Thursday, October 15, 2026
Home Blog Page 34

Service to My Country: Zack Gottshall, Marine and Army Veteran

0

When I first stepped into the United States Marine Corps in the 1990s, I never imagined the path ahead. For anyone who has wondered about a life of service, my journey took me across two branches— the Marine Corps and later the Army— shaping who I became and what I learned. I retired with a total of 23 years of service, and in sharing my story, I hope to offer a glimpse into the meaning, the challenges, and the lessons that service can bring. In those decades, I faced critical transitions, personal challenges, and enduring lessons. By sharing these lessons, I hope to offer perspective and value to the next generation whether they choose service or another path of purpose.

I chose the Marine Corps largely because my older brother was already a Marine. Growing up, I knew if I picked another branch, I would never hear the end of it! But it wasn’t just rivalry. I admired the Marines’ camaraderie and history. Once I joined, it deepened the bond with my brother. For decades now, we have shared the Marine Corps birthday— a tradition unlike any other in my family. The pride, discipline, and legacy of the Corps shaped me, not just as a Marine, but as a brother and a leader.

After my discharge from the Marine Corps, I thought my service was over. But after 9/11, the Army gave me a second chance. With different standards, they offered me not only a role I wanted, but a renewed sense of purpose and even a bonus. In the Army, I had the pleasure of serving in the Republic of Korea, in Germany, and with Army Central Command both in the United States and abroad. Those experiences fast-tracked me into leadership roles, pushing me to grow faster than I had imagined. As I advanced in leadership, I ultimately chose to assess for warrant officer in my field. This transition changed everything: my responsibilities, my role, and even how I related to those I once served alongside. I now had to approach the mission with a broader perspective, knowing that my actions and decisions carried new weight.

Being selected as a Warrant Officer was one of the greatest honors of my military career, but it was also one of the most difficult transitions I would ever experience. Overnight, my responsibilities changed. I was no longer viewed solely as a leader of Soldiers but as a technical expert and trusted advisor to commanders. That change required me to rethink not only how I approached the mission, but also how I approached people. Relationships with peers naturally evolved, expectations increased, and every recommendation I made carried greater weight. I quickly learned that technical competence alone would never be enough. To be effective, I had to earn the trust of both commanders and the Soldiers I served by remaining approachable, objective, and committed to the mission above myself. As I progressed from Warrant Officer One through Chief Warrant Officer Three, I came to appreciate that the most respected leaders were rarely the loudest or the most authoritative. They were the ones who listened first, remained teachable, and never forgot who they were serving. That realization fundamentally changed my perspective on leadership. I discovered that true influence is earned through competence, integrity, consistency, and humility. It took time for me to mature into that perspective, and now, looking back, I recognize those lessons as some of the most valuable of my career— not only in uniform, but in every aspect of my life that followed.

While deployed to Kandahar, Afghanistan, serving with U.S. Forces Afghanistan in the Kandahar Intelligence Fusion Center, I was responsible for providing daily intelligence briefings to coalition forces conducting combat operations throughout southern Afghanistan. Over time, I developed close relationships with many of the service members I briefed, watching them prepare for missions day after day and welcoming them back when they returned. During many of those operations, I also monitored live video feeds from multiple intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) platforms providing overwatch for the forces on the ground. On one tragic day, while observing one of those live feeds, I witnessed the attack that claimed the lives of seven of my friends. The enemy had concealed improvised explosive devices within the compound walls and around the property, turning what appeared to be a routine operation into a devastating loss. Witnessing their final moments in real time forever changed my understanding of the true cost of military service.



A quick interjection…. We need more stories! Are you a veteran or active-duty service member? Please share your story and keep the series going! Know someone with a story? Encourage them to share!

More submission details here: “Service to My Country” Series Story Request

Thank you! Now back to the story…


While I was on patrol in Kabul in August, a blast threw me approximately eight to ten feet into a parked vehicle. I suffered a concussion, a ruptured eardrum, abrasions, and other blast-related injuries that required immediate medical treatment. Less than two months later, on October 6, 2009, I was part of a multi-vehicle Humvee convoy that came under attack. An improvised explosive device detonated beneath the lead vehicle, bringing the convoy to an immediate halt. Moments later, a second explosion struck the trail vehicle, effectively trapping us in an enemy ambush with no avenue of escape. After engaging in the firefight and helping secure the area, I returned to my Humvee. Within moments, another buried IED detonated near the front passenger side of my vehicle, knocking me unconscious. I regained consciousness while receiving emergency medical treatment before being evacuated back to Kandahar for additional care. Those two concussive events, occurring less than two months apart, would prove to be far more significant than I could have imagined.

Because of my career field, it was a common fear that admitting to psychological impacts from trauma might jeopardize one’s security clearance. Because of that, I began to avoid follow-on medical treatment for my injuries— choices that would shape the long-term effects to come.

