Wednesday, February 11, 2026
Home Blog Page 3

House Democrats and Republicans Debate Best Way to Ensure State Pays Its Bills on Time

Natalie Spaulding
-
7
House Democrats and Republicans Debate Best Way to Ensure State Pays Its Bills on Time

Yesterday, Jan 29, at 3:15pm, the House State Affairs Committee met to consider three bills. First on the agenda was HB 133: “An Act establishing a 30-day deadline for the payment of contracts under the State Procurement Code; establishing deadlines for the payment of grants, contracts, and reimbursement agreements to nonprofit organizations, municipalities, and Alaska Native organizations; relating to payment of grants to named recipients that are not municipalities; and providing for an effective date.” The bill is sponsored by Representative Rebecca Himshoot (I-Sitka) and cosponsored by Representatives Fields (D-Anchorage), Kopp (R-Anchorage), Mears (D-Anchorage), Mina (D-Anchorage), and Holland (I-Anchorage).

The Committee discussed two proposed amendments to the bill, one from Rep. Carrick (D-Fairbanks) and one from Rep. McCabe (R-Big Lake).

Carrick’s amendment requested that Rural Health Transformation funding be used as a funding source for software upgrades necessary for realizing the bill. Rep. Vance (R-Homer) asked if technology upgrades are a permissible use of Rural Health Transformation funding. Rep. Carrick answered that the funds cannot be used for capital projects or hardware, but it can be used for software.

Amendment 1 was adopted by the Committee.

McCabe’s amendment addresses unintended consequences that the bill causes, mainly at the expense of the State. This amendment removes non-profits from triggering the automatic penalty if the State’s payment to a non-profit is delayed. McCabe argues that prompt payment clauses in other states usually apply to local governments and private contractors, not to non-profits. Regulations already imposed by the Legislature regarding non-profits make it difficult for the State to make payments to non-profits without delays. McCabe says that it does not make sense to punish agencies for delays that the Legislature itself has caused.

Rep. Holland spoke in opposition to the amendment, stating, “Non-profits operate as a business… they have to figure out how to juggle the money just like a private business… Our non-profits need to be treated as well or even better than municipalities and private contractors.”

Rep. Himshoot also spoke in opposition to the amendment. Rep. St. Clair (R-Wasilla) spoke in support.

McCabe responded to Holland and Himshoot, saying that they were presenting non-profits as simple mom-and-pops, but McCabe points out that the state has contracts with large non-profits like Providence. “We are talking about non-profits like Providence… This is not a bunch of volunteers we are talking about here.” He emphasized that the amendment keeps “the status quo” for non-profits and does not add any additional burdens.

After a vote 3 yes – 4 no, amendment 2 was not adopted by the Committee. Republicans Vance, McCabe, and St. Clair voted yes for the amendment. Independents Himshoot and Holland and Democrats Story and Carrick voted no.

In her final remarks regarding the bill as a whole, Rep. Vance acknowledged that there is truth in everyone’s points, and the discussion shows that “the bill touches on a broader issue” within state departments. “Something obviously needs to change,” she stated, but expressed doubt that this particular bill as written is the way to do it.

Rep. Carrick pointed out the common ground: “Everyone agrees the state should pay its bills on time.” Then, she acknowledged there are different ways to go about that. Referencing conversations that she has had with organizations who express frustration with the current system, she believes the bill is the correct course of action.

The bill moved from House State Affairs. Next, it will be considered by the Finance Committee.

Opinion: Parents Must Stay Vigilant and Demanding of Government Schooling Systems

GUEST CONTRIBUTOR
-
8
Opinion: Parents Must Stay Vigilant and Demanding of Government Schooling Systems

By Lars Bauer

The opinions expressed here are of the author only.

In August 2025, Senior Contributor John Quick made meaningful observations about the posture of homeschooling in small town Nikiski, asking in his column’s title “Can someone like homeschooling and public school?”

