A two-person team fell approximately 1,000 feet while climbing Mt. Johnson, an 8,400-foot peak located in Denali National Park and Preserve’s Ruth Gorge, on the night of Thursday, April 25. One of the climbers died in the fall, while the other sustained serious traumatic injuries.
The roped climbers were ascending a route on Mt. Johnson known as “the Escalator,” a steep and technical alpine climb on the peak’s southeast face, the National Park Service said. The approximately 5,000-foot route involves navigating a mix of steep rock, ice, and snow.
Update: The person who died was Robbi Mecus. According to Emily Russell of NCPR public broadcasting, “She was beloved in the Adirondacks and has been a role model in the queer and outdoor community here [in the Adirondacks.] Public broadcasting reports, “Mecus was a leader among forest rangers in the Adirondacks, serving as a ranger since 1999. She was part of hundreds of searches and rescues over her career…”
The fall was witnessed by another climbing party on the route, who alerted the Alaska Regional Communication Center at approximately 10:45 p.m. The reporting party then descended to the accident victims and confirmed one climber had died in the fall. The responders dug a snow cave and attended to the surviving climber’s injuries throughout the night.
At 7 a.m. Friday morning, the park’s high altitude rescue helicopter pilot and two mountaineering rangers launched from Talkeetna. After an initial reconnaissance flight of the accident zone, a mountaineering ranger was short-hauled via long line to the awaiting climbers.
Together, the ranger and injured patient were short-hauled out to a flat glacier staging area, and then loaded into the helicopter for the flight to Talkeetna. The patient was transferred to a LifeMed air ambulance at the Talkeetna State Airport for further care.
Later that morning, the park helicopter and two rangers returned to the accident site to recover the body of the deceased climber, however they were turned back due to deteriorating weather and increasing cloud cover. Park rangers will return to the site when weather conditions allow.
The identity of the deceased climber is being withheld until family members are notified.
Alaska Superior Court Judge Adolf Zeman, who earlier this month ruled that the State of Alaska may not reimburse families for the correspondence studies of Alaska students, must stand for his first retention election in November. But there’s a process that starts much earlier that involves public input on his performance.
The Alaska Judicial Council takes public testimony on judges standing for retention and reviews the judges’ performance, then makes a recommendation to the voters on whether a judge should be retained.
On Wednesday, May 8, a public hearing on the all judges standing for retention in November will take place via Zoom, an internet-based meeting website.
The Judicial Council’s public hearing will begin at 4:30 p.m. via this Zoom link. Meeting ID: 863 2522 6382 Passcode: 072643.
Participants can phone into the meeting at 833-928-4610 to give their testimony.
Written comments are also accepted by the Judicial Council and will be shared with the judge only after the comments have been edited to remove information that might identify you. Use this email link below to send your comments: [email protected]
Zeman may find headwinds in his retention after he ruled that the 24,000 Alaska students in correspondence school programs may not receive support from the state because that is, by his logic, considered “private school,” something he interprets as banned by the Alaska Constitution.
Correspondence programs that are reimbursed with public funds are approved and administered by school districts.
“This court finds that there is no workable way to construe the statutes to allow only constitutional spending, Zeman wrote. He said the state laws that allow reimbursements for books and materials for students using correspondence studies “must be struck down in their entirety.”
The judge did not consider that books and materials used in government schools are also purchased from private companies. His ruling could impact private tutors and specialists that are now used by districts to supplement classroom learning.
Zeman has had other controversial rulings since he was appointed by Gov. Mike Dunleavy in 2020.
In November, he ruled that a regulation was illegal when he reenacted a ban on personal use jet skis or personal watercraft in Kachemak Bay. Fish and Game had repealed the regulatory ban, but Zeman stepped on that authority and said jet skis are prohibited in the Fox River Flats and Kachemak Bay “critical habitat areas.”
Fish and Game is appealing the ruling, saying it makes no sense that it, as an agency, has the authority to ban the jet skis but doesn’t have the authority to lift the ban based on current science. But the judge thought that, rather than the state having the authority, the court now has the authority to regulate, saying that although skiffs may be used in the area, personal watercraft may not be used.
The Alaska Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on the appeal of Zeman’s ban on personal watercraft at 11 a.m. on July 31.
On Zeman’s recent decision that recently raised the ire of homeschool and correspondence studies families, a coalition of families and affected education providers is forming to craft a constitutional clarification, so that students in Alaska can continue to use correspondence courses and have state support for those classes, said Bethany Marcum, state director for Americans for Prosperity Alaska.
