Election officials prepare the Assembly Chambers for in-person voters on Monday, March 24, 2025. (Bill Roth / ADN)
Half of the Anchorage Assembly’s seats will be decided in this April’s municipal election. According to campaign finance reports submitted to the Alaska Public Offices Commission earlier this week, many of the six races are close in terms of fundraising, with some exceptions.
In the years since Anchorage shifted to mail-based balloting for its elections, many candidates have generally adjusted their spending strategies, retaining cash until March, when voters begin receiving their ballot packets. Several of this cycle’s candidates appear to have held off on major spending. But a number of challengers seeking to knock off incumbents have made significant expenditures already.
Voters will begin receiving their ballots in the mail in mid-March, and ballots are due back by the April 7 deadline.
District 1 – Downtown/North Anchorage
Assembly Chair Chris Constant is barred by term limits from running again. Four candidates are vying to fill his seat, though only two reported significant fundraising and campaign expenditures.
Sydney Scout reported raising $50,130 since launching her campaign last year. She’s spent a little more than half of that, with close to $23,000 in cash still on hand.
Advertisement
Among Scout’s donors are a number ofpolitical action groups representing labor and public safety unions. She saw a few larger contributions from local donors but overwhelmingly reported smaller contributions under $500. Among her financial supporters are many prominent local politicos, including several current members of the Assembly and AnchorageSchool Board, as well as Democratic groups.
Most of her $27,509 in expenditures so far have gone to campaign services paid to Amber Lee Strategies, as well as $7,500 to True Blue Associates, a strategy firm run by two former progressive bloggers who have worked for Democrats in the Legislature in the past. There are a number of purchases for ads on Meta’s social media platforms, Facebook and Instagram, as well as in-person campaign events.
Justin Milette reported raising $36,771 in his Alaska Public Offices Commission disclosure, withat least $13,000 from Milette himself. He received several other major donations, including $5,000 from a loan officer at Alaska Growth Capital, another $5,000 from a local attorney and $2,500 from independent investor Justin Weaver. That was about the same amount Weaver contributed to Scout’s campaign.
Milette received contributions from a number of prominent local political figures and advocates, including Republican gubernatorial candidate Treg Taylor and Sami Graham, who briefly served as chief of staff for former Mayor Dave Bronson.
Most of Milette’s spending — $22,566 — has gone to the firm Red Dirt Campaigns for a range of services, including donor data, printing, canvassing data and media products.
Advertisement
Two other candidates filed to run for the seat, Nicholas Danger and Max Powers. Danger reported no campaign income. Powers had not submitted a fundraising disclosure report to APOC as of Thursday.
District 2 – Eagle River
Assembly member Scott Myers, who currently represents the communities north of the Anchorage Bowl, is not running for a second term.
First-time candidate Donald Handeland reported raising more than $40,000, of which a little more than $26,000 has been spent so far.
Though Handeland reported contributing $2,500 of his own money, he raised the overwhelming majority of his funds through relatively modest donations from well over a hundred people.
Many prominent conservatives show up on Handeland’s donor rolls, including former heads of the Alaska Republican Party Tuckerman Babcock, Randy Ruedrich and Peter Goldberg; both of the district’s current Assembly members, Myers and Jared Goecker; and many of the individuals who regularly contributed to Bronson’s mayoral campaigns.
Advertisement
Handeland reported spending more than $13,000 on campaign services from Red Dirt Campaigns. He also bought digital ads on social media. He split costs with four other candidates for a fundraising event called “Axe the Tax” at a local ax-throwing parlor. The fundraiser was premised on candidates’ shared opposition to a proposed city sales tax,which was eventually pulled back by Mayor Suzanne LaFrance in early January.
Campaigning against Handeland is Kyle Walker, who ran unsuccessfully to represent the district during the last cycle. Of the $8,258 he reported raising, $5,500 came from union PAC contributions. The remainder were small individual donors.
Though Walker reported a little more than $4,000 in expenses so far, he listed another $13,666 in financial commitments to the Ship Creek Group for campaign management and a comprehensive suite of services. Ship Creek has been a major player in local politics, working primarily with moderate and left-leaning candidates, but is attached to only one other Assembly campaign this cycle.
District 3 – West Anchorage
The race is a rematch of the 2023 contest for the same seat, in which Assembly Vice Chair Anna Brawley beat challenger Brian Flynn by a 17-point margin. Then as now, there is a lot of money flowing to both candidates.
So far, Flynn has outraised Brawley but is also spending down his war chest more aggressively, primarily on campaign services by firms both inside and outside of Alaska.
Advertisement
Brawley reported $52,044 in campaign contributions, including thousands of dollars from just under a dozen organized labor PACs. Her largest individual donor was retired banker Victor Mollozzi, who contributed $4,000 in two separate installments. Among her prominent backers are current members of the Assembly and school board, Democratic former U.S. Sen. Mark Begich and Democratic gubernatorial candidate and former state Rep. Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins.
