Saturday, October 17, 2026
Home Blog Page 99

Zack Gottshall: Power Grab in Plain Sight: FCC Staff Move to Silence Anchorage’s Neighborhoods

17

By ZACK GOTTSHALL

Something serious is happening inside the Federation of Community Councils (FCC)—and Anchorage’s residents should be paying attention.

The FCC’s executive staff have introduced draft bylaws that would eliminate the voting power of every community council delegate and consolidate control under a small, unelected Board of Directors. The proposal, dated October 10, 2025, would replace the long-standing board-of-delegates model—where every neighborhood council has a vote—with a corporate-style structure in which just seven to eleven individuals make all decisions.

This is not reform. It is a deliberate move to remove authority from the very people the FCC was created to support.

For nearly fifty years, Anchorage’s Community Councils have been the foundation of local participation in city government. Their purpose is clearly defined in law. Anchorage Municipal Code 2.40.020, which implements Article VIII of the City Charter, guarantees citizens “a direct and continuing means of participation in government and local affairs” and ensures “maximum community involvement and self-determination.”

Each council—whether in Fairview, Spenard, Eagle River, or Girdwood—elects its own officers and sends a delegate to the FCC. Together, those delegates represent every neighborhood in Anchorage, guiding how the FCC’s municipal grant funds are used to support public meetings, communication, and recordkeeping.

The Municipality of Anchorage’s own reference guide, Community Councils 101, is explicit about the FCC’s role:

“The FCC is not recognized in the charter or municipal code; the organization is granted money by the Assembly to provide support to the community councils.”

That means the FCC exists to assist, not to command. It has no statutory authority. The councils are recognized by law; the FCC is not.

The proposed bylaw changes reverse that relationship. By eliminating delegate votes, FCC staff are positioning themselves—and a handful of board members—to direct how public funds are spent and how community issues are prioritized. Delegates who now make motions and shape agendas would be reduced to passive observers.

That change violates the purpose of AMC 2.40.020 (A)–(B), which was enacted to keep citizen participation direct and continuous. Removing delegate authority inserts a private layer between the community and local government—an insulated intermediary with no legal accountability to the public.

Anchorage’s neighborhoods have long been able to bring forward concerns—from homelessness to road safety, zoning, and drainage—through their councils. The FCC’s staff now propose to take those voices out of the equation.

That is not efficiency. It is control.

The FCC is funded by the Anchorage Assembly to support neighborhood participation. If its own staff rewrite bylaws to override those neighborhoods, they’re acting beyond the purpose of that public grant. The Assembly allocates taxpayer money to strengthen councils’ advisory role—not to fund an internal bureaucracy that limits it.

If implemented, this new structure would turn the FCC from a service organization into an unaccountable management board. That is not what the Charter envisioned when it promised “maximum community involvement.”

Anchorage’s Assembly members should not let this proceed quietly. They should review the proposed bylaws before adoption, ensure the FCC remains aligned with its grant purpose, and withhold further funding if it does not. The Municipal Ombudsman should also evaluate whether the proposal conflicts with the Charter’s guarantee of direct citizen participation.

This is a question of governance, not convenience. The FCC staff were hired to serve the councils, not to rewrite the system that keeps those councils free and self-determining.

Anchorage’s neighborhoods have earned their voice in city affairs. It should not be handed away to a small group operating without a public mandate.

The next FCC Board of Delegates meeting will be held on Wednesday, October 15, 2025, from 6:00–8:00 p.m. at the FCC Conference Room and via Zoom (Meeting ID: 896 0052 8663). The agenda includes the “Introduction of Draft Bylaws” as a discussion item for delegates, with revisions expected to return for a potential vote in December. Residents and council members are encouraged to attend and provide comment.

Zack Gottshall is a retired U.S. Army Intelligence Officer, a Commissioner on the Alaska State Commission for Human Rights, Vice President of the Taku/Campbell Community Council, and a small business owner in Anchorage, Alaska.

Remnant of Typhoon Halong Wrecks Western Alaska 

14

Flooding in Kipnuk, Kwigillingok, Napakiak, and other communities around Western Alaska has displaced over 1,000 people from their homes. First responders from the Alaska National Guard, Alaska State Troopers and the U.S. Coast Guard rescued 51 people on Sunday, Oct. 12. A woman from Kwigillingok died in the flood. Authorities said yesterday that two other Kwigillingok residents are still missing. The flooding originated from Typhoon Halong which hit Japan on Oct. 9.  