In Alaska, to modify the state constitution, a simple majority vote of 50%+1 is required by the public. There is no direct path from the citizenry via the initiative process to change the Alaska Constitution; the Legislature must put forward the ballot question on behalf of the citizens.
Getting the Alaska Legislature to move on the issue may require a special session, as the regular session must end on May 15, and there’s not been a lot of progress on the question. Some legislators want to do a statutory “fix,” but the judge was clear that there can be no statutory fix to what he sees as a constitutional mandate.
The Alaska Judicial Council has a detailed explanation of the judge retention process and how to take part at this link.
As outlined by the Judicial Council’s website, about six months before the retention election, the council meets to discuss the information gathered for these judicial evaluations, and to decide whether each judge met performance standards during his or her most recent term in office. These performance standards, which are defined in the council’s bylaws, are:
Legal Ability. The judge demonstrates knowledge of substantive law, evidence, and procedure, and clarity and precision in their work.
Impartiality/Fairness. The judge demonstrates a sense of fairness and justice and treats all parties equally.
Integrity. The judge’s conduct is free from impropriety or the appearance of impropriety, and the judge makes decisions without regard to possible public criticism.
Judicial Temperament. The judge is courteous and free from arrogance, and the judge manifests human understanding and compassion.
Diligence and Administrative Skills. The judge is prepared for court proceedings, works diligently, and is reasonably prompt in making decisions.
A judge may request an interview with the council before the council members vote on the retention recommendations. The council may also ask judges to speak with the council members during the final stages of the evaluation process. Judges may respond to concerns raised during the evaluation process and the council may conduct personal interviews with presiding judges, attorneys, court staff, and others about the judge’s performance.
At the conclusion of the process, the council publicly votes whether to recommend that each judge be retained in office, based on its determination that each judge either met or did not meet performance standards. Four votes by council members are necessary for the Judicial Council to recommend for or against the retention of a judge. The chair of the council — the chief justice of the Alaska Supreme Court — does not vote except when a fourth vote is required for council action, in the event of a 3-3 tie.
The Judicial Council then publicizes the results of its evaluations at least 60 days prior to the election, as well as provide them to the lieutenant governor for inclusion in the state’s Official Election Pamphlet.
Each Alaska voter household receives the Official Election Pamphlet, which includes a page summarizing the Judicial Council’s performance evaluation of each judge. The council also posts non-confidential materials compiled during the evaluations on its web site.
One strategy for state officials looking to transition Washington’s transportation sector to electric vehicles is by subsidizing them with taxpayer dollars.
This week, Gov. Jay Inslee announced $45 million in subsidies through a Department of Commerce grant program for families deemed “low-income” to purchase an EV.
“Washingtonians really get it when it comes to electric vehicles,” Inslee said at a Wednesday news conference in Tukwila.
The program provides up to $9,000 for families to lease an EV, or $5,000 to purchase one. The grant program allows them to purchase either new or used EVs. The funding would be available to those who make 300% of the federal poverty level or less. And the grant will only stretch to about 9,000 people, if they all take the $5,000 deal being offered, or 5,000 people taking the $9,000 deal.
Inslee described it as a way to “democratize EVs. We’re not stopping here. We want to help the entire ecosystem, if you will, of electrifying our transportation fleet. We expect there are going to be a lot of folks that are going to be enjoying this benefit.”
Subsidies has been one recommendation made in the Electric Vehicle Coordinating Council’s transportation electrification strategy, in which residents would receive public dollars in exchange for giving up a fossil fuel vehicle to purchase an EV.
Inslee described it as a way to “democratize EVs. We’re not stopping here. We want to help the entire ecosystem, if you will, of electrifying our transportation fleet. We expect there are going to be a lot of folks that are going to be enjoying this benefit.”
The program has drawn criticism, including from Washington Policy Center Environmental Director Todd Myers. In a blog post, he argued that the subsidies won’t help reduce carbon emissions and is a waste of taxpayer money better spent on other environmental priorities, such as salmon recovery.
“This is one more example of how wasteful and ineffective Washington’s climate policy is,” he wrote. “It also reveals the disingenuousness of claiming that climate change is an ‘existential crisis’ while wasting tens of millions of dollars on projects that do nothing to address that crisis.”
The grant funds will be available to qualifying low-income residents in August.
The Alaska House on Wednesday passed legislation to bring property assessments into a more fair process.
Rep. Julie Coulombe of Anchorage introduced House Bill 347, a nearly identical companion to Senate Bill 242, introduced in the Senate earlier this legislative session by Sen. Jesse Kiehl of Juneau.
The bill is intended to restore trust in the property assessment process — trust that has been broke in at least Juneau and Haines, where properties were not only given extraordinary assessments, but when at least one property owner challenged the assessment, the assessor made a punishing decision to increase the assessment even more.