Brawley has spent several thousand dollars so far on campaign services from Amber Lee Strategies, the same firm that handled her 2023 run. She’s also paid for printed signs, as well as access to the Alaska Democratic Party’s voter information. But most of her resources are in reserve. Brawley listed $17,400 committed to the The Mobilization Center, a local outfit that handles field operations for political campaigns.
Flynn reported raising $81,663. Among his contributors are a number of prominent local Republican and conservative politicians, including outgoing School Board member and current Assembly candidate Dave Donley, Republican former House Minority Leader and current state Rep. Mia Costello, and former Anchorage first lady Deb Bronson.
Flynn received a few hefty donations from individuals. John and Kari Ellsworth, who own part of the Anchorage Wolverines junior hockey franchise, gave a combined $6,500. Business owners Teresa Hall and Diane Bachman each gave $5,000.
According to Flynn’s APOC report, he’s spent $63,414. The biggest portion of that, more than $21,000, has gone to Optima Public Relations, a Wasilla-based firm that primarily handles conservative and Republican political campaigns. He also spent more than $7,000 on direct mail handled by national Republican consulting firm Axiom Strategies, and several hundred dollars more to its polling arm Remington Research for text messaging services. A $3,700 expenditure was listed to former Assembly candidate Travis Szanto for “putting up signs, sign frames.”
Advertisement
District 4 – Midtown
Incumbent Felix Rivera is terming off the Assembly. The race to replace him is between two older candidates who both have experience with local political campaigns, and are roughly even on their fundraising and expenditures so far.
Dave Donley has served as a Republican in the Alaska Legislature, and is winding down three terms on the Anchorage School Board. He reported raising close to $39,000 so far, of which he’s spent almost $28,000. A number of influential conservative politicians, both current and former, chipped in to his campaign, including gubernatorial candidates Treg Taylor and Shelley Hughes, as well as former Anchorage mayors Rick Mystrom and George Wuerch. He also received contributions from several union PACs.
Donley’s main expenditures include services provided by Red Dirt Campaigns, which range from consulting work and data to social media and content production. He’s also spent money advertising on conservative opinion blogs.
Paralegal and former nurse Janice Park reported raising $42,226, and has spent less than half of that. Park has unsuccessfullyrun several times for legislative positions as a Democrat. She received contributions from several current and former Democratic lawmakers, as well as current members of the Assembly and the Anchorage Democrats. Her largest contributor was Justin Weaver, the private investor, who so far has donated $14,000 to Park.
Park has made a lot of small ad buys to Meta for social media reach, as well as on traditional analog printed signs. But her largest expenditure is for “campaign consulting, including communications, compliance, and strategy” to True Blue Associates.
Advertisement
Kim Winston, a third candidate who formally filed for the seat, reported no income to APOC.
District 5 – East Anchorage
Incumbent George Martinez is fending off a challenge from Cody Anderson, a retired non-commissioned Air Force officer and church pastor.
Martinez raised close to $11,000, most of it in new contributions from individual donors and unions, on top of $5,000 in money carried over from a past campaign. Several current Assembly members chipped in modest amounts, along with a $300 contribution from the Anchorage Democrats.
Martinez only listed $5,634 in campaign spending so far. The two largest expenditures in his APOC report were $1,000 for “promotion/advertisement” to a company based in Miami, Florida, and $1,256 to Alaska Airlines for “travel,” with no additional details listed in the report.
Anderson reported raising $45,878, however his campaign finance disclosure listed payments to his campaign manager and other substantial expenditures as income, distorting the total by more than $16,000, according to a review of hisAPOC report.
Advertisement
Among those donations are thousands of dollars from employees at Mountain City Church, where Anderson works, including $1,000 from former head Jerry Prevo and $2,000 from lead pastor Ron Hoffman. The Anchorage Republican Women’s Club donated $750.
Anderson’s biggest expenditures listed were $5,500 to his campaign manager for various services and $7,500 for content creation and social media placement to Stephanie Williams, who worked as a special assistant under former Mayor Bronson before resigning in 2021.
District 6 – South Anchorage
Incumbent Zac Johnson is running for a second term against Bruce Vergason, whose background is in business and construction, as well as a third candidate, Janelle Anausuk Sharp, an environmental scientist.
Johnson reported $33,272 in contributions, with $9,239 spent and more in future financial commitments to a local political firm.
Johnson received contributions from several organized labor groups, along with current and former members of the Assembly.
Advertisement
He listed $11,500 in future payments committed to Ship Creek Group for comprehensive campaign management services.
In his APOC filing, Vergason listed $43,843 in fundraising and $17,052 in spending. He received major contributions from local business owner Susanne Gionet and physician John Nolte, who donated $5,000 each.
On top of $6,290 paid to Optima for campaign work, Vergason also paid $2,460 to election data firm i360 for canvassing services, along with significant outlays for sign printing. Vergason was part of January’s ax-themed fundraiser, coordinating with Handeland, Anderson, Donley and Flynn on the joint event.
