Thursday, July 16, 2026
Home Blog Page 36

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.

House Energy Committee: AEA Advances Bradley Lake Expansion, Secures $206.5M Federal Grant for Cook Inlet Power, and Highlights $41M REF Demand

0

The Alaska House Energy Committee convened yesterday to receive a comprehensive update from the Alaska Energy Authority (AEA) on critical infrastructure projects, rural energy programs, and federal funding wins that are reshaping the state’s power landscape. Executive Director Curtis Thayer detailed progress on the Bradley Lake expansion, the Cook Inlet Power Link (CIP Link), the Power Cost Equalization (PCE) program serving 81,000 rural Alaskans, and Round 18 of the Renewable Energy Fund (REF), underscoring AEA’s role as a pivotal player in lowering costs and displacing fossil fuels.

Thayer opened with an overview of AEA’s owned assets—Bradley Lake, the Alaska Intertie, and the CIP Link—alongside administration of the $46 million PCE program. The PCE offsets rural rates above the urban benchmark of approximately $0.20/kWh up to $0.75/kWh, with some communities like Lime Village facing $1.75/kWh. AEA processes monthly applications and manages the roughly $1 billion PCE endowment, drawing from five-year average earnings and returning unspent funds to the Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation.

The Circuit Rider Program, staffed by just four specialists who travel in pairs and handle nearly 300 interactions annually, serves as the “911” for about 50 small communities lacking local utility support. Thayer flagged a looming challenge: the impending retirement of the AVTEC instructor responsible for bulk fuel and diesel generator training, with no immediate replacement identified.

Major capital projects dominated discussion. The Bradley Lake expansion, including the Dixon Diversion and a 16-foot dam raise, carries a $400 million price tag, with $20 million already allocated for pre-construction since 2022. Pre-construction activities include environmental studies, geotechnical boreholes, and a preliminary FERC license amendment filed last month. Construction is slated to begin May 2027, with commissioning targeted for December 2030. The project promises a 40-50% output increase, displacing 1.5 billion cubic feet (BCF) of natural gas annually and creating approximately 2,000 construction jobs per Northern Economics analysis. It will also synchronize with required 2035 FERC dam maintenance to avoid duplicate mobilization costs.

The CIP Link, a $413 million HVDC project featuring two 38-mile subsea cables (approximately 80 miles total, each weighing 30 pounds per foot), has secured $270 million—including a $206.5 million Department of Energy grant—leaving a $142 million gap. Spending of $125-126 million is projected for 2026-2027 and is fully funded, but the DOE seeks assurance for 2028 onward. The project must enter service by 2032 or risk losing the grant.

Financing strategies were outlined in detail. For Bradley Lake, options include USDA Rural Utilities Service loans (Treasury + 1/8%), tax-exempt bonds via the State Bond Bank (already reserving $142 million), DOE Title 17 financing, and traditional CFC bonds. Up to $100 million in federal Investment Tax Credits (ITC) could apply if the project qualifies under Treasury measurement standards for added capacity. CIP Link financing is more constrained, with USDA loans and CFC taxable bonds (around 6%) as primary avenues. No new legislative appropriations were requested for either project in FY27, though Thayer noted any available funds would prioritize closing the CIP Link gap.

The Renewable Energy Fund (REF) Round 18 drew significant attention. Twenty-nine projects request $41 million total for FY27 consideration, following $333 million in historical state investment that has delivered 110 operational projects and displaced 120 million gallons of diesel (roughly 13 million gallons annually). Thayer emphasized REF’s leverage: early grants often unlock larger federal matches. The governor’s budget amendment includes $0 for REF, prompting committee discussion on funding levels and options for the Finance Committee. Low-cost areas like Comprehensive Energy Plan Act (CEPA) are capped at $2 million, while high-cost areas can reach $4 million.