My family and I appreciated and agreed with his sentiment of two worlds coexisting but noted Mr. Quick did not have a laser-focus on whom that question needs to be asked of. As an Alaskan military family currently homeschooling outside the state, we can confidently clarify the answer. We can also herald the arrival of what is to happen should our communities fail to constantly pay attention to the ever-growing conflict over educational and parental freedom being waged outside our towns and our state.

I am going to use the term “government school” instead of “public school” because it is more precise. “Public school” is not quite “public.” Unless one lives in a one-school town, families are zoned to a specific district, meaning the public is often denied entry except to the school they are told to go to. Moreover, unless they are enrolled in that school, the public is denied all opportunity for programs at that or any government school except via policy.

Our own children have attended all types of government, private, and home-schooling environments, both state-side and abroad. They have lived in far off and wonderous places and have experienced interactions with people and concepts that most people on earth never will. Just as unique are the challenges and setbacks they face. Most military families report frequent moves and quasi-nomadic lifestyles. The loss of continuity in steadfast relationships and community are the larger trade-offs for gaining these world experiences.

Today that community for us is not Nikiski, nor any other small town, U.S.A in red state America where the home/government-school environments could ever be mutually feasible. It is a place where the state mandates frequent reports and work samples from homeschooling parents or else face criminal charges and Child Protective Services notifications. A place where school districts deny and gate-keep all opportunity for children in sports, ROTC, and academic programs merely because families will not enroll in their system. In certain states and countries where we have lived, lucky homeschooling families are left alone to educate how they wish; while in others they are arrested and their children taken.

That is why we know the answer to the question of who. Who needs to answer, “Can we like both?” The same group who would stand in the way of people’s freedom to both. Not only are government school system heads and their union/political arms the ones who need to answer this question, but they also need to affirm their support of both. They alone owe the answer. Alaskan parents take note: unless you demand this daily from lawmakers, irrespective of your current educational setting, places like Nikiski are not immune from what is happening outside. Mr. Quick is able to frame his question without adversaries identified. We should all be so fortunate.

Lars Bauer is an Active Duty Field Grade officer. He and his wife are lifelong Alaskans currently homeschooling their children through years of deployments and operational tours around the world. His expressed views are personal and do not represent his respective service branch or the Department of War.

Cuts to Biden-era Leasing Regulations Benefit Oil and Gas Industry

Natalie Spaulding
-
4
Cuts to Biden-era Leasing Regulations Benefit Oil and Gas Industry

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service has announced revisions to leasing regulations for federal oil and gas resources on National Forest System lands. The revisions establish a clearly defined leasing decision point, reduce duplicative analysis, improve response times to industry requests, reduce backlogs, accelerate lease issuance, and support timely processing of permit applications.

The revisions were issued in response to President Trump’s Declaration of a National Energy Emergency. The declaration identifies “affordable and reliable domestic supply of energy” as “a fundamental requirement for the national and economic security of any nation.” Claiming the urgent need to address America’s “precariously inadequate and intermittent energy supply, and an increasingly unreliable grid,” the declaration authorizes federal agencies to “identify and exercise any lawful emergency authorities available to them, as well as all other lawful authorities they may possess, to facilitate the identification, leasing, siting, production, transportation, refining, and generation of domestic energy resources, including, but not limited to, on Federal lands.”

Furthermore, Trump’s Executive Order “Unleashing American Energy” provides a detailed list of directives aimed at restoring American prosperity by cutting red tape preventing or delaying energy development.

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins stated: “This rule gives energy producers the certainty they need to expand supply to make energy more affordable, create jobs, and ensure America remains the dominant force in global energy markets – all while safeguarding forests and communities. Energy security is national security. These revisions create clarity and alignment across federal agencies, allowing our teams to move swiftly on leasing and permitting so American families and businesses can rely on affordable, dependable energy, while continuing to be good stewards of our public lands.”