Having witnessed the loss of close friends and having survived multiple concussive blast injuries in such a short period of time, my life was changed in ways I could not have understood at the time. Ironically, after spending years learning that humility was one of the greatest attributes of effective leadership, I found myself abandoning that very principle when I needed it most. Because of the career field I served in, there was a common belief that admitting to psychological struggles or cognitive difficulties could jeopardize one’s security clearance and, ultimately, one’s career. Rather than asking for help, I convinced myself I could simply push through it. Pride replaced humility, and for more than a decade I lived with both PTSD and post-concussive syndrome resulting from multiple concussive injuries. Those conditions slowly influenced nearly every aspect of my life. They affected my judgment, my relationships, my career, and, most painfully, my family. My wife and children experienced the consequences alongside me, even though they had never stepped onto the battlefield.

It was not until after I retired that I finally recognized the error of my ways. A close friend and fellow veteran’s testimony opened my eyes to the pride that had blinded me. Mike Stone reminded me of the very lessons I had learned throughout my military career but had failed to apply in my own life for nearly a decade. I recommitted myself to God. I focused on obedience to what God was calling me to do, that being a strong devotion to serving my family, my community, and others. In that obedience, I began to experience genuine healing. That healing restored not only my own life, but also my family’s. It renewed relationships that had been strained for years, brought peace back into our home, and restored a sense of happiness and purpose that had slowly disappeared for more than a decade.

If I could leave one message for the next generation, it would be this: never forget the life lessons you have learned— live them. Integrity and accountability are not qualities to embrace only when they are convenient; they must become part of your character. Learn the difference between confidence and pride. Confidence allows you to lead with conviction. Pride convinces you that you no longer need others. Never allow pride to keep you from asking for help when you need it. Today, I am proud to be an Alaskan, proud to be a local small business owner, and grateful for the opportunities I have been given to continue serving others. Most of all, I am thankful to give back to my community, to the servicemen, women, and veterans who will always be my brothers and sisters in arms, and to remain obedient to God and my Lord Jesus Christ. If sharing my experiences helps even one person avoid the mistakes I made, encourages someone to seek help before pride gets in the way, or inspires one young American to pursue a life of purpose and service, then every lesson I learned was worth sharing

More in Series

Pro Deo et Patria (For God and Country) 

0

As our country approaches our 250th Anniversary, there are many celebrations being planned all across our blessed homeland. Many fond memories come to mind as I ponder what this means to those who gave their all to secure and ensure our continued freedom. One phrase that comes to mind is: “Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country.”  

This phrase once haunted me in my younger years as my sister would say it over and over again as she practiced her typing. Honestly, if you grew up as either a Baby-Boomer or Generation X’er, how can you not remember this from typing class?  I cannot remember if I ever registered the words she was repeating nor the meaning of those words at that time, back then it was just annoying but today, as the words reappeared from my memory, the words are much more meaningful and profound. A phrase so simple, used to time the number of words typed correctly, filled with the duty and responsibility of every American who truly loves this country.   

As I now repeat this phrase in my mind, it serves as a reminder that we are privileged to serve, much more than a duty, but should it ever become a duty, one should embrace it with honor and readiness.  

From the beginning of time, or close to it, God has called and anointed men, and women to lead armies against His enemies; Joshua, David, Joan of Arc, just to name a few. 

When we would visit my grandparents, I would see the pictures of my maternal grandfather and all my uncles in their Navy uniforms. Every time I would see those pictures and the pictures of my dad and his brother in their Army uniforms, I would remember that phrase and repeat those words, silently, over and over in my head and think, they came to the aid of their country.  

Although I really did not understand the full depth of their service at the time, just seeing them in their uniforms, knowing that when Uncle Sam called, they all answered the call for God and country. 

My father-in-law, a decorated Korean War Veteran was awarded two Purple Hearts, having served two tours in the jungle of Korea, at the age of 17. His family’s military service dates back to the Civil War and as far back as 1854 with one of his great-great-great grandfathers who was part of the “Horseback Company” Co. C, 2nd Brigade, 1st Division, New Mexico Mounted Militia. He was wounded by two arrows while serving alongside Federal Troops due to his expertise with horses and familiarity with the terrain.   

Being born into a family of service men and marrying into a family of military men ignited a fire within me do my part for a country I truly love. These men served because they believed in the American Dream. Not only what was happening, but what could be for all men and women in a Country for those who longed to be free.  I knew I had to be part of this legacy. I could do nothing less than what my ancestors had done and that was to serve my country for the blood, sweat, and tears that flowed generations before me to secure my rights and my freedom. I had to continue to ensure the same rights and freedom for my own children and grandchildren, so in 1987, I proudly raised my hand to serve in the United States Air Force. I ended my Active duty after 20-years, 6 months and 22-days having served during Desert Shield, Desert Storm, Iraq, Afghanistan, and I would do it all over again.  