Federal support remains robust. AEA has received approximately $476 million in awards over the past four years, with $232 million in matches largely secured. The EPA’s $100 million bulk fuel grant (no state match) was sub-awarded $50 million to AEA and AVEC for the top 25 most vulnerable facilities. Additional USDA grants totaling $7 million were highlighted, reversing prior administration restrictions on fossil-fuel-related infrastructure.

Thayer identified micro-nuclear as a promising future technology. “Micro nuclear. That’s something that we’ve looked at… It’s not going to solve all the problems in rural Alaska, but ones of a certain size where we know that we can bring in… a power plant, and it’s there for 20 years, and we know what the cost of energy is going to be for the next 20 years,” said Thayer. Committee members requested follow-up on power-cost impacts, natural gas displacement metrics, and Northern Economics economic analyses.

The next session is scheduled for Thursday to discuss HB 328 and 369.

For Alaska’s energy future, today’s hearing signals strong momentum on hydro expansion and transmission while exposing vulnerabilities in rural training capacity and REF funding. Federal grants provide critical leverage, but timely legislative support and creative financing will determine whether projects deliver lower rates and greater resilience by 2030.

Alaska DNR FY27 Budget Hearing: Federal Funding Surge, AG Dept. in Limbo, and $1.8B Oil Royalties Spotlighted

0

The Senate Natural Resources Finance Subcommittee reviewed the Department of Natural Resources’ proposed FY2027 operating budget today, uncovering a strategic mix of federal windfalls, internal realignments, and unresolved legal questions over the transfer of agriculture programs. The governor’s proposal reflects a 2.7% overall increase from FY26, propelled by a 24% surge in federal funding totaling roughly $4.3 million, while trimming 30 positions department-wide.

Administrative Services Director Shannon Miller opened the presentation by noting the exclusion of the Division of Agriculture, now structured separately under the governor’s plan. General funds (unrestricted and designated) still anchor 61% of the $122 million core budget, with DNR boasting a decade-long average of generating $22 in revenue for every $1 of general fund invested. Designated receipts from park fees, mining leases, timber sales, and land disposals continue to fuel operations alongside interagency receipts and Mental Health Trust Authority funds.

Key line items include implementation of a statewide IT classification study affecting 29 positions at a $595,000 cost, the elimination of $175,000 in concluded Exxon Valdez Oil Spill Trustee Council authority, and a new $573,000 Mental Health Trust component for facilities maintenance. A permanent Forester IV position in Ketchikan, funded entirely by $160,000 in federal Good Neighbor Authority receipts, will expand timber sales capacity on Tongass National Forest lands under a new 10-year master agreement and emerging 30-year shared stewardship pact with the U.S. Forest Service.

The Division of Geological & Geophysical Surveys gains $5.8 million in federal USGS Earth MRI funds for critical minerals mapping—no state match required this year—shifting the long-running program from capital to operating status. Fire Suppression Preparedness receives a $1.5 million interagency receipt boost for all-hazard responses, while two long-vacant fire positions and roughly $193,000 transfer toward the new agriculture department.

The most contentious elements involve Executive Order 137 transfers: approximately $5.8 million and 17 positions from agricultural development, plus $3.9 million and 20 positions from the North Latitude Plant Materials Center. These moves remain in the governor’s December 11 budget submission despite a Superior Court ruling against the new department’s creation; a Supreme Court decision is pending. The legislature has already stripped the agriculture structure from its own operating budgets.

Deputy Commissioner Brent Goodrum addressed concerns directly during questioning. “We’re waiting for the Supreme Court to rule,” he told Sen. Bill Wielechowski (D-Anchorage) when asked whether the administration still advocated proceeding with the transfers.

Additional amended items include a net-zero realignment in the Division of Mining, Land & Water to shift funding toward more reliable program receipts for staff retention, and continuation of the three-year geothermal energy program in DGGS to leverage federal partnerships for baseload power development.