The federal government’s cutting of red tape for the oil and gas industry contrasts sharply with Alaska State Representative Ashley Carrick’s “AIDEA Accountability Act,” introduced Jan 22, 2026. The Democrat-sponsored bill seeks to add legislative oversight to the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority that could delay or prevent key resource development projects in Alaska.

USDA Forest Service issues revised oil and gas leasing ruleDownload

Opinion: AIDEA Accountability Act Would Paralyze Alaska’s Economic Development

GUEST CONTRIBUTOR
-
22
Opinion: AIDEA Accountability Act Would Paralyze Alaska’s Economic Development

By Marcus Moore

HB 124 is what happens when lawmakers want to kill projects but do not have the nerve to say “no” out loud. So instead, they wrap obstruction in the language of accountability, smile politely, and let uncertainty do the dirty work.

This is being sold as the AIDEA Accountability Act. That name alone should raise alarms. Because when politicians lead with “accountability,” what usually follows is paralysis, delay, and a quiet retreat of anyone with capital, patience, or options elsewhere.

The Soft Sell, the Hard Stop

On the surface, parts of HB 124 look harmless enough. Tweaks to the AIDEA board. Adjustments to appointments. A bit more legislative visibility. Fine. Boring, even.

But buried inside this bill is the real payload: a fundamental rewrite of how Alaska treats large-scale economic development.

HB 124 drags major infrastructure projects out of established, professional due-diligence processes and dumps them into the political thunderdome of the legislature. Not for guidance. Not for review. For permission.

That is not oversight. That is a veto with extra steps.

Section 9: The Project Graveyard

Section 9 is where this bill stops pretending.

It creates a new statute that applies to any AIDEA project over $10 million. And what does it require? It requires:

  • A full economic impact analysis
  • A social impact analysis
  • An environmental impact analysis
  • Submission of all documentation to the legislature
  • Explicit legislative approval, passed into law

All after years of planning, permitting, financing work, and regulatory review.

If you were trying to design a system that scares off investment before it ever shows up, this is exactly how you would do it.

The $10 Million Tripwire

Let’s be clear about what $10 million means in Alaska.

This bill is not aimed at hypothetical mega-projects or boogeymen. In Alaska, $10 million is:

  • Energy infrastructure
  • Roads and access projects
  • Ports and industrial facilities
  • Health care construction
  • Resource development

In other words: normal projects.

That means real, existing investments suddenly fall into legislative limbo, including:

  • Interior Energy Project — $139M (Fairbanks)
  • Ambler Access Project — $50M+
  • Yukon Kuskokwim Health Corporation — $162M (Bethel)
  • Cook Inlet Gas Development — $82M

Under HB 124, all of these would be forced to survive a political gauntlet that has nothing to do with engineering, finance, or feasibility, and everything to do with election cycles and committee chairs.

Uncertainty Is the Point

Supporters will say this is about transparency. That the legislature deserves a say. That the public needs confidence.

Here is the reality: Alaska already has one of the most rigorous permitting and review processes in the country. This includes environmental review, public comment, financial due diligence, regulatory oversight, and federal and state approvals layered on top of each other.

HB 124 does not add clarity. It adds uncertainty at the worst possible moment.

After millions are spent.
After years of planning.
After investors have committed.

The final step becomes “wait and hope the legislature likes you this year.”

That is not how serious economies operate.

How You Kill a Project Without Saying No

Legislators rarely like being blamed for lost jobs or stalled development. HB 124 offers a workaround.

No need to reject a project outright. Just require one more approval. One more vote. One more session. One more delay.

Eventually, the investors leave. The timelines collapse. The financing evaporates.

And lawmakers get to shrug and say, “Well, it just didn’t pencil out.”

Mission accomplished.

The Message This Sends

HB 124 would tell the world exactly one thing: Alaska is no longer predictable.

And in capital markets, predictability matters more than enthusiasm, incentives, or press releases. No serious developer is going to sink years of work into a project that can be kneecapped by political mood swings at the finish line.

