation program replacing 40,000–50,000 ties, and a half-billion-dollar bridge program targeting more than 100 structures to reach the Lower 48’s 286,000-pound standard.

On the Alaska LNG project, O’Leary expressed full readiness to transport pipe, citing decades of experience including recent moves through Seward. The ARRC plans to deploy roughly $10 million in spur and terminal upgrades upon the developer’s Final Investment Decision. A major financial tool emerged from a January 15, 2026, IRS revenue ruling affirming the railroad’s authority under the Alaska Railroad Transfer Act to issue tax-exempt debt as a conduit issuer for the pipeline and related facilities—potentially saving hundreds of millions without liability to the state or ARRC. Legislative authorization would still be required for any issuance.

“We can do this,” O’Leary stated confidently, referring to the railroad’s logistics and financing capabilities for the LNG project.

Committee members raised questions on freight growth beyond LNG, passenger affordability for Alaskans (noting federal grant restrictions on resident discounts), and the Healy Airport runway on ARRC land. Action items include providing statutory references from AS 42.40, the full strategic plan, and detailed passenger-count breakdowns separating public riders from cruise-line charter cars.

The committee then took up HJR 42, sponsored by Rep. Garrett Nelson (R-Sutton). Invited testifiers Kevin Thompson and Greg Madalena of E4M, along with Hillary Palmer of Dewberry Engineers, described the NCC as a 1,200-plus-mile corridor offering supply-chain redundancy, national defense logistics, and economic impact projected at 420,000 job years. Palmer referenced her 2023 FEMA supply-chain assessment highlighting Alaska’s single-point vulnerabilities at the Port of Alaska and Alaska Highway. The resolution frames the project around unprecedented federal defense spending and an expiring 2030 presidential permit. No state construction funding is required; proponents envision initial Department of Defense validation to attract private capital. An amendment deadline was set for Friday, March 13, 2026, at 5 p.m.

Co-Chair Rep. Eischeid (D-Anchorage) praised the resolution as “forward-thinking” and timely. The committee will continue its hearing on HJR 42 at the next meeting, scheduled for Thursday, March 12.

The ARRC presentation and HJR 42 discussion reflect growing momentum for rail expansion in Alaska, balancing near-term infrastructure upgrades with long-term connectivity goals.