Division leaders showcased robust FY25 performance. Forestry sold 27.1 million board feet of timber (appraised at $764,000) and harvested 31.1 million board feet generating $2.8 million in receipts, while reconstructing 86 miles of forest roads. The division trained 235 new firefighters and 84 cadets, contained over 90% of critical fires with initial attack, and conducted 184 outreach events reaching nearly 96,000 Alaskans. Fire season projections remain neutral based on early El Niño indicators, though officials cautioned more clarity will emerge in April with snow-depth data.

DGGS, under new Director Dr. Erin Campbell (formerly Wyoming State Geologist), emphasized economic development and public safety through critical minerals mapping, Cook Inlet and North Slope energy studies, landslide and volcano monitoring, and a new hyperspectral scanner at the Geologic Materials Center. The division collaborates closely with the University of Alaska Fairbanks Geophysical Institute without duplication.

The Division of Mining, Land & Water reported $38.3 million in land-use revenue (up 1%), conveyed over 18,000 acres to municipalities, and sold 169 parcels generating $6.2 million. Upcoming conveyances include 1.4 million acres north of the Yukon River following revocation of Public Land Order 5150, plus nearly 360,000 acres potentially to the University of Alaska via federal land-grant processes. The ACORN geospatial network will nearly double for two-centimeter real-time accuracy.

Division of Oil & Gas highlighted $1.8 billion in royalty receipts last fiscal year, record lease-sale activity on the North Slope, and active Cook Inlet interventions via royalty modifications. No carbon sequestration revenue has materialized yet, but a new DOE-partnered subsurface data hub is now public to accelerate industry interest.

Subcommittee members requested detailed post-fire cost breakdowns (aviation vs. crews vs. logistics), updated fire-season projections in April, and contingency plans for potential unpaid suppression contracts stemming from last year’s vetoed supplemental funds. Goodrum assured lawmakers the state would continue lifesaving responses via emergency declarations regardless of immediate funding.

The hearing adjourned with several action items assigned, including timelines for carbon sequestration outreach and Cook Inlet drilling incentives. The outcome of the Supreme Court case on agriculture transfers and legislative handling of the governor’s budget structure will shape final FY27 appropriations in coming weeks.

House Education Committee Tackles Funding Woes: Waive H-1B Fees to BSA Increases

1

The House Education Committee convened for a session that blended celebration of educational innovation with urgent legislative action. The meeting spotlighted Alaska’s 2026 Teacher of the Year, Pete Daley, and his groundbreaking “Girls in Welding” program before delving into three key pieces of legislation: House Joint Resolution 39 (HJR39), House Bill 261 (HB261), and House Bill 374 (HB374). These bills, while distinct in focus, are interconnected threads in a broader effort to stabilize Alaska’s public education system amid declining enrollment, rising costs, and persistent teacher shortages. HJR39 addresses international teacher recruitment by easing H-1B visa fees, HB261 seeks to provide fiscal predictability through reformed student counting methods, and HB374 proposes a direct infusion of funds via an increase in the Base Student Allocation (BSA).

The session’s narrative underscores how these bills are not isolated fixes but complementary measures: HJR39 supports workforce stability by facilitating foreign teacher hires, HB261 enhances budgeting certainty to aid retention and planning, and HB374 provides the raw financial resources needed to implement both.

Part 1: HJR39 – Waiving H-1B Visa Fees for Teachers

The committee’s swift handling of House Joint Resolution 39 highlighted a targeted approach to Alaska’s teacher shortage crisis. Sponsored by Representative Galvin (NA-Anchorage), HJR39 urges the federal government to waive the $100,00 H-1B visa fees for teachers in the state, a move designed to make it easier for school districts to recruit qualified educators from abroad. In a state where teacher turnover hovers at 28%—far above the national average of 8%—this resolution addresses a critical gap in the workforce pipeline.

During the brief discussion, Co-Chair Himschoot (NA-Sitka) noted that no amendments had been received and public testimony had already been heard in a prior session. With no further inquiries from members, Co-Chair Story (D-Juneau) moved the resolution forward, and it passed without objection, accompanied by individual recommendations and an attached fiscal note.