Yesterday, Oct. 13, Senate President Gary Stevens (R-Kodiak) issued the following statement regarding the terrible flooding:  

“The images and reports coming from Kipnuk, Kwigillingok, Napakiak, and all the communities around Western Alaska are deeply concerning. Our thoughts are with the families who have been displaced, those injured, and the communities working tirelessly to recover from this unprecedented storm. 

“The Senate Majority commends the first responders, the Alaska National Guard, U.S. Coast Guard, and local leaders who have rescued dozens of residents, helped thousands of displaced Alaskans, and continue to work under extremely dangerous conditions.  

“The State of Alaska has mobilized all available resources to provide emergency relief, shelter, and essential supplies to those affected. As recovery efforts continue, the state, along with the federal government and all Alaskans, will continue to coordinate in support of these communities. 

“The path for Western Alaska to recover will be long and will require a lot of work. We encourage all Alaskans to assist through volunteer support, donations, or other means as we continue to go through this storm. As Alaskans always do in times of adversity, we pull together and help our neighbors.” 

“I Forgive Him” – Erika Kirk Reflects Christ’s Unfathomable Mercy 

11

At least 90,000 people crowded into the State Farm Stadium in Glendale, Arizona for Charlie Kirk’s memorial on September 21. Thousands more overflowed into nearby venues. An estimated 200,000 people attended in person from the stadium and overflow venues or tuned in online.  

One of the most sincere, shocking, and tear-jerking moments in the memorial was Erika Kirk publicly forgiving her husband’s assassin. Erika referenced Luke 23:34, the verse where Jesus Christ, while hanging on the cross, forgives his own murderers. Then, struggling to choke back tears and asking God for strength, she publicly forgave Tyler Robinson for killing her husband and the father of her two children, the well-beloved Charlie Kirk. 

“The answer to hate is not hate. The answer we know from the Gospel is love, always love,” Erika stated. 

This was no show of political theatre or mere Christian rhetoric. With the words “I forgive him,” Erika reflected God’s true and abounding love and mercy. 

In addition to being Turning Point USA’s new CEO and Chair of the Board, Erika Kirk also serves as the Founder and Owner of Everyday Heroes Like You, Biblein365, and PROCLAIM streetwear. She also hosts the “Midweek Rise Up” podcast. 

Watch here: ‘Answer to hate is not to hate’: Erika Kirk says she forgives Charlie Kirk’s shooter

Natalie Spaulding, a 2025 Hillsdale College graduate, recently joined the Must Read Alaska team. 

Sen. Sullivan Renews Hope for Wrangell’s Harbor Revitalization Project 

1

On June 27, 2024, the City and Borough of Wrangell sent out a press release announcing it had received a $25 million grant to help rebuild its harbor through the Harbor Basin Revitalization and Transportation Resiliency Project. The grant is part of the Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity program (RAISE).

Now, over a year later, what has become of Wrangell’s harbor revitalization project? Well, there has been little progress. In a meeting with Senator Dan Sullivan on Oct. 4 this year, city officials blamed the project’s slow progress on the National Environmental Policy Act’s (NEPA) inefficient processing.

Senator Sullivan said the project piqued his interest because it helps serve the executive order titled “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential” which President Trump signed on his first day of office. Trump’s order states: “The State of Alaska holds an abundant and largely untapped supply of natural resources including, among others, energy, mineral, timber, and seafood. Unlocking this bounty of natural wealth will raise the prosperity of our citizens while helping to enhance our Nation’s economic and national security for generations to come.” Revitalizing Wrangell’s harbor helps accomplish these aims by significantly supporting the backbone of Wrangell’s commercial life. 

“This is giant for this community,” Sullivan said. “We don’t want to waste a day, we don’t want a 10-year NEPA, we don’t even want a two-year NEPA. We want a six-month NEPA.” 

With Sullivan’s attention to the project, city officials gain hope that the harbor revitalization effort will not only get off the ground but soon be completed, creating great benefits for Wrangell citizens and Alaskan commerce. 

Natalie Spaulding, a 2025 Hillsdale College graduate, recently joined the Must Read Alaska team.

Alaska’s Permanent Fund: The Great Debate

18

The People of Alaska vs. The Legislature

Part I: Inflation-Proofing: Where’s the Problem?