To risk everything for God and Country, the brave men who drafted and signed the Declaration of Independence in reality signed their own death sentences. They believed in a free state where the tyranny of a monarchy would never again reign over them and keep them shackled by their unjustly rule.  

The Preamble, the unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America, kicks it off: 

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”  

It flows into the Declaration of Independence as it reads: 

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator (emphasis mine) with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness… But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”  

There are countless number of men, women and children, whose names we may never know, who shed their blood to preserve the values this country stands for and the freedoms we are blessed to have. If we forget how we attained said freedoms, their sacrifice would be for naught. 

When we are faced with the possibility of war, Augustine of Hippo, reminds us that “Peace should be the object of your desire; war should be waged only as a necessity, and waged only that God may by it deliver men from the necessity and preserve them in peace.” He continues, that even while fighting, one must keep mercy in view: “Let necessity, therefore, and not your will, slay the enemy who fights against you.” 

We are One Nation Under God. We are the Land of the Free, because of the brave men, women and children who gave their lives for our country. 

As G.K. Chesterton so eloquently put it: “The true soldier fights not because he hates what is in front of him, but because he loves what is behind him.” 

Fly your American Flag proudly, not just in the month of July, but every day. And remember all those who gave up everything so you could live in the Greatest Country in the world. 

And always remember, if the time ever comes: “Now is the time for all good men to come to the aid of their country.” 

Live your life worthy of HIS Sacrifice + 
God Bless America + 
Deacon Dez

Analysis: The True Aim of the AK LNG Project That Legislators Won’t Say Out Loud

This article was originally published in the author’s personal Substack on 6/19/2026 under the title “The Urgency Nobody Will Defend.”

Natural gas is a commodity. It trades on volume and proximity to market, not on scarcity or specialty value. Qatar, Australia, the U.S. Gulf Coast, and a dozen other suppliers compete on the same global spot price, and the margins on commodity LNG are thin by the standards of any other energy investment. Glenfarne’s own consultant told the Alaska Senate Finance Committee on May 27 that gas “is not the driver” of this project’s economics and that it “is not worth much.” Nobody followed up. Nobody asked what was worth much instead.

That single exchange should have ended the urgency argument the day it happened. Instead, the governor and the operator have spent the special session telling Alaskans the opposite: that a market window is closing, that delay is costly, that the legislature must act now or lose the opportunity. If the commodity itself is not the driver, the market-window argument is being made about a product nobody involved says is actually driving the deal. That is not a minor inconsistency. It is the entire justification for the speed at which this bill has moved, collapsing under testimony supplied by the people asking for the speed.

What the governor has said, and not said

Governor Dunleavy has been publicly describing a different project than the one being sold to the legislature since at least December 2022, when he published an op-ed on RealClearEnergy titled “Alaska’s Map to Clean Hydrogen Leadership.” He wrote that natural gas is a key ingredient for hydrogen production and that Alaska is positioned to compete because of its geology suited for carbon capture. That same month, the Alaska Gasline Development Corporation submitted a concept paper to the U.S. Department of Energy describing a hydrogen production hub at the Nikiski terminal, fed by North Slope gas through the AKLNG pipeline, sequestering captured carbon dioxide in underground formations. He has traveled to Japan twice promoting this combination of LNG, hydrogen, and carbon management to the same audiences AGDC now cites as the urgent buyers.

None of that record describes a commodity gas sale. It describes a credit-generating industrial process that happens to use a gas pipeline as its delivery mechanism. The governor has had this language available to him for four years. He has not used it once during the special session to explain why the bill needs to pass in 30 days, then 30 more.

What Glenfarne has said, and not said

Glenfarne released a public cost range for the project for the first time on June 4, more than two weeks into the special session that was supposedly urgent enough to require it. The range carried no stated cost class, no contingency methodology, and no independent verification. The company has not produced the detailed economic model its own consultant told the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee in December could not yet be contemplated. It has not stated, anywhere on the public record, whether its Nikiski terminal is designed to produce clean hydrogen, what volume, or what share of the project’s financing case depends on it.

A company asking a state legislature to permanently restructure property tax law in 30 days ought to be able to answer what the project actually produces. Glenfarne has not answered that question once.

The deadline that explains everything else

There is exactly one date in the public record that explains a 30-day clock with any precision. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act, signed July 4, 2025, set December 31, 2027 as the construction commencement deadline for the Section 45V clean hydrogen production tax credit. Alaska’s special session legislation sets its own construction trigger at January 1, 2028. Those are the same deadline, stated in two different documents, by two different governments, eighteen months apart.

The 45V credit pays up to $3 per kilogram of qualifying clean hydrogen for ten years to projects that begin construction before that date. At the production volume AGDC itself proposed to the Department of Energy, that credit is worth up to $1.5 billion a year. No fiscal note before the Alaska Legislature has ever quantified it. No committee chair in either chamber has asked Glenfarne whether it applies.