This resolution’s passage underscores the interconnectedness of the day’s legislative agenda. Alaska’s rural and urban districts alike struggle with recruitment, as evidenced by later testimonies on funding shortfalls leading to staff cuts.

In essence, HJR39 acts as a recruitment booster shot for a system bleeding talent. Its relation to the other bills is clear: stable funding (HB374) and predictable budgeting (HB261) are futile without enough teachers to staff classrooms. As Rep. Galvin implied, the resolution builds on prior discussions, positioning it as a proactive step in a holistic education strategy.

Part 2: HB261 – Reform Student Count Method for Funding

Shifting to more complex funding mechanics, the committee devoted significant time to HB 261, sponsored by Co-Chair Story. This act aims to enhance education funding predictability by allowing districts to choose between a three-year average or the previous year’s student count for funding calculations. In a state grappling with enrollment declines—down 3% statewide—and growth in pockets like Mat-Su and Kenai Peninsula, HB261 seeks to mitigate fiscal volatility, enabling better budgeting, teacher contracts, and retention.

Co-Chair Story explained the bill’s origins in a 2015 recommendation from the Governor’s Education Task Force. Districts would select their count by July 1, providing certainty for March teacher contracts. Using hypothetical examples, she clarified the three-year average (e.g., 2022-2024 counts for FY26) versus the previous year (2025). This choice benefits stable or declining districts with the average, while growing ones opt for the recent count.

Key discussions revealed proposed amendments for a forthcoming committee substitute (CS). To address growth concerns raised by Rep. Elam (R-Nikiski), Story suggested authorizing immediate funding for significant fall influxes above a set percentage. She also announced grandfathering “hold harmless” provisions for districts currently benefiting, a Task Force recommendation. Intensive student counts—costing $43 million initially—would use the previous year but include a February 15 “true-up” to fund new arrivals, avoiding double-counting fears.

She removed a $5.8 million alternative school funding provision, citing fiscal climate, suggesting a separate bill. On staffing, she noted mid-year student moves force districts to absorb costs, as contracts prevent teacher transfers. Elam requested a 10-year impact snapshot, which Story committed to pursuing, encouraging districts to run their own numbers.

As Story emphasized, “These costs are happening right now in districts,” shifting burdens back to the state aligns with HB374’s funding boost. Without HB261, even increased BSA might not prevent mid-year shortfalls, underscoring the bills’ interdependence.

Part 3: HB374 – Boosting the Base Student Allocation to Prevent Cuts and Closures

The meeting’s crescendo focused on House Bill 374, sponsored by the committee, proposing a $630 BSA increase to $7,280 per student. Presented by Representative Himschoot (NA-Sitka), the bill addresses inflation-eroded funding, with the current $6,650 BSA equating to just $4,711 in FY11 dollars. Himschoot invoked the constitutional “shall” for public schools, noting last year’s $700 hike—only $20 above prior one-time funding—fell short of the $1,800 needed for purchasing power parity.

Rising costs dominate: Anchorage’s property insurance up 42%, liability 139%, health benefits 33%; Sitka’s energy 45%. New mandates like the Reads Act add burdens, with Kuspuk spending $403,000 on interventions and tutoring. Himschoot highlighted education’s people-driven nature, with 88% of budgets on wages/benefits, and turnover costing $20,000-$30,000 per teacher, plus unquantifiable learning losses.

Enrollment drops—3% statewide, steeper in some districts—exacerbate fixed costs for facilities and insurance. Himschoot calculated the $630 based on the mean deficit of the five largest districts: Anchorage ($90M), Mat-Su ($22M), Fairbanks (surplus after cuts), Juneau ($11.8M), Kenai ($8.6M). This won’t fully close gaps but prevents deeper cuts.

Principal David Nogg reported a $142.4M-$146.8M statewide deficit from 43 districts, forcing his school to cut teachers, an assistant principal, and electives, shifting to a six-period day. “This isn’t hyperbole; it’s a devastating reality,” he said, urging BSA support. Principal Elizabeth Kwame warned Sterling Elementary’s closure would consolidate 110 students into classes of 30, harming vulnerable learners. “Without additional funding, schools like mine are set to close.”