Sharp appears to have raised around $3,500. Though her APOC disclosure listed a significantly higher figure, it erroneously categorized expenses as income. Cheryl Frasca, who is listed as her campaign treasurer, has a long record of handling compliance reports for political campaigns, including several current Republican gubernatorial candidates, and headed the municipality’s Office of Management and Budget under Bronson.
Outside of a $679 contribution to Optima for campaign logo design, Sharp’s biggest expenditure was $4,233 to The Business MD for services that include “assisting with general campaign strategy and organization, communications guidance, and outreach planning to help strengthen voter connection organization, all of which is advisory in nature.” The company is run by a local businesswoman focused on emotional intelligence coaching.
Mayer Brown is a proud sponsor of Proximo Congress 2026. This senior meeting of the US energy, infrastructure, and digital infrastructure finance community is shaped around the questions credit and investment committees are actually asking in 2026: how asset classes are converging, how risk is being priced in a recalibrated policy and geopolitical environment, and how public and private capital are being structured together to deliver projects at scale.
Mayer Brown has also been recognized for three separate awards which will be presented during the event. These awards include:
Proximo North America Transport Deal of the Year 2025 – SR 400 Peach Partners
Proximo North America Rail Deal of the Year 2025 – Brightline West
Proximo North America LNG Deal of the Year 2025 – Port Arthur LNG 2
If you have ever taken out a mortgage, you’ll know there are a lot of requirements to meet. You may need to put down a certain amount and have a debt-to-income ratio below a certain threshold. You may also run into limits on how much you can borrow or what sources of income the lender will count.
These rules do not apply to all mortgages — just to conforming mortgages, which is what the majority of borrowers take out. However, mortgage lenders are increasingly offering what are known as nonconforming loans, or mortgages that do not “comply with every one of the strict standards put in place after the housing crisis,” said The Wall Street Journal. While “still a small portion,” the “share of mortgages using alternative lending practices” has “doubled in size over the past three years.”
What are nonconforming loans?
A nonconforming mortgage is a “type of home loan that doesn’t meet some or all of the guidelines that make them eligible for purchase by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,” said Bankrate. These are the government-sponsored entities that “support much of the secondary mortgage market in the U.S.,” meaning they often purchase resold mortgages.
The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Advertisement
SUBSCRIBE & SAVE
Sign up for The Week’s Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
Latest Videos From
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have “federal rules that limit the purchase of loans deemed relatively risk-free,” said Investopedia. Loans that meet these guidelines are conforming loans; loans that do not are nonconforming. To be a conforming loan, a mortgage must fall under a certain loan amount, and the borrower must meet specific criteria when it comes to their credit score, debt-to-income ratio and loan-to-value ratio.
Effectively, any home loan that does not align with these stipulations is considered nonconforming. Examples include jumbo loans, government-backed loans, bridge loans and interest-only loans.
Why do people get them?
There are a wide range of reasons people may opt for a nonconforming mortgage. For one, “you may have no choice but to choose a nonconforming jumbo loan if you want to buy an expensive property,” said Rocket Mortgage. These loans can also provide more flexibility when it comes to the type of property you purchase, your credit score and your down payment amount.
Advertisement
Nonconforming loans additionally “offer an opportunity for home buyers who might not otherwise qualify for traditional loans because they are self-employed or hold their wealth in assets such as real estate,” said the Journal.
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
What are the drawbacks?
For starters, there are fewer lenders offering them “since they pose a higher risk to the bank or mortgage lender,” said Yahoo Finance. That said, availability can vary depending on the specific type, as “some nonconforming loans (like FHA mortgages) are common, while others (like USDA loans) can be harder to find.”
Nonconforming loans also “generally carry a higher interest rate for the borrower,” said the Journal, given the increased risk to the lender. Still, this can vary by loan type. For instance, “FHA, VA and USDA loans usually have lower interest rates,” while “less common nonconforming loans, such as bridge loans, often have higher interest rates,” said Yahoo Finance. There is also the possibility that a nonconforming loan “could have an unusual repayment schedule or other features that make it harder to repay,” said Bankrate.
What U.S. consumers ask of their credit cards has changed. For financially stressed households, it has little to do with rewards.
As more households turn to credit cards to manage liquidity and cover everyday expenses, a new set of practical concerns is driving card behavior: Can the card help avoid a missed payment? Can it make balances easier to track? Can it provide enough visibility into available credit and upcoming obligations to help manage an uncertain month?
Those concerns are beginning to reorder what consumers value most in their credit card relationships.
That evidence is clear in “Winning Top of Wallet: How Credit Card Apps Shape Choice,” a PYMNTS Intelligence and Elan Credit Card report examining how consumers use mobile apps to manage spending, payments and engagement across their credit card portfolios. The report found 30% of consumers primarily use credit cards to build credit or extend purchasing power, while another 22% primarily use cards for cash flow management, together outweighing rewards-based usage.
The divide is more pronounced among financially stressed households. Among consumers living paycheck to paycheck and struggling to pay bills, 40% cited credit dependence as their primary