By JON FAULKNER

Author’s Note: This is the first of a series that frames Alaska’s “Great Debate” regarding Alaska’s Permanent Fund. The series will invite debate but promote a protective view of both the management of the corpus, and the original dividend plan. We start this series with inflation-proofing, a topic which has broad consensus and clear legal direction.   

Alaskans feel the effects of inflation.

We all know the effects of inflation, how it robs each of us of purchasing power, especially the poor.  Fund managers, legislators, Alaska citizens—we all agree that inflation-proofing the Permanent Fund is wise.  

Alaskans understand what it takes to inflation-proof.

To inflation proof means to follow a strategy designed to protect the purchasing power of the Permanent Fund against the eroding effects of inflation. One such strategy is to invest in assets that are more likely to increase in value at a rate equal to or exceeding inflation, such as real estate or Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities.

But once an investment strategy is implemented, there are only two ways to inflation-proof. Option one is to deposit hard cash to the main corpus of the Fund annually to offset the impact of inflation.  Option two is not to deposit hard cash, but instead to calculate the value of the Fund portfolio annually, and assuming the value has increased at a rate at least equal to inflation, declare such increase as de-facto inflation-proofing.

There is a distinction between these two options that matters to Alaskans. Option one is conservative, meaning ‘safe”. Option two, while logical, does not impose fiscal discipline—which politicians hate. Yes, we might achieve positive returns, but any so-called “unrealized gain” is equity, not cash, and until such gains are monetized and added back to the corpus of the Fund, inflation proofing has not actually occurred.  Years of low returns combined with high inflation, such as we have experienced, confirm the risk. Only option one unequivocally secures the public trust—and did for many years until our modern legislature changed course.

Inflation-proofing should be non-negotiable.

Inflation proofing should be consistent, in cash, “off the top”, and the Legislature’s first priority.  Deposits should NOT be linked to annual budget prioritization.   

When the legislature or Fund board talks about how investment returns that exceed inflation are “automatically inflation proofing”—they are misleading you.  Alaskans know better; we want the cash “in the bank” and off-limits, not an I.O.U.

Inflation proofing is the law.

That’s right, the law! The legislature pretends to be victims of “contradictory” statutes, as though they aren’t accountable for both creating the problem—and not fixing it! Who among our legislators admits to flouting the law, or will stand firm to follow it?    

The simple truth is the Legislature is required by statute annually to inflation proof the Permanent Fund. Their mandate in AS 37.13.145(c) is clear. The formula they are to use is crystal clear: transfer enough money from the Earnings Reserve Account (ERA) to the Fund’s corpus every year to cover inflation. Simply put, this rule implements option one; it transfers cash from realized gains to the corpus of the Fund, where the legislature can’t touch it. This rule, enacted in 1982, and has withstood the test of time.

The legislature flouts the law.

The legislature’s history of inflation-proofing is published here, which shows that in the ten years from 2016-25, they failed to deposit any money at all in half the years. (Some records show a deposit of $250m in 2018–half needed to meet the law)  In 5 out of the last 10 years, deposits were statutorily sufficient, but the net effect has been to erode Alaska’s wealth fund.  Since 2016, the legislature has failed to deposit approximately $2.4 billion needed to meet the law.

High returns are great, but never a substitute for protecting the public trust.    

The legislature is pursuing option two, but the law, 30-year historic precedent, and the public interest all confirm option one as the ONLY course.  Between 2010 and 2025, the CPI changed from ~218 to ~338, indicating inflation of 55%. Thankfully, the Fund’s 2010 Corpus of $32 billion has grown to $72 billion today, outpacing inflation. So where is the problem?  The problem is not the outcome, it’s the broken process—and promise. The truth is the legislature has abandoned fiscal discipline, just like our federal government. During the 16- year span above, based on APFC’s website,  inflation deposits amounted to $14.85 billion— short of the $17.6 billion required by law.  Where would the Fund be today if prior legislatures, since 1983, had not consistently followed option one and the law?   

Stay informed. Follow MRAK’s series on this topic.   

How does the legislature get away with this, as they did last session when the Democrat-led majorities axed the transfer of $1 billion for inflation proofing and passed a paltry $1,000 PFD, the lowest inflation-adjusted in history? One answer is that we, the voters, let them; another is that Juneau is controlled by politicians who place their own interests ahead of Alaskans.     