Committee dialogue addressed formula flaws (Rep. Elam) and accountability (Rep. Schwanke (R-Glenallen)). Himschoot agreed on long-term fixes but stressed immediate BSA action: “What is the opportunity cost of doing nothing?” Rep. Dibert (D-Fairbanks) shared Fairbanks’ struggles—six closures, 40-student classes—while Rep. Eischeid (D-Anchorage) questioned if flat funding improves outcomes, with Himschoot replying, “I think it’s common sense.”

A public hearing is set for March 11 at 5:00 PM, with a joint session with the State Board of Education at 8:00 AM.

HB374 anchors the trio: its funding directly enables HB261’s predictability and HJR39’s recruitment. Without it, reforms falter amid deficits, as testimonies showed. The bills collectively combat out-migration, retain talent, and sustain programs.

By easing teacher imports, stabilizing counts, and increasing funds, they form a cohesive response to fiscal pressures, ensuring schools remain open and effective. As Himschoot noted, inaction risks losing families and educators, threatening the state’s future.

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

By Michael Tavoliero

The 2009 Alaska Education Plan and the 2018 Alaska Education Challenge look, on paper, like serious efforts to rethink K–12. The Plan billed itself as the state’s “first blueprint for public education,” promising a vision to guide spending and give citizens a basis for accountability. The Education Challenge, adopted nine years later, promised to “transform our public education system” around three commitments: increasing student success, supporting responsible and reflective learners, and cultivating safety and well‑being. 

Together, they represent years of summits, committees, and “action plans” involving hundreds of Alaskans and millions of dollars. What neither document ever does is grapple with the three structural chokepoints: statutory school‑board terms and election timing that insulate boards from meaningful voter course correction; the PERA carve‑out that locks districts into a single, mandatory bargaining framework; and APOC’s campaign‑finance regime, which tilts the playing field toward permanent insiders and makes grassroots challenges procedurally hazardous. 

Repeating the same blind spot 

The 2009 Plan promised a “basis for accountability to the public,” inviting Alaskans to “participate in the goal‑setting process and own the results.” It organized its work around “World‑Class Schools,” “Community, Culture and Family,” and “Student Health and Safety,” aimed at college‑ and career‑ready graduates, strong school–family partnerships, and safe learning environments. 

Alaska’s Education Challenge echoes this, repeating the mission of “an excellent education for every student every day,” highlighting achievement gaps and low test scores, urging Alaskans to “demand great schools,” and outlining strategic priorities—amplifying student learning, modernizing the system, and inspiring tribal and community ownership—through 13 recommendations and example action plans. 

Both documents focus on goals, outcomes, and programmatic strategies—early learning, standards alignment, personalized learning, trauma‑engaged practice, professional academies, and statewide collaboration—while never acknowledging that the legal structures of governance, labor, and political participation may be the main barriers to achieving those goals. The state invites citizens to “own the results” while leaving them almost no lawful way to change the system that produces those results. 

Accountability without power 

Both the 2009 Plan and the Education Challenge constantly invoke “accountability,” telling the public they can “measure performance against these goals,” rely on “multiple measures” of success, and adjust course. Yet both documents assume “the public” can hold school boards responsible without admitting that board timing, staggering, and ballot placement are locked in statute and beyond local revision. Even as the Education Challenge promotes “systemic collaboration” and “self‑governance compacting,” it never addresses the core question of who sits on the governing body and when they are accountable to voters. 

Flexibility on a fixed cost base 

The 2009 Plan praises “alternative pathways to student success,” early childhood programs, and “world‑class schools” with flexibility to meet individual needs, while the Education Challenge pushes “personalized learning,” “modernization,” and “enabling resources,” so districts can adapt. All of this assumes districts can meaningfully reconfigure their largest cost driver: labor. Yet the PERA carve‑out denies K–12 boards the choice other political subdivisions have over bargaining frameworks. They cannot opt out, adopt a different statutory model, or change it by charter or local initiative. Neither document acknowledges that its vision for flexible, modern schools sits on top of a wage and bargaining structure locked behind a one‑way statutory door. 