This bill does not protect Alaskans. It protects indecision.

It does not create accountability. It guarantees delay.

And it does not strengthen Alaska’s economy. It quietly tells investors to take their money somewhere else.

Down But Not Out: ConocoPhillips Pivot Development Strategy

Todd M Lindley
-
4
Down But Not Out: ConocoPhillips Pivot Development Strategy

The toppling of Doyon Drilling Rig 26 on January 23, 2026, during transport on a North Slope gravel road has temporarily disrupted ConocoPhillips’ operations, but highlights the company’s commitment to innovative, responsible resource development amid ongoing legal challenges. The massive rig, known as “The Beast,” ignited a contained fire after collapsing in unseasonably warm 30-degree temperatures. All personnel escaped serious injury, with eight individuals treated and released, and no damage to pipelines or communities reported. The incident, just miles from Nuiqsut, landed 50 feet from gas lines, prompting an environmental assessment under Unified Command led by Doyon Drilling.

Engineered for Arctic extremes, Doyon 26 features a 165-foot cantilever mast, 1.3 million-pound hook load, and 3,000 hp drawworks, with a modular design of five support modules and a two-piece subbase for ice-road mobility. This enables extended-reach drilling (ERD) to tap 154 square miles from a 14-acre pad, as seen in the 2022 Fiord West Kuparuk record well of 35,526 feet.

The outage—limited to the derrick subbase, allowing potential modular rebuild—could delay projects like Willow, but Conoco has pivoted to Doyon 142 for exploration. By comparison to another massive ERD land rig, Russia’s Sakhalin-1 Yastreb rig, a 230-foot seismic-resistant giant with 1.5 million-pound capacity and world-record ERD of over 37,000 feet horizontal, Doyon 26 showcases transportability over scale. The modular design between the Doyon 26 and Doyon 142 provides a distinct advantage to enable a quicker turnaround to resume development drilling.

Amid this, a U.S. District Court ruling allowed Conoco’s winter exploration to proceed despite a lawsuit by groups including Earthjustice, which argues rushed approvals harm wildlife and subsistence in areas like Teshekpuk Lake. Earthjustice, a nonprofit environmental law firm with a stated goal to end the extraction and burning of fossil fuels, contrasts Conoco’s prosperity-focused development by challenging permits to ensure legal compliance and environmental safeguards.

“This project opens a new era we call ‘growth without gravel’ where we can use extended reach technology to access 60 percent more acreage from a single pad, dramatically reducing our footprint,” said Erec Isaacson, president of ConocoPhillips Alaska.

This remains a developing story.

Opinion: Alaska’s 2026 Election and America’s Stability

SENIOR CONTRIBUTOR
-
19
Opinion: Alaska’s 2026 Election and America’s Stability

By Paul A Bauer Jr.

My op-ed for Alaskans is framed to inform, not inflame, and to connect national instability to practical decision-making in the 2026 gubernatorial election. My spirit is civic, sober, and grounded in Alaska’s governing realities.

Alaskans are practical people. We live far from Washington, D.C., yet we feel the consequences of national decisions are faster and harder than most states. Energy policy, federal land control, law enforcement, elections, and courts are not abstractions here, they shape whether our community’s function or fracture.

As the country enters one of the most polarized periods in modern history, it is reasonable to ask a difficult question: Is the United States at war with itself?

The honest answer is “no,” not in the sense of tanks, militias, or rival governments. But the country is experiencing an internal conflict marked by deep mistrust, ideological extremism, and competing views of whether the Constitution is something to be followed or something to be “corrected.”

That matters for Alaska, and it should matter when we vote in 2026.

Large numbers of Americans now believe institutions apply the law unevenly, elections are administered in ways that favor one side, speech is punished while disorder is excused, and Constitutional limits are obstacles rather than guardrails.

At the same time, radical ideological factions, particularly on the far left, have been tolerated, enabled, or defended by elements within one major political party. What matters is that millions of citizens believe the system no longer treats them equally.