Governor Jay Hammond, the father of the Permanent Fund, said: “As the dividend goes, so goes the Permanent Fund”. He predicted the greed of power-seeking politicians would jeopardize the Fund and hoped to secure the people’s vigilance with the dividend program, a concept honoring the sovereignty of every resident that is unique in the world. Imagine a world where this model can spread!  With inflation proofing seemingly optional to the legislature, and dividends going down a predictable path, the Fund itself—perhaps even the concept of citizen sovereignty itself–appears in jeopardy.

Juneau Voters Back Citizens’ Tax Relief Measures and Oust Longtime Incumbent

15

By BRENDA JOSEPHSON

Juneau voters sent a clear message in the October 7 municipal election to slow government spending and protect taxpayers, and a need for new leadership.

Two rounds of preliminary results from the City and Borough of Juneau (CBJ) show that two tax-relief measures advanced by the Affordable Juneau Coalition, a citizens group, are likely to pass. A city-proposed seasonal sales tax that would have eroded the citizen initiatives was decisively rejected. And a political newcomer with conservative leanings is poised to unseat a longtime incumbent who typically called for more spending and increased taxation. Many observers interpret the outcome as a conservative sweep given the options on Juneau’s ballot.

Approximately 28,000 mail-in ballots were mailed to Juneau voters, but less than 10,000 were returned based on the unofficial preliminary results that were released on October 10th. The return represents a modest 35% turnout despite mail-in voting, which is consistent with recent elections. The city clerk estimated that between 200 and 400 ballots may still be counted prior to final certification, which is scheduled for October 21st.

Only one Assembly seat was contested in this election. In that race, political newcomer Nathaniel “Nano” Brooks, running on a fiscally conservative platform, is leading incumbent Wade Bryson for a seat in District 2. Brooks holds a preliminary lead of 410 votes, surpassing the clerks’ estimated remaining votes to be counted.

Brooks’s campaign emphasized tighter budget oversight, waste reduction, and the importance of government living within its means. Bryson, the incumbent, emphasized continuity, additional spending unrelated to growth, and advancing projects like funding a new City Hall that was twice rejected by Juneau voters. The result suggests the electorate favoring a shift toward fiscal discipline.

People are viewing the successful challenge as a pivotal moment. “People are ready for change and want accountability,” said Joe Geldhof, a longtime Juneau resident. Geldhof added that the current Assembly in Juneau “has stopped listening to the citizens and is committed to spending without regard to affordability.”

The driving force behind the citizen-led ballot campaign was the Affordable Juneau Coalition, which was formed in early 2025 to champion a set of ballot initiatives aimed at alleviating tax burdens on residents. Affordable Juneau emphasized affordability by limiting future tax increases and reducing the tax burden on basic goods and utilities while still protecting the public’s ability to support public infrastructure projects with debt service if approved by the voters.

In April, the coalition submitted three proposals to the municipal clerk, with Joe Geldhof designated as the petitioner. Geldhof is an attorney who has worked on several citizen initiatives, including the local cruise passenger measure, which passed in 1999, and the statewide cruise ship taxation initiative adopted by Alaska voters in 2006. The citizens’ process successfully passed both measures, generating hundreds of millions of dollars for Juneau.

The citizens’ initiative on the October 7th ballot included Proposition 1, which was an amendment to Juneau’s city charter to limit CBJ’s ability to raise property taxes by lowering the maximum mill rate from 12 to 9 mills, excluding debt service. Supporters described it as a “guardrail,” meant to keep tax increases in check unless voters specifically approve them. Geldhof explained, “It puts up a wall so the government can’t raise taxes without a public vote.” He added that “the cap on property taxes was capped at nine mills, which is very close to the existing mill rate, which maintains the status quo.”

Proposition 1 is currently leading in the vote count by 195 votes, with 5,002 supporting the change to 4,807 opposed.

The Affordable Juneau Coalition also placed Proposition 2 on the ballot, proposing to remove the local sales tax from essential groceries and residential utilities. The intent was to provide some financial breathing room to households struggling with high costs for basic necessities. Proponents viewed the measure as a fairness issue, aiming to assist working families and those with fixed incomes. “It was the right thing to do… to help younger residents, especially those with families. This proposal was supported by many seniors, who already benefit from existing exemptions, to provide relief to younger residents,” said Geldhof.

Proposition 2 has passed by a wide margin, with about 69 percent of voters supporting it.