Participation scripted from above 

Both the 2009 Plan and Alaska’s Education Challenge lean heavily on the language of partnership and engagement. The Plan insists, “Choice without knowledge has no meaning.” The Challenge celebrates “unity and collaboration,” tribal and community ownership, and parents and educators as co‑authors of a better system. But genuine ownership requires more than listening sessions; it requires the power to organize, fund, and sustain campaigns that can unseat incumbents and change policy. 

Here, APOC’s campaign‑finance regime becomes decisive. Neither document mentions its impact on who can realistically participate. They speak as if all stakeholders share equal procedural footing, while the finance framework ensures that those best positioned to “own the results” are the institutions most aligned with the status quo. 

Exhibit A and Exhibit B 

If the 2009 Plan is Exhibit A in Alaska ignoring its own legal architecture, Alaska’s Education Challenge is Exhibit B. The Challenge frankly acknowledges achievement gaps, low test scores, absenteeism, and the need for trauma‑engaged schools, and offers detailed action plans, strategic “crosswalks,” and even self‑governance compacts with tribes. Yet it never asks whether the current school‑board election structure lets communities replace boards that resist change, whether a one‑size‑fits‑all labor framework can support truly local, culturally responsive schools, or whether APOC’s rules make it too costly and risky for ordinary citizens to challenge entrenched interests. 

In that sense, the Education Challenge does not fix the 2009 Plan’s blind spots; it perfects them, expanding the vocabulary of commitments and phases while leaving the three chokepoints untouched and inviting Alaskans to “pioneer” a new system without giving them the legal tools to change the old one. 

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

House Labor and Commerce Debates HB 350: Proposed Income Tax on High-Revenue S-Corps and LLCs

1

During Monday’s House Labor and Commerce Committee meeting, lawmakers discussed HB350, a measure sponsored by Representative Fields (D-Anchorage) that would impose a state income tax on S-corporations and LLCs generating over $25 million annually in taxable income. The bill sparked debates on tax equity, economic competitiveness, and the state’s outdated fiscal framework, reflecting broader concerns about funding public services.

Evan Anderson, staff to Rep. Fields, provided a recap, explaining the bill targets “qualified entities” like S-corps and LLCs taxed as partnerships, which currently do not pay state income taxes despite significant revenues. “This bill would impose a 9.4% state income tax on qualified entities with more than $25 million in annual taxable income,” Anderson stated.

Fields elaborated on the rationale, highlighting the growth of S-corps since Alaska repealed its income tax in 1980. He pointed to Hilcorp as an example of a successful S-corp that benefits from the current system. “Hilcorp has invested hundreds of millions, billions of dollars in development. They’ve done a great job getting gas out of Cook Inlet,” Fields acknowledged. However, he argued the tax code is “way outdated” and fails to reflect modern business structures. “I don’t think when the legislature eliminated the income tax, they foresaw Hilcorp, and we’re going to have other S-corps come in here,” he said, emphasizing the need for “greater parity” in taxation for large corporations.

The discussion revealed committee members’ mixed views on fairness and impacts. Representative Sadler (R-Eagle River) noted Hilcorp’s outsized role: “Hilcorp has the largest; I probably assume that revenue wise they’re doing the most under an S-corp, so Hilcorp would be the biggest payer of taxes under this bill.” Fields agreed but stressed long-term planning: “They would right now, but I want to look ahead.”

Representative Coulombe (R-Anchorage) raised concerns about equity and potential deterrents to investment. ” I am not sure that the problem is funding core services; it’s managing our core services. They’re not being managed well, and it’s very expensive,” she countered, suggesting the bill might penalize companies like Hilcorp that have committed heavily to Alaska. Fields responded by advocating for incentives like royalty modifications in Cook Inlet to encourage production, while modernizing the code: “We have to modernize our tax code around S-corps and C-corps.”