History is clear: countries do not unravel because everyone is wrong, they unravel because trust collapses.

Why Alaska Is Not Immune

Some argue Alaska can ignore national turmoil. That is a mistake.

Alaska depends on Constitutional clarity between state and federal authority, Neutral enforcement of law and order, public trust in elections and courts, and leaders willing to confront, not accommodate ideological extremism. I expect that we will experience some outside activism occurring this spring 2026 in Alaska.

When other states normalize sanctuary policies, selective prosecution, or ideological governance, the effects spread. They weaken federalism, undermine public confidence, and invite disorder.

Alaska cannot afford that, not with our geography, our infrastructure challenges, our energy economy, or our reliance on public safety and resource development.

The 2026 Gubernatorial Election Is About More Than Personality

My belief is that this election should not be about charisma, slogans, or social media performance, but it should be about governance under pressure.

Alaskans should ask every gubernatorial candidate:

  • Do you believe the Constitution limits government power, or merely guides it?
  • Will you enforce the law evenly, even when it is unpopular?
  • Do you view radical political movements as legitimate partners or as destabilizing forces?
  • Will you defend Alaska’s sovereignty against federal overreach?
  • Can you lead decisively when institutions are under stress?

This is not about left versus right. It is about constitutional stability versus ideological drift.

Alaska’s Historical Advantage and Responsibility

We, Alaska, are young by state standards. We were built by people who understood self-reliance, fairness, and rule-based cooperation. Our success has never come from ideological experiments. It has come from competence, restraint, and respect for law.

In times of national uncertainty, states either anchor stability, or import chaos. To my observable knowledge, there are forces from outside influencing our state, not just in the current blitz of political ads but with an influx of voters escaping sanctuary states that they destroyed. As they escape their sanctuary states, they inherently bring their politics.

Then there are the vulnerable low information and low-income voters that need to communicate about the truth of what is occurring and the best candidate to address it. Are you going to be part of the problem, or part of the solution?

The governor and lt. governor elected in 2026 will play a decisive role in which path Alaska takes.

A Final Thought

Civil conflict does not begin with violence. It begins when people stop believing the system protects them. Alaskans still have a choice.

In 2026, voting less on rhetoric, and more on character, constitutional loyalty, and governing ability. Alaska does not need a gubernatorial team of candidates with showmanship, incompetence through inexperience, or displaying personality niceties. It needs leadership that understands the stakes and is willing to act accordingly, even aggressively if necessary.

Our future depends on it.

Paul A. Bauer Jr. is an Anchorage-based civic leader, military veteran, former elected official, and public integrity consultant. His work focuses on constitutional governance, election integrity, public safety, energy and resource development, and institutional accountability. Bauer emphasizes competence over showmanship, character over celebrity, and results over rhetoric in Alaska’s public leadership.

Alaskans Can Now Get $1,700 Tax Credit for Donating to a School of Their Choice

Natalie Spaulding
-
11
Alaskans Can Now Get $1,700 Tax Credit for Donating to a School of Their Choice

On Monday, Jan 26, Governor Dunleavy opted Alaska into the Federal K-12 Education Tax Credit Scholarship Program. The program was enacted by the President Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act and allows individuals and families to claim a tax credit up to $1,700 a year when donating to a school of their choice. To qualify for the tax credit, taxpayers must donate to a Scholarship Granting Organization (SGO) which will then distribute the funds to the school that the taxpayer chooses.

The program requires governors to opt their state into the program for taxpayers in that state to participate.

Scholarships granted by the SGO will be given to eligible families making up to 300% of their area’s median gross income. Recipients may use the funds for qualified expenses, including:

  • Tuition, fees, books, supplies, other equipment, academic tutoring, and special needs services for special needs beneficiaries that are incurred by the beneficiary in connection with enrollment or attendance as an elementary or secondary school student at a public, private, or religious school;
  • Room and board, uniforms, transportation, and supplementary items and services (including extended day programs) if these expenses are required or provided by a public, private, or religious school in connection with enrollment or attendance; and
  • Computer technology, equipment, or internet access and related services if used by the beneficiary and the beneficiary’s family during any of the years the beneficiary is in elementary or secondary school.