This is the urgency. Not a market window for a commodity that Glenfarne’s own adviser says is not the driver. A federal construction deadline attached to a credit program that has never been named on the floor of either chamber.

That deadline determines whether the operator captures roughly a billion and a half dollars a year for a decade, and it has nothing to do with whether Cook Inlet runs short of gas or whether Asian buyers sign contracts in 2026 instead of 2027.

The House had a reason to rush. The Senate does not.

The House passed its version of HB 381 on a deadline the governor set, under pressure from an operator who needed a bill before this legislature adjourned. Whatever the merits of that bill, the House’s incentive to move fast tracked Glenfarne’s incentive to move fast, and the result was a floor amendment package that cut the alternative volumetric tax to six and thirteen cents per thousand cubic feet, deleted the municipal equity option, and exempted the credit-generating infrastructure from local taxation, all without a single corrected fiscal note showing what those rates would actually produce.

The Senate’s incentive is not the same. The Senate does not answer to Glenfarne’s construction calendar. It answers to Alaskans who will live with this tax structure for the next thirty years. There is no version of the Alaska Constitution’s mandate to develop resources for the maximum benefit of the state’s people that requires the Senate to match the House’s deadline because the House’s deadline happened to align with a federal tax credit window the House was never told about either.

The Senate has the leverage here, and the leverage is time. The 45V deadline is the operator’s problem, not Alaska’s. A developer that needs to break ground by January 1, 2028 to preserve a tax credit worth $1.5 billion a year does not walk away from a negotiation because Alaska takes a few more months to see the complete financial picture before voting. The IRS five percent safe harbor provision lets a developer lock in 45V construction eligibility through equipment purchases alone, without breaking physical ground, which means even Glenfarne’s own federal deadline does not require the legislature to act on the timeline it has been given.

What the Senate should actually do

Stall it. Not to kill the pipeline. To find out what it is.

Demand the complete economic model GaffneyCline told the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee in December did not yet exist. Demand a fiscal note that quantifies the 45Q and 45V credit streams instead of pretending they are not part of the deal. Demand to know whether the Nikiski terminal is designed to produce hydrogen, and if so, at what volume, and what becomes of the credit revenue once it exists. Demand the AGDC-Glenfarne governance and collateral agreements that have been withheld from legislative review since at least February under a confidentiality framework the bill’s own drafters now claim does not permit hiding exactly this kind of information.

None of that requires opposing the pipeline. Alaska’s gas is real. Alaska’s geology is real. The case for connecting a stranded resource to a paying market is legitimate on its own terms. What is not legitimate is permanently surrendering the state’s taxing authority over that resource on a clock set by a deadline the people asking for the vote will not name, for a commodity their own consultant says is not the point.

If LNG were actually the driver, the governor and the operator would be making the LNG case. They are not. They are describing carbon capture geology, hydrogen production volumes, and federal trade missions, then asking the legislature to vote as if none of that exists. The Senate does not owe Glenfarne the same rush the House gave it. It owes Alaskans the complete picture before it signs away thirty years of tax authority on a project nobody in government will fully describe.

Dana Raffaniello lives in Palmer, Alaska. He works as a network engineer, reads Alaska energy legislation closely, and publishes analysis of its fiscal and structural implications at raff6482.substack.com. He is running for the Mat-Su Borough Assembly, District 2. He has no commercial interest in any energy project discussed in this analysis.

Opinion: Reviewing the Record Reveals Clear Progressive Trend in Alaska Politics Despite Republican Leadership

Why are we Republicans, conservatives, libertarians, and the remaining thoughtful groups that are sick and tired of being sick and tired with Alaska politics not telling Alaska’s political leadership to stop this fool’s parade and seriously approach a winning strategy for the legislature?  

Keep in mind: A Decade of Failure by Incompetence: 

2015 – Medicaid Expansion by Executive Action 

Governor Walker expanded Medicaid without direct legislative approval, and the Legislature failed to stop it. Alaska inherited a larger permanent entitlement structure, future state costs, and a deeper health-care bureaucracy. 

2016 – Education Funding Without Reform 

Lawmakers continued funding the existing education system without requiring performance accountability, administrative reform, school choice, consolidation, or measurable student outcomes. 

2017 – Oil Tax Policy Without Strategy 

HB 111 ended cashable oil tax credits, but Alaska still failed to adopt a durable resource strategy for production, revenue, investment stability, and fiscal discipline. 

2018 – PFD Cuts Institutionalized 

The POMV framework normalized using Permanent Fund earnings for government operations and turned the statutory PFD into an annual budget bargaining chip. 

2019 – Criminal Justice Reversal Without Repair 

HB 49 rolled back SB 91 under public pressure, but did not solve addiction, homelessness, prosecution gaps, repeat offenders, mental health failures, or reentry problems. 

2020 – COVID Spending Without Lasting Oversight Reform 

CARES Act funds exposed confusion over emergency spending authority, legislative control, audits, and transparency. Alaska spent the money but failed to build better emergency-budget rules. 