Fields framed HB 350 as a step toward sustainability: “I introduced the bill because I don’t like people criticizing Hilcorp. I support Hilcorp; I think they do great work.” He called for balancing competitiveness with revenue needs, noting Alaska’s low overall tax burden but reliance on oil.

As the state faces budget gaps projected at $300–500 million for FY27, HB 350 could reshape corporate taxation. Critics worry it might drive businesses away, but proponents see it closing loopholes in a system unchanged since the 1980s.

Shelley Hughes: Real Solutions, Real Support, and a Campaign Built for Alaska

By Shelley Hughes, 2026 Candidate for Alaska Governor and Former Alaska State Senator

Originally published February 17, 2026, by the Alaskans for Hughes campaign.

As the first round of campaign finance reports are released, I want to speak directly to Alaskans about what this campaign is—and what it is not.

From the beginning, my focus has been on Alaska: building a serious campaign team, meeting Alaskans in every region of our state, and developing real, workable policies to address the challenges we face. This campaign is about real solutions, not soundbites.

While some campaigns have focused on fundraising more than anything else in this first stretch and have chosen to measure success by dollars raised, I believe leadership is measured by trust earned, ideas developed, and time spent listening to the people we seek to serve. I’m very proud of my fundraising results, but I have invested my energy traveling the state, sitting down with families, workers, business owners, and community leaders, and putting forward detailed action plans for Alaska.

That work is reflected in the long-form policy videos we have already released, with more to come in the months ahead.

That work was also reflected at the recent Alaska Young Republicans State Convention, where I was ranked first among Republican candidates for governor in their straw poll. In other informal polls, I’ve also placed at or near the top, and in more rigorous polling, as one of the top three Republicans to make it onto the November ballot. This support confirms what I am hearing across Alaska: Republicans are ready for a governor who is prepared, grounded, and focused on results.

Our campaign is also being run the Alaska way—stretching every dollar and powered by an incredible team of volunteers who believe in this mission. History shows that in Alaska, the candidate who raises or spends the most money does not always win. Senator Dan Sullivan was outspent five-to-one in 2020 and prevailed. More recently, in the 2024 congressional race, early reports showed Mary Peltola raising more than $2 million compared to just over $300,000 for Nick Begich, and she ultimately outspent him by a massive margin—yet Alaskans chose leadership and vision over fundraising totals. Alaskans vote for substance, not spreadsheets.

I am running for governor because Alaska deserves serious leadership, real plans, and a governor with a proven track record of getting things done. Together, we will build a stronger Alaska, a place where opportunities abound and Alaskans can live affordable and rewarding lives.

I also bring real experience to this effort. Over the course of my legislative races, I have raised hundreds of thousands of dollars in support of my work, and I understand what it takes to build a strong, competitive fundraising operation. As this campaign transitions into its next phase, we are well positioned to do exactly that. Despite the fact that my senate resignation was right before the holidays, we are off to an excellent fundraising start. Things will only ramp up from here!

I’ve made a deliberate choice to spend my early months focused in Alaska—not in D.C., not dialing for dollars outside the state. Our problems won’t be solved by outsiders or from a fundraiser thousands of miles away; they’ll be solved by leaders who show up, listen, and do the work.

That said, this campaign does need support to continue growing and to compete all the way through Election Day. I will be coming to communities across the state for fundraisers and events, and I invite you to attend, get involved, and contribute if you are able. If you’d like to know when I’ll be in your area, please contact the campaign and we will connect you with your regional chair.

This resonating message is why our campaign is building momentum—the future we are working toward is what Alaskans want. Fence-sitters won’t choose the next governor; those who are willing to take a stand will. I respectfully request that you take a stand with me and for a strong Alaska.

This op-ed was voluntarily submitted by the Alaskans for Hughes campaign and not solicited by Must Read Alaska. All gubernatorial candidates 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.