According to Governor Dunleavy: “Opting into the ECCA creates another opportunity for families and students to reap the benefits of school choice -something more and more Alaskans are choosing, all while having no negative impact on the State budget and allowing an equivalent tax deduction to those who choose to support education through their donations.”

Commissioner Deena Bishop also commented on the program: “This credit offers families another valuable tool to utilize in making the best education decision for their students. Doing everything we can to help our kids earn their success is our mission as educators, and this is another step in the right direction.”

Governor Dunleavy opts Alaska into the Federal K-12 Education Tax Credit Scholarship ProgramDownload

Alaska Senate Resources Examines LNG Lessons from Canada Amid Glenfarne Push

Todd M Lindley
-
16
Alaska Senate Resources Examines LNG Lessons from Canada Amid Glenfarne Push

Alaska’s Senate Resources Committee convened on Tuesday, January 26, to dissect the state’s natural gas export ambitions through the lens of Canada’s LNG Canada project, a rare success story in the North American LNG sector. With developer Glenfarne Group signaling renewed momentum toward a pipeline and export facility from the North Slope to Nikiski, lawmakers sought clarity on fiscal frameworks, cost overruns, tax incentives, and project readiness. Consultants from GaffneyCline—energy advisory firm Senior Director of LNG and Energy Transition Nicholas Fulford and Director of Facilities and Cost Andrew Duncan—delivered detailed testimony, highlighting contrasts between Canada’s approach and Alaska’s evolving proposal.

The LNG Canada project, located in Kitimat on British Columbia’s mid-coast, has become a benchmark for Pacific-facing LNG developments. Built around a roughly 400-mile pipeline constructed by TransCanada, the project overcame rugged terrain and significant cost escalation. Fulford noted that budgeted construction costs for the Coastal GasLink pipeline ballooned from CAD $6 billion to CAD $16.4 billion, with overruns absorbed primarily by TransCanada and project sponsor Shell. Despite the escalation, the project reached final investment decision (FID) and has since begun operations.

Canada’s success hinged on a carefully negotiated fiscal environment that provided long-term predictability. The federal government granted “Nation Building Status,” signaling that the project’s tax and regulatory framework would remain stable. British Columbia mitigated front-loaded taxes, reduced corporate income tax rates from 12% to 9% through credits, and introduced accelerated depreciation to defer tax burdens. A capped carbon tax was also locked in, offering investors certainty absent in Alaska, which has no carbon tax. Property taxes in Canada remained far lower than Alaska’s typical rates.

Fulford stressed the importance of such stability: “Ultimately what we are talking about is a fiscal framework and a government tax regime that an investor or lender can depend on in the long-term.”

The project’s financing relied entirely on private equity and parent-company balance sheets. Equity partners—including Shell, Petronas, and others—entered take-or-pay marketing arrangements covering 100% of their entitlements, transferring credit risk to highly rated corporate entities and securing low-cost debt. No direct government capital or guarantees were provided, unlike earlier Alaska proposals that envisioned significant state involvement.

Alaska’s current proposal, led by Glenfarne, diverges from the 2014 Senate Bill 138 framework. That earlier plan assumed state equity participation, profit-sharing mechanisms, and a pipeline primarily serving Southcentral Alaska power needs before export. Glenfarne’s structure emphasizes private development, with gas supplied from the North Slope and export focused on Asian markets. Fulford told senators the shift in profit allocation between upstream production and downstream liquefaction/export would require a fresh look at state taxation and revenue models. He noted that Wood Mackenzie’s analysis of the project appeared consistent with state assumptions, but recommended revisiting legislative direction to align incentives.