“HB 347 is my bill to put more guardrails around property assessments,” Coulombe said in a Facebook post. “We heard an overwhelming amount of testimony about why this bill is needed to protect property owners. I was grateful for support from my colleagues. “You can watch the floor session here:”
Current law allows for assessors to increase assessments on appeal, which has had a chilling impact on the public’s ability to challenge an assessment, as people fear retaliation.
While House Bill 347 still allows for flexibility at the local level, it creates some baseline standards for assessors.
Rep. David Eastman and Rep. Jesse Sumner voted against the bill, which received support from all other members of the House who were present. The bill has bipartisan support, however. Co-sponsors include Representatives Frank Tomaszewski, Mike Prax, Andi Story, Ben Carpenter, George Rauscher, Sara Hannan, Sarah Vance, Andy Josephson, Stanley Wright, Jamie Allard, Mike Cronk, and Dan Saddler.
The bill is now in the Alaska Senate. Senate Bill 242 has been stuck in Senate Community and Regional Affairs Committee since being referred there on Feb. 19. That committee is chaired by hardline leftist Sen. Forrest Dunbar.
The fertility rate in the United States has plunged to its lowest point on record, signaling a demographic shift, according to a report released Thursday by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
“The general fertility rate in the United States decreased by 3% from 2022, reaching a historic low. This marks the second consecutive year of decline, following a brief 1% increase from 2020 to 2021. From 2014 to 2020, the rate consistently decreased by 2% annually,” the CDC reported.
The new report, “Births: Provisional Data for 2023,” analyzes data from more than 99% of birth certificates issued during that year. The report shows a 2% decline from 2022, with 3,591,328 births recorded in 2023.
The CDC found that birth rates declined for women ages 20-39, were unchanged for females 10-14 and women 40-49, and were down for teenagers aged 15-19. The birth rate for women ages 20-24 reached a record low.
This is occurring at the same time transgenderism is reaching record highs. According to a study at the UCLA School of Law’s Williams Institute published in 2022, estimating there are 1.6 million transgender people 13 and older. The number of teenagers and young adults in the United States who identify as transgender has doubled in the past five years, the study shows.
The CDC and news agencies did not make the link. But according to the UCLA report, 18- to 24-year-olds make up 11% of the U.S. population but represent be 24% of the transgender community.
In 2021, the Biden Administration replaced the word “woman” with the phrase “birthing person” in the CDC maternal guidelines and other publications across its massive website.
Now, in a departure from its use of “birthing persons” as a description of women, both the CDC and news groups reported the statistics about the drop in births by using the terms “female” and “woman.” Birthing persons were nowhere in the report.
“After a steep plunge in the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic, the fertility rate has fluctuated. But the 3% drop between 2022 and 2023 brought the rate just below the previous low from 2020, which was 56 births for every 1,000 women of reproductive age,” CNN reported.
“After a steep plunge in the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic, the fertility rate has fluctuated. But the 3% drop between 2022 and 2023 brought the rate just below the previous low from 2020, which was 56 births for every 1,000 women of reproductive age,” wrote ABC News, also avoiding the term “birthing persons.”
In November, a story about births in Louisiana, ABC used the government term, “birthing people.”
“Among all states, birthing people living in Louisiana are the most vulnerable to ‘poor maternal health outcomes,'” the news agency said.
And on April 8, 2024, the CDC wrote, “During Black Maternal Health Week, learn how you can support pregnant people in your life to reduce factors that contribute to pregnancy-related complications and death.”
Both the government and news organizations said that the factors contributing to the low birth rate were housing affordability, job security, and the high cost of child care. They did not mention the indoctrination of youth and college students into what is sometimes described as anti-humanism as part of the radical environmental agenda taught in educational institutions.
In 2017, the Federal Aviation Administration revoked James M. Fejes Jr.’s pilot’s license, after he had been flying cannabis products to shops around Alaska with Flying High Investments, his company that was dissolved in 2020.
Fejes challenged the revocation in federal district court, saying the federal government does not regulate commerce within the state of Alaska. He was not crossing state lines with his bundles of weed, so interstate commerce laws didn’t apply. His arguments failed the Ninth Circuit.
“Although many states have legalized recreational marijuana, it continues to be a controlled substance federally,” Judge Ryan D. Nelson wrote in the ruling.
Fejes, who held a pilot certificate issued by the FAA, came under scrutiny after Alaska’s Alcohol and Marijuana Control Office (AMCO) reported him for violating regulations pertaining to the transportation of marijuana. Despite marijuana being legalized for most uses under Alaska state law, Fejes’s activities were deemed illegal under federal statutes.