2021 – Federal Dependency Deepens 

ARPA money expanded Alaska’s reliance on federal funds, tying more state, local, school, and nonprofit priorities to Washington’s rules and temporary funding streams. 

2022 – Education Industry Capture Continues 

Despite poor student outcomes, the Legislature again treated funding as reform while avoiding competition, school-level autonomy, administrative caps, and parental control. 

2023 – Ranked-Choice Voting Becomes the Shield 

After adoption in 2020 and use in 2022, lawmakers avoided a serious review of voter confusion, ballot exhaustion, party displacement, and whether the system still had public consent. 

2024 – Statehood Erodes Under Federal Control 

Federal restrictions on Alaska land, resources, roads, and energy development continued, while state leaders mostly responded after the damage was done. 

2025 – More Spending, More Control, Less Accountability 

The Legislature pushed education increases without enforceable performance reform, advanced election-law changes under the banner of modernization, drifted toward energy policies that risk higher costs, and again treated the statutory PFD as government’s balancing account. 

2026 – The Pattern Continues 

Public-pension revival efforts, unresolved election reform, reduced PFDs, and continued fiscal avoidance show the same governing pattern: short-term relief, institutional protection, federal dependency, and procedural games instead of structural reform. 

Bottom Line 

The decade’s failure is not that every proposal was malicious. Some were sincere.  

The real problem is worse: Alaska’s political class repeatedly chooses temporary fixes and institutional self-protection over reform, then transfers the future cost to families, taxpayers, children, and grandchildren. Without a governing strategy tied to measurable results, the Legislature will keep doing what it does best: redistributing state money through grants, programs, and favored institutions that then become political constituencies for the same legislators who fund them.  

Alaska’s FY2025 grant system moved roughly $2.7 billion through state agencies to outside entities, nonprofits, local governments, service providers, and advocacy-linked organizations. Some do useful work, but the larger pattern is obvious: public money creates dependency, dependency creates political loyalty, and political loyalty helps incumbents get re-elected.  

That is not reform. It is taxpayer-funded political maintenance. If Alaska wants different results, all state funding must be tied to measurable outcomes, independent audits, sunset reviews, and consequences for failure. Otherwise, the system will continue recycling public money into institutional support for the status quo while families, children, and future taxpayers are left paying the bill.  

Unless we, Alaska voters, realize we are no longer operating in a traditional democratic-republic election process, taxpayer-funded political maintenance will continue as Alaska’s norm, not the exception.  

Since statehood, Alaska’s political system has been steadily reshaped into a progressive governing structure in which public money is used to build and protect political constituencies, ranked-choice voting diffuses accountability, and institutional networks increasingly outweigh clear voter mandates. This is no longer a simple contest of candidates, slogans, or campaign personalities. It is a contest over systems: who controls the money, the rules, the administrative machinery, the nonprofit networks, the unions, the media narrative, and the election structure itself.  

Until conservatives and non-progressives recognize that the battlefield has changed, we will continue treating elections like beauty pageants (Note our current Republican gubernatorial race. Silly, isn’t it?) while the other side treats them like systems engineering. That is why we keep losing ground even when public sentiment is with us. The lesson is blunt: a movement that only campaigns, but does not build durable institutions, cannot defeat a political machine that governs through them. 

Rebuttal to ADN Article: Anchorage’s Ice Arenas deserve Facts, not Politics

4

By Steve Agni, Head of O’Malley Ice and Sport

When O’Malley Ice and Sports replied as the sole Company willing to manage Anchorage’s ice arenas, we did not expect the contracts to make money. We understood they were aged facilities with structural deficits, deferred maintenance, and complex politics. Our goal was simple: Use our experience to restore the skating community after COVID and bring some normalcy back to Anchorage by returning the “Sully” to its original purpose: a venue for hockey and community events. Everyone agrees we succeeded on both accounts!

It is now painful and undeserved to see our work described in ADN coverage with phrases like “mismanagement,” and a narrative built on partial truths and omissions, not the full record. I was not “unavailable for comment.” I have checked my call logs and cannot find any attempt by the ADN to reach me. More importantly, framing our contract as a “Bronson-era deal” ignores what actually happened the past several years.

Under our contracts, O’Malley did not receive start-up funding or operating subsidy. We took over Ben Boeke and Dempsey Anderson having to carry all operating risks. Even so, they became cash flow positive to the MOA, We increased their utilization, and transferred more than $570,000 to the MOA in maintenance subsidies, capital reserves, revenue shares, and other payments; while also funding repairs and replacements in the buildings. That is not “mismanagement.”

The Sullivan story is more complex than headlines can capture. The article itself acknowledges the MOA did not fully discharge its responsibilities, especially around deferred maintenance and the wastage of utilities inherent in the aged building. From the onset, we brought to the MOA’s attention the problems in the physical plant, operating responsibilities and the contract shortcomings.