Duncan assessed Glenfarne’s progress as falling between decision gate 2 (concept selection) and decision gate 3 (pre-FEED), with FID typically occurring at gate 4 once Class 3 cost estimates solidify. He acknowledged Glenfarne’s public actions—securing construction resources, preliminary gas supply agreements, and permitting advancements—as reasonable momentum-building steps. “There does seem to be an assumption that the project will go ahead,” Duncan said. “I haven’t seen anything I would consider to be inappropriate.”

The global LNG market provides context for Alaska’s renewed interest. Current capacity stands at approximately 400 million tonnes per annum (MTPA), with projections targeting 700–800 MTPA by the early 2030s, driven largely by Asian demand. Pacific Coast projects benefit from low-cost feed gas and shorter shipping routes to premium markets. Fulford cited Petronas’s sale of a 5% stake in LNG Canada as an example of how equity can be monetized without perpetual state ownership.

Committee members pressed on disclosure, comparing Canada’s five-year fiscal negotiations with Glenfarne’s more opaque progress. They also explored whether tax breaks were needed for production, pipeline construction, or export operations, and whether the project’s evolution warrants new legislation. Fulford acknowledged that LNG Canada’s developers had insisted on tax changes to make the projects investable, breaking a years-long impasse.

Alaska’s project faces unique challenges, including higher property taxes and a history of stalled efforts dating back decades. Yet proponents argue low-cost North Slope gas and strategic location could compete effectively if fiscal terms attract investment. The committee’s discussion signals lawmakers are weighing whether to update statutes or maintain flexibility as Glenfarne advances toward potential groundbreaking.

No formal recommendations emerged from the hearing, but the testimony underscored that predictable, investor-friendly policies were key to Canada’s success. Alaska’s path forward may hinge on similar adaptations.

AIDEA Reports $17 Million Dividend, $1.6 Billion Net Position; Discusses Ambler Project with Senate State Affairs

Natalie Spaulding
-
11
AIDEA Reports $17 Million Dividend, $1.6 Billion Net Position; Discusses Ambler Project with Senate State Affairs

The Senate State Affairs Committee met today, Jan 27, at 3:30pm to hear from the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA). AIDEA’s mission is “to promote, develop, and advance economic growth and diversification in AK by providing various means of financing and investment.” 

Democrat Introduced AIDEA Accountability Act

Last week, the House State Affairs Committee heard and discussed HB 124, known as the AIDEA Accountability Act, sponsored by Representative Ashley Carrick (D-Fairbanks). HB 124 seeks to enhance “legislative and public oversight of AIDEA as a state corporation.” Representatives Kevin McCabe (R-Big Lake) and Sarah Vance (R-Homer) criticized the bill as “micromanagement” and “anti economic development.”

Reports of Continued Success

At the Senate State Affairs meeting today, AIDEA Chief Investment Officer Geoffery Johns presented on AIDEA’s progress and significant projects. Johns was accompanied by Chief General Counsel Kent Sullivan and Infrastructure Development Senior Finance Officer Jeff San Juan.  

Johns began by stating that AIDEA was created by the State Legislature to take on state development projects, specifically focused on economic development and job creation in Alaska. The state-owned corporation has seen great success with a cumulative $60.1 billion in economic output from 1987 to 2026. In 2025, AIDEA declared a $17 million dividend. The corporation’s net position has risen from $1.491 billion in 2024 to $1.560 billion in 2025.

Highlights of Significant Projects

Johns highlighted AIDEA’s significant projects, touching on the corporation’s role in Alaska’s small business economy, the Ambler Road project, West Susitna Access project, Arctic National Wildlife Refuge 1002 leasing, Delong Mountain Transportation System, Interior Gas Utility project, Ketchikan shipyard, Alyeschem North Slope plant, HEX Furie, and Blood Bank of Alaska.

The Committee’s discussion focused heavily on the Ambler Road project.

Ambler Road Discussion

According to Johns, the Ambler project will create over 3,000 direct jobs and approximately $1 billion in profit for the State. The AIDEA board approved over $100 million of its own money to invest in the project.