The third measure stood in stark contrast to the first two. Sponsored by the City and Borough of Juneau rather than by citizen petition, it proposed creating a seasonal sales tax structure with a higher rate of sales tax during the busy tourist season and a reduced tax percentage in the winter months. The stated goal of the CBJ proposition was to shift more of the tax burden onto visitors and reduce costs for residents during slower months. However, many voters viewed it skeptically, questioning whether it would truly solve underlying budget issues while also increasing costs during residents’ busy summer season when significant purchases are made.

Proposition 3 has been rejected decisively, with 59% voting no on CBJ’s proposed seasonal sales tax.

The local ballot outcomes, with the success of citizen proposals and the rejection of a city-led tax scheme, are being viewed as a sign of renewed confidence in citizen oversight rather than top-down policy imposition.

Amid narratives of voter apathy and disengagement, many in Juneau saw the 2025 election as a positive sign. “There’s still breath on the mirror of democracy,” said Geldhof, reflecting on months of door-knocking, petition-gathering, and community outreach.

Organizers described the campaign as “tiring but worthwhile” and a demonstration that even in a divided context, a motivated citizen base can influence local policy. The success of the coalition’s measures and the shift in leadership of one assembly seat suggest that engaged voters can still influence local governance.

Ultimately, Juneau’s 2025 election reflects a shift toward fiscal responsibility in the capital city, as voters rejected the city-driven tax plan, approved two taxpayer-centered reforms, and supported a new Assembly member advocating for fiscal restraint. If certified as expected later this month, the new measures will take effect in 2026.

Brenda Josephson is a board member of Alaska Gold Communications, Inc., the publisher of Must Read Alaska. You can contact her via email at [email protected].

Share How Charlie Kirk Impacted Your Life at TPUSA-UAA Event Tues, Oct. 14

12

TPUSA-UAA invites the community to come out and share how Charlie Kirk has impacted you! The event will be held on National Charlie Kirk Remembrance Day, this Tuesday, Oct. 14.

TPUSA-UAA’s event flyer reads: “Join us as we gather to reflect on the life of the disciple, father, and patriot, Charlie Kirk. This open mic event is focused on providing the community an opportunity to share how Charlie touched our lives, and how we plan to move forward in honoring him and the principles he stood for.”

The event will be from 6:00-10:00 p.m. at the Main Event Grill in Anchorage (1041 E 76th Ave. #1A).

This is a great opportunity to hear others’ stories inspired by Charlie Kirk and add your own! We hope to see you there.

The Grand Jury: Constitutionally Based Power Retained by the People

Part I: Is a Constitutional Showdown Coming?

By Jon Faulkner, Co-author and Bob Bird, Co-author

With regard to the hierarchy of constitutional authority, we all hear about the three co-equal branches of government. But a serious inquiry into our foundational documents informs us that actual equality exists neither in the U.S. constitution, nor in Alaska’s.

In Alaska’s constitution, Article 4 states, “The jurisdiction of the courts shall be prescribed by law.” Meaning, the judiciary’s scope is subordinate to the legislature. And we read in Article 3, Section 16, that the governor’s authority “shall not be construed to authorize any action or proceeding against the legislature.”

Does this make the legislative branch supreme? No, not quite, for all branches of government are subordinate to the citizens. One simple instrument that effectuates every citizen’s essential sovereignty, and their right to investigate potential infringements of it, is the grand jury.

Alaska citizens are re-asserting this fundamental right. Take a look at Article 1, Section 2:

§ 2. Source of Government

All political power is inherent in the people. All government originates with the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the people as a whole.

Alaska’s constitution may have flaws, but none question this foundational source of all power. The question becomes: “Who protects this power of the people?” Elections are one way, but hardly the only way. The constitutional power vested in our governor, among the most extensive grants of any state, is another avenue. This power is found in Article 3, Section 16:

§ 16. Governor’s Authority

The governor shall be responsible for the faithful execution of the laws. He may, by appropriate court action or proceeding brought in the name of the State, enforce compliance with any constitutional or legislative mandate, or restrain violation of any constitutional or legislative power, duty, or right by any officer, department, or agency of the State or any of its political subdivisions. This authority shall not be construed to authorize any action or proceeding against the legislature.