We documented, in detail needed repairs, replacements, and equipment purchases never addressed during the commissioning process that were necessary to make the Sullivan operational and code-compliant. In August 2024, we submitted a reimbursement report describing more than $191,000 in completed work and another $112,000 of recommended repairs and replacements at actual hard cost with no markup. We also made clear that all MOA surcharges and fees for Sullivan were offset and more— by $340,000 in documented improvements we had funded.

The same transparency applied to utilities. In spring 2025, we informed the MOA that the Sullivan could not realistically be operated if full utility costs were pushed through the manager onto the users and patrons. We offered a defined annual “allowance” of about $100,000 toward utilities, with the balance recognized as a municipal responsibility for the aging public arena. We asked MOA to document that approach in an amendment, but they refused even though we had no control over utilities, building heat, or ventilation. In the meantime, we continued to reopen the long-closed arena in a post-pandemic environment, hosting youth hockey, community events, while absorbing the shock of a force majeure cancellation of a marquee Lynyrd Skynyrd relaunch concert; where more than $300,000 in ticket costs and fees were fully refunded to the public and vendors, even as the expected revenue vanished. Those acts are not a picture of an operator trying to avoid its obligations. They clearly describe an operator acting responsibly to keep public facilities open under a contract everyone now agrees was flawed.

The new arena contracts with substantial operating subsidies and clearer allocations of responsibility are a clear recognition that the original framework was not workable. We sincerely wish the best for the new operators, and we hope they are allowed to manage these important assets based on facts and performance rather than deliberately applying political labels like the “Bronson era.”

There is an old saying that no good deed goes unpunished. That is how this chapter feels. We stepped in when no one else bid, and reopened a major community venue, funded repairs, and operated without a subsidy, now to be told that our efforts should be understood primarily through political labels, sound bites, and poorly researched news accounts.

Anchorage deserves better. These facilities are not partisan talking points; they are places kids learn to skate, families gather, and community congregates. As the city implements the new contracts, I hope we all agree on one principle: Decisions about the arenas should be based on a factual record of what has been accomplished to date, what has failed, and what it will cost to keep them open; not on slogans about who signed which agreement in which administration.

15 Alaskans Charged with Medicaid Fraud Totaling $1.83 Million as Part of Nationwide $6.5 Billion Health Care Fraud Takedown

0

On June 23, 2026, the Alaska Department of Law announced that 15 defendants were charged with committing Medicaid fraud totaling approximately $1.83 million. The Alaska Department of Law’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU) participated in a nationwide health care fraud takedown coordinated through the Vice President’s Fraud Task Force. The operation was conducted between June 8 and June 22, 2026, and revealed health care fraud and opioid abuse schemes involving “$6.5 billion in false claims and significant patient harm, including death.”

The 2026 National Health Care Fraud Takedown resulted in charges against 455 defendants across 45 states, including 90 doctors and other licensed medical professionals.

“We are aggressively scaling our offensive against anyone using health care as a front to steal from the American people,” said Assistant Attorney General Colin M. McDonald of the Justice Department’s National Fraud Enforcement Division. “As today’s cases and arrests show, there is no case too big, no scheme too complex, and no hiding place too remote for our relentless fraud-fighting team. Our message is simple: if you put profit over patients, you should expect to be put in prison.”

“Protecting the integrity of Alaska’s Medicaid program is critical to ensuring that taxpayer-funded resources remain available for Alaskans who genuinely need medical and long-term care services,” said Deputy Attorney General Angie Kemp. “These charges reflect the ongoing commitment of our MFCU team and our partners to investigate and prosecute individuals and organizations that abuse public assistance programs for personal gain.”

Alaska’s participation in the takedown led to the following five cases:

Mirci Dental Billing Case

On June 22, 2026, Joseph J. Mirci, DDS, 47, along with Peninsula Family Dental Center LLC and Joseph J. Mirci DMD LLC, were charged with Scheme to Defraud, Theft in the First Degree, and 19 counts of Medical Assistance Fraud. The charges allege that between January 2021 and September 2025, the defendants submitted approximately $83,985.97 in fraudulent Medicaid claims for dental services that were not provided, were not medically necessary, were unsupported by patient records, failed to meet Medicaid requirements, and/or were billed at a higher level than performed.

Graystone Assisted Living Case

On June 17, 2026, Amie Sanneh, 72, Sainabou Faal, 46, and Graystone Assisted Living Home LLC were charged with Scheme to Defraud, Theft in the First Degree, and four counts of Medical Assistance Fraud. The charges allege that more than $1.1 million in Medicaid claims submitted between 2022 and 2025 lacked sufficient supporting documentation. According to the charging documents, the defendants were unable to produce records for a substantial portion of billed services and many of the records provided were incomplete.