Permitting

Senator Scott Kawasaki (D-Fairbanks) asked Johns if the road has been fully permitted. Johns handed the question to AIDEA’s Infrastructure Development Senior Finance Officer Jeff San Juan. San Juan replied that the corporation has secured all the state permits and expects federal permits to be secured soon.

Ownership and Accessibility

Sen. Kawasaki then asked if the road will be accessible to the public. San Juan answered that the road will be private industrial access only with no public access. Later in the discussion, Chief General Counsel Kent Sullivan clarified why the Ambler Road project cannot permit public access. He explained that the native corporations NANA and Doyon required AIDEA to guarantee private industrial access only, otherwise the native corporations would refuse to allow the project to continue over their lands. “There was no other way,” he stated.

Sullivan also clarified that the road will not be owned by just one mining company but will be owned by all stakeholders along the road.

Then San Juan addressed Sen. Kawasaki’s next question related to differences in permitting between the Ambler Road project and the Pogo Gold Mine. San Juan said the two have different permitting because the Pogo permits assume transfer to the public at some point, whereas the Ambler Road will never be made public.

Senator Jesse Bjorkman (R-Nikiski) jumped into the conversation, asking where NANA stands on Ambler. NANA had originally supported the project, but then later expressed opposition. According to San Juan, AIDEA is working with NANA and “NANA is starting to communicate… the relationship is starting to get rebuilt.”

Targeted Hiring

Shifting to the project’s hiring potential, Sen. Kawasaki asked if AIDEA will require contracted companies to hire local Alaskans to work on the project. San Juan responded that AIDEA, as a state-owned corporation, cannot impose a hiring preferential. Legal Counsel Sullivan corroborated, stating that as a state corporation, AIDEA cannot do preferential hires for Alaska natives, but NANA and Doyon can prefer to hire natives to work on the portions of the road going across NANA and Doyon land.

Sen. Kawasaki then asked if AIDEA still prioritizes “jobs for Alaskans,” as their mission statement proposes. Sullivan answered, “yes, it is a big consideration… it is a part of the conversation.” Sen. Kawasaki asked how it could be part of the conversation if AIDEA is prohibited from preferential hiring. Sullivan responded that AIDEA can choose which companies it wants to contract with based on that company’s percentage of in-state vs. out-of-state employment, but AIDEA cannot impose a hiring bias when it comes to the individuals hired to work on the project. Furthermore, Sullivan emphasized that AIDEA has an Alaska preference (which it express through contracts with companies who hire Alaskans), but not a native corporation shareholder preferential.

Wildlife Impact

The conversation about Ambler finished with Rep. Bjorkman asking AIDEA to confirm that the project will have minimal impact to wildlife. Sullivan and San Juan both confirmed that AIDEA’s study found that the project would have minimal impact to wildlife, particularly to caribou.

AIDEA’s Relationship to the PFD

After wrapping up his presentation on significant project highlights, Johns spoke briefly on AIDEA’s relationship to the Permanent Fund. According to Johns, the State Legislature formed AIDEA as “a shield to protect the Permanent Fund.” AIDEA is a distinct institution, not part of the Permanent Fund Corporation, and its dividends help cushion the Permanent Fund.

1234...1,759Page 3 of 1,759

About us

Must Read Alaska is news of people, politics, policy, culture, and happenings in Alaska.

Contact
4021 West Hill Road,
Homer, AK 99603
[email protected]

The latest

Sitka-Based Cruise Line Unexpectedly Ends Operations

The 907 0
Alaska Dream Cruises, owned by Bob and Betty Allen,...

Complete List of Anchorage Assembly Candidates Released

The 907 2
Anchorage's Municipal Clerk's Office has released the complete list...

Trump Advances America First Fishing Policy

Politics 2
On Friday, February 6, President Trump signed a proclamation...

© Must Read Alaska