Thus, Governor Dunleavy has defined authorities over all branches of government and their respective bureaucracies, excepting only the legislature itself. On the narrow topic of enforcing citizen’s constitutional rights, it is not true that the judicial branch has exclusive purview. In Alaska, the Executive officer has supreme authority in matters of considerable consequence. The issue of constitutionally based duty and supreme authority to act in the people’s interest is about to explode.

Put plainly, if the judicial branch has—wittingly or not—prevented any Grand Jury from exercising its constitutionally mandated power, then the governor must intervene on behalf of the people to enforce the mandate. He may also restrain any violation of a constitutional power by any officer, agency or department of the state. This is not wishful thinking on the part of conservative activists; this is foundational compact law.

Many Alaskans believe that Supreme Court Order 1993 was corrupt—motivated to limit the rights of the grand jury in Alaska. Here is what our state constitution states about the purpose and power of the people’s grand jury:

§ 8. Grand Jury

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the armed forces in time of war or public danger. Indictment may be waived by the accused. In that case the prosecution shall be by information. The grand jury shall consist of at least twelve citizens, a majority of whom concurring may return an indictment. The power of grand juries to investigate and make recommendations concerning the public welfare or safety shall never be suspended.

Many Alaskans have come to believe the power of grand juries to investigate corruption and abuse of power within our government has been suspended by the judicial branch. When Alaska’s citizenry cannot reasonably understand or comply with the procedural complexities the judiciary has erected to process citizen complaints, then a “de-facto” denial of constitutional intent and due process is present.  Proof of this exists, and Alaskans are pressing their case.   

Their case is based on Supreme Court Order 1993 (SCO 1993) and the restrictive regulations issued since by the Department of Law to implement this order.  Protocols adopted by the AG that aggregate and impose strict “gatekeeping” powers serve to unreasonably hinder the grand jury’s power to perform their constitutional function.

It is unnerving when our constitutional rights hinge on a single person’s vote.  Here’s what Supreme Court justices Compton and Burke wrote in their dissent of the Supreme Court ruling in 1991 that provides the foundation for today’s protocols:

 “This procedural rule is not the least bit deferential to the “anti-suspension” clause. Indeed, it mocks it. The Grand Jury, and not the courts, can choose matters on which it reports and recommends, and the manner in which to do so. Its constitutional power shall never be suspended by the overlay of cumbersome procedures which provide for private judicial adjudications and review of whether the report it is to publish adversely reflects on someone, or otherwise violates his or her constitutional rights.”

By a single vote, these high-court objections were dismissed and our modern protocols became law. The question today is: how can the people overcome this travesty of justice?

Governor Dunleavy, our elected Executive, must declare SCO 1993 null, void, and of no effect, since it is deemed by him, acting alone if necessary, to be unconstitutional. He has the power, the duty—and the proof– that compels this declaration.

Every candidate for governor will be asked to take a stand. Who among them will grasp and affirm the present injustice, then pledge to remedy it on behalf of Alaska citizens?  This great state belongs to the people. To be worthy of this responsibility, we must be informed and willing to act. The current restrictions placed on grand juries, just as Burke and Compton warned, suspend a constitutionally based power retained by the people.

Anchorage Republican Women’s Club Gives $1,000 to Turning Point USA-UAA 

12

After attending the Charlie Kirk memorial put on by University of Alaska – Anchorage’s Turning Point USA chapter, Anchorage Republican Women’s Club (ARWC) President Judy Eledge realized the importance of Republicans mentoring and financially supporting young conservatives. To this end, ARWC donated $1,000 to the TPUSA chapter at the University of Alaska-Anchorage. 

Without a doubt, the assassination of Charlie Kirk has motivated numerous students across colleges in America to join Turning Point USA in its mission “to promote the principles of fiscal responsibility, free markets, and limited government.”  

One such student, Jack Thompson, has stepped forward to lead the TPUSA-UAA chapter. Thompson announces his vision for the chapter: “My vision is for this group to serve as a way for our generation to begin to write our chapter in the history of Alaska, starting immediately with next year’s elections. It is not just about politics; it is about building an institution that will mobilize my generation into something that changes Alaska. It is about proving that young Alaskans are not just watching things happen, but we are the ones fundamentally shaping our future.”  

He also expresses gratitude to ARWC: “The donation from ARWC is an incomprehensibly generous asset that will give us the means necessary to begin our work immediately.” Charlie Kirk has inspired many young conservatives to bring civil discourse and conversative values back to America. Older conservatives must actively support the next generation of conservative leaders.