Heritage Assisted Living Case

On June 16, 2026, Molly Joanna Bates, 46, Kyle Sujoy Bates, 48, Peyton Ward Love, 33, Heritage Assisted Living Home LLC, Heritage Home LLC, and Alaska Life Group Homes LLC were charged with Scheme to Defraud, two counts of Theft in the First Degree, and seven counts of Medical Assistance Fraud. The charges allege approximately $618,961.99 in fraudulent Medicaid billing, including claims for services that were not provided or were inadequately staffed, and services lacking sufficient supporting records.

Personal Care Services Fraud Case

On June 9, 2026, Marcus Edward Olsen, 36, of Kenai was charged with Medical Assistance Fraud, Theft in the Second Degree, and Falsifying Business Records. The charges allege Olsen billed Medicaid approximately $4,418.84 for personal care services that were never provided. Investigators allege his timesheets claimed extensive caregiving services that were inconsistent with the recipient’s condition when later admitted to a hospital.

Respite and Personal Care Services Fraud Case

On June 8, 2026, Melia Tofaeono, 47, and Joshua Tofaeono, 36, of Anchorage were charged with Scheme to Defraud, Theft in the Second Degree, Falsifying Business Records, and two counts of Medical Assistance Fraud. The charges allege approximately $13,707.44 in fraudulent Medicaid claims for respite and personal care services that did not occur. According to the charging documents, Joshua Tofaeono claimed services during times he was working elsewhere or when the recipient was at school, while Melia Tofaeono certified that the services had been provided.

These cases were investigated by the Alaska MFCU investigators Jeanette Bartz, Scott Wright, and Randy Mayer with assistance from the FBI and IRS. All five cases are being prosecuted by Assistant Attorney General Heather Dyreng and Assistant Attorney General Leif Haugen.

The charges in this case are only allegations.  All defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt at trial.

About the Alaska Medicaid Fraud Control Unit

The Alaska MFCU is part of the Alaska Department of Law and is located in Anchorage. It is responsible for investigating and prosecuting Medicaid fraud, abuse, neglect, and financial exploitation of patients in any facility that accepts Medicaid funds. The unit is 75% federally funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services under a grant award totaling $1,979,808 for FY 2026. The remaining 25%, totaling $659,934, is funded by the State of Alaska. Citizens with information about suspected medical assistance fraud, patient abuse or neglect are encouraged to use the Alaska MFCU online complaint form or to contact the unit at (907) 269-6279.

Governor Signs Bill Creating License for “Complex Care Residential Homes” to Assist Individuals with Severe Behavioral and Medical Needs

The following is a press release provided by the Alaska Department of Health.

Today, June 25, 2026, Governor Mike Dunleavy signed House Bill 73 into law, advancing Alaska’s complex care work and helping address a longstanding gap in care for Alaskans with severe, complex behavioral health and medical needs.

“Alaska has long recognized a significant gap in care for individuals whose needs cannot be safely met at home or through existing community-based services, but who do not require hospitalization,” said Governor Mike Dunleavy. “House Bill 73 helps address that gap by creating a new level of care that will provide Alaskans and their families with more appropriate options, strengthen our continuum of care, and ensure some of Alaska’s most vulnerable residents can receive the support they need closer to home.”

HB 73 establishes a new license type called, “Complex Care Residential Homes”. This creates the framework for specialized settings that provide individualized care and support through a multi-disciplinary team in a home-like environment. The new level of care is focused on individuals with severe behavioral and medical needs that cannot be safely addressed in existing residential options and for whom long-term placement in institutional settings may not be appropriate.

“Complex Care Residential Homes will provide a new option for people and families who have often struggled to find the support that meets their needs,” said Department of Health Commissioner Heidi Hedberg. “This legislation creates a pathway for Alaskans with complex needs to receive individualized care in safe, supportive, home-like environments that promote stability, dignity, and quality of life.”

“This bill is a result of intense collaboration between the Department of Family and Community Services and the Department of Health,” said Department of Family and Community Services Commissioner Tracy Dompeling. “The Departments have been working together for several years to help serve the most vulnerable Alaskans and through the course of that work recognized the need for these new homes.”

For more information about Alaska’s Complex Care Initiative, visit https://dfcs.alaska.gov/Commissioner/Pages/Complex-Care/Complex-Care.aspx.

Full bill text here:

Dunleavy Passes State Budget Focused on Addressing Energy-Related Costs and School Capital Needs

The following is a press release provided by the Office of the Governor.

On June 24, 2026, Governor Mike Dunleavy signed the State of Alaska Fiscal Year 2027 budget into law, providing needed investments in school infrastructure and additional funding to districts to offset increased energy and related costs.

The unforeseen events in the Persian Gulf led to a temporary increase in oil prices over the past several months, leading to higher-than-expected revenues to the State.

However, the increase in oil prices resulted in dramatically higher costs for energy during the time of year when rural school districts purchase fuel in advance. Elevated energy prices also increased expenses tied to freight, construction materials, and essential maintenance. These pressures compounded existing capital needs, including deferred maintenance projects affecting such as roof repairs and facilities upgrades.