The FAA invoked § 44710(b)(2), a provision that mandates the revocation of a pilot certificate when the individual knowingly engages in an activity related to controlled substances punishable by imprisonment for more than one year. Fejes’s use of aircraft for the distribution of marijuana fell squarely within this provision, leading to the revocation of his pilot certificate.
Fejes contested the revocation, arguing that the FAA lacked jurisdiction to regulate purely intrastate commerce such as marijuana delivery within Alaska. However, the panel rejected this argument, citing the constitutional authority of Congress to regulate interstate commerce, including the use of airspace.
Furthermore, Fejes attempted to invoke an exemption under FAA regulation 14 C.F.R. § 91.19, which allows for the transportation of controlled substances authorized by federal or state statutes. However, the FAA maintained that this exemption did not apply to Fejes’s case, as it relied on a different provision in law.
Finally, Fejes challenged the interpretation of § 44710(b)(2) by the FAA, arguing that his conduct did not align with enforcement priorities outlined in a memorandum on marijuana-related prosecutions. However, the panel dismissed this argument, emphasizing that a criminal conviction is not a prerequisite for the revocation of a pilot certificate under the statute.
The ruling fortifies the FAA’s authority to regulate aviation activities, even in the context of state laws that conflict with federal statutes.
While the U.S. Department of Justice has directed prosecutors to use discretion in spending resources to pursue marijuana crimes in states where pot is legal, the court opinion noted: That “does not alter marijuana’s status — it remains illegal under federal law.”
The Federal Trade Commission issued a final rule Tuesday to ban noncompete contracts that prevent employees from joining rival companies in a move that immediately drew a legal challenge.
U.S. Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Suzanne Clark said the measure was illegal and would hurt businesses and workers.
“The Federal Trade Commission’s decision to ban employer noncompete agreements across the economy is not only unlawful but also a blatant power grab that will undermine American businesses’ ability to remain competitive,” she said in a statement. “This decision sets a dangerous precedent for government micromanagement of business and can harm employers, workers, and our economy.”
Clark said the chamber would file suit as soon as possible.
“Since its inception over 100 years ago, the FTC has never been granted the constitutional and statutory authority to write its own competition rules,” Clark said. “Noncompete agreements are either upheld or dismissed under well-established state laws governing their use. Yet, today, three unelected commissioners have unilaterally decided they have the authority to declare what’s a legitimate business decision and what’s not by moving to ban noncompete agreements in all sectors of the economy.”
Federal officials said banning noncompete contracts would help employees and prevent employers from using exploitative practices. The FTC said the final rule is expected to result in higher earnings for workers and lower health care costs by up to $194 billion over the next decade. The agency also said it would lead to more patents.
“Noncompete clauses keep wages low, suppress new ideas, and rob the American economy of dynamism, including from the more than 8,500 new startups that would be created a year once noncompetes are banned,” FTC Chair Lina Khan said in a statement. “The FTC’s final rule to ban noncompetes will ensure Americans have the freedom to pursue a new job, start a new business, or bring a new idea to market.”
Noncompete contracts are used widely in the U.S. An estimated 30 million workers – about 20% – are subject to a noncompete contract, according to the FTC.
Under the FTC’s new rule, existing noncompetes for the vast majority of workers will no longer be enforceable after the rule’s effective date.
Existing noncompetes for senior executives – who represent less than 0.75% of workers – can remain in force under the final rule, but employers are banned from entering into or attempting to enforce any new noncompetes, even if they involve senior executives.
FTC officials said employers will be required to provide notice to workers bound by an existing noncompete that they will not be enforcing any noncompetes.
The Alaska education industry is trying to avoid changing the Alaska Constitution that would give parents more choices for their children.
It also wants to avoid the court system deciding the issue of whether parents have the right to choose the best education fit for their children. That’s because the education industry may lose in the courts.
On April 12, Alaska Superior Court Judge Adolf Zeman basically shut down Alaska’s correspondence school program. He ruled as unconstitutional the allotments which parents use to purchase educational services and materials from various vendors (AS 14.03.310).
Judge Zeman also ruled the individual learning plans (ILP) were unconstitutional (AS 14.03.300).
The correspondence school program provides more opportunities for parents to select the best education for their children. All correspondence schools are administered by the school districts. These school districts give a financial allotment to parents and parents select educational services/materials from both private and religious vendors.
The religious vendors can only provide non-sectarian services/materials to the parents. For example, a parent could buy a Latin course from Holy Rosary Academy. But that parent could not purchase a Bible or Catholic catechism course using their state allotment money.
The statute is very clear—only nonsectarian services/materials may be purchased.
Here is the specific wording: “A parent or guardian may purchase nonsectarian services and materials from a public, private, or religious organization with a student allotment provided…”.
The statute also says these materials and services “are approved by the school district.” The responsibility for ensuring that only nonsectarian purchases are made is on the school districts.
The school districts have the final say regarding whether a course is nonsectarian or not. They also have the final say if a course or material should be funded.
The school districts “own” the failure if they do not follow the law.
So, why did the National Education-Alaska file the lawsuit?
The NEA-AK and the education industry see hundreds of students leaving the brick-and-mortar schools and enrolling in these correspondence schools. That means less money and fewer NEA-AK union members are needed.
That is why the NEA-AK filed the lawsuit in the first place, using several individuals as the plaintiffs. One of the plaintiffs was the campaign manager for Anchorage School Board member Kelly Lessens.
Without allotments and ILPs, parents were left hanging. The Anchorage School District suspended paying the allotments to correspondence parents. But the ASD was still purchasing services/materials from private vendors, which Judge Zeman ruled unconstitutional.
The education industry is trying an end run to a constitutional amendment by telling the State Board of Education to issue an “emergency regulation”. They don’t want the people to vote on a constitutional amendment. Because they may well lose.
But the education industry may run into a brick wall because the Alaska Administrative Procedures Act controls the issuance of “emergency regulations”.
Alaska statute AS 44.62.250 defines the conditions of an emergency regulation. It states, ”a regulation or order of repeal may be adopted as an emergency regulation or order of repeal if a state agency makes a written finding, including a statement of the facts that constitute the emergency, that the adoption of the regulation or order of repeal is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, safety, or general welfare.”
The correspondence program issue does not meet the definition of “public peace, health, safety, or general welfare.
Emergency regulations are meant for natural disasters, national emergencies, and pandemics.
The Anchorage School District is taking the lead on this effort to demand that the State Board of Education & Early Development issue an emergency regulation.
The Anchorage Board of Education passed a resolution, Memo 151, at its April 23 meeting. It concludes that “The Anchorage School Board urges the State Board of Education and Early Development to meet as soon as possible and exercise the authority conferred on it by the Alaska Legislature to promulgate regulations that provide for constitutional correspondence study programs for the 2024-2025 school year and beyond.”
The important part of the resolution is the district wants the State to issue this “emergency regulation” forever. And thus, take it out of the courts to resolve.
Senators Bill Wielechowski and Loki Tobin also support this “emergency regulation” change to avoid the court system in an April 17 Facebook conversation.
The Alaska Senate is depending on Sen. Tobin, chair of the Senate Education Committee, to take the lead.
Interestingly, both Senators Tobin and Wielechowski have the lowest performing schools in the district. Why would they not want their district parents to choose the best education for their children? Don’t they want children in their districts to be able to read? To be able to achieve their maximum potential?
The education industry is aware that it might lose in the Alaska Supreme Court. And it will surely lose if/when the question goes to the U.S. Supreme Court. That’s because the SCOTUS has already decided this issue in its Espinoza v. Montanaruling.
The NEA-AK and its education industry supporters fear a constitutional amendment because they will lose in the court of public opinion.
Let parents choose. Let the people vote on a constitutional amendment.
The Alaska House is holding hearings on HJR028 in the House Judiciary Committee. This bill would amend the Alaska Constitution to provide more opportunities for Alaska’s children.
You can have a say. Will parents win or will the education industry win?
Election integrity hawks — myself among them— have spilled gallons of ink since 2020 exposing ballot drop boxes, “Zuckbucks,” and voting machine vulnerabilities, and conservatives are all the better prepared to face the 2024 election for those efforts. But there’s a massive front in this fight we can’t afford to overlook because we’re losing: voter registration.
If getting out the vote (GOTV) is the key to winning elections, registering voters is the key to effective GOTV. But doing it at scale takes money and coordination, something Republican strategists and donors have almost totally ignored.
As it stands, the left is more than a decade ahead in that race.
Beginning around 2008, “progressive” operatives discovered they could weaponize 501(c)(3) charities — the same part of the tax code as your local church or The Salvation Army — to identify and register tens of millions of new Democrat voters across the country purely by using demographics. Take it from the far-left Brennan Center, which birthed this scheme: To build a permanent Democrat majority, we must bring “millions of new voters onto the rolls through a modernized registration system — starting in 2010.”
A secret strategy memofrom 2015 asks mega-donors to fund “large-scale, multi-year voter registration programs” focused on “underrepresented” groups to “fundamentally reshape the electorate in as many as 13 states” — by 2020.