In response, the administration and the Legislature chose to direct a portion of the state’s one-time revenue toward addressing energy-related costs and overdue capital needs in schools across Alaska.

“This was an anomaly, not a trend, and it created both an opportunity and a responsibility,” Governor Dunleavy said. “While the state realized additional revenue, those same price pressures placed a real burden on school districts, particularly in rural Alaska. This budget makes targeted, responsible use of a temporary revenue increase to stabilize school facilities and address energy costs.”

The Governor’s vetoes preserve $57.8 million of state general funds and $31.7 million of designated general funds, federal receipts, and other funds.

The budget also provides $57 million for the Disaster Relief Fund and $60.6 million for the Fire Suppression Fund.

Documents for the FY 2027 budget are available on the Office of Management and Budget website.

Opinion: Reacting to Shelley Hughes’ Take on the PFD Debate

This article was originally published in Seward’s Folly, the author’s personal Substack on June 25, 2026, under the title “Shelley Hughes’ Big Blunder.”

By Greg Sarber

In Alaska’s Governor election, Shelley Hughes was on the short list of candidates I was considering. However, she just made a blunder so enormous that I wonder if her candidacy can survive, and I am now taking a second look at other people in the race.

On most issues, former state Senator Hughes has been spot on. On one subject in particular, that of grand jury rights in Alaska, Hughes took a pitch-perfect position on the issue and made an excellent proactive plan to address the problems brought about by SCO1993. So, it is with great shock that I read her opinion piece yesterday, in which she explained her position on the statutory Permanent Fund Dividend.

Senator Hughes attempted to find the middle road on the challenging statutory PFD issue, but instead made a huge mistake. Although not mentioning any other candidate by name, Hughes said that she thought the candidate promising one last large PFD payout and ending dividends forever would not pass constitutional muster. It is clear that Hughes referred to former governor Bill Walker’s plan and disagrees with it, but she can afford to be critical of Walker, as his candidacy is not likely to go anywhere. Based on his performance the last time he ran for governor, where he only got 2% of the vote in the general election, it is unlikely that Walker will make it past this year’s primary, not even with his obvious attempted bribe of the voters.

On the other side of the issue, Hughes said that candidates calling for a full PFD are engaging in political theater and are not serious about paying a full PFD. Hughes again did not mention any names, but the only candidates pledging to pay a full PFD are Edna DeVries and Bernadette Wilson, so it was those candidates she was referring to, and Hughes is right to be worried. Both women are strong conservative candidates who are resonating with voters and are a threat to her in the primary.

Hughes argued that paying a full PFD is impossible, and those supporting the idea need to present their plan showing where the money comes from and what services will be cut. Claiming that if they cannot do so, their comments are just empty campaign rhetoric. Hughes also argued that because the legislature has not funded a full PFD for the past 10 years, it is not feasible to do so in the future. She says it is pointless to threaten a veto of the legislature’s budget without a full PFD, as they would just override the governor’s veto.

Wow. That is all I can say. Wow.

She must not realize that former Governor Jay Hammond warned us this day was coming. He said that greedy legislators would not be able to keep their hands off the Permanent Fund, and the only way to protect it was to pay a dividend to the voters to ensure they have ownership of it. On this issue, Hughes is tone deaf and sounds like she is channeling the former legislator that she once was.

If candidate Hughes wants an example of leadership on difficult legislation, she should look at the actions of our current president. The SAVE America Act is important to President Trump. He believes it safeguards the integrity of our election system. The US Senate is unwilling to pass this legislation, but it wants to advance other legislation instead. President Trump is playing hardball. He said yesterday he will not sign either the Senate’s FISA extension bill or housing bill until they pass the SAVE Act.

President Trump is attempting to get recalcitrant legislators to act on his legislation. He may not succeed, but at least he is taking on the tough fight for legislation he believes in.

Hughes, by contrast, sounds like someone looking for a reason to fail. She claims that since the legislature will override her veto anyway, why bother trying to get a full PFD? That is the wrong attitude to take. The willingness of candidate Hughes to give up the battle before the fight even starts is astounding and disqualifies her for the job of governor.

If I were Edna DeVries or Bernadette Wilson, I would take advantage of Hughes’s mistake today. I would write an Op-Ed and send it to every political website and newspaper in Alaska, explaining not only why a full PFD is possible, but also why Shelley Hughes is wrong on the issue.

Hughes just made the biggest political blunder of her career, and her opponents are sure to capitalize on it. Voters will pay attention to Hughes’ faux pas; she had better rethink her position on this issue soon, or it may cost her the election.

Greg Sarber is a lifelong Alaskan. He is a petroleum engineer who spent his career working on Alaska’s North Slope. Now retired, he lives with his family in Homer, Alaska. Greg is a former board member of Alaska Gold Communications, Inc., the publisher of Must Read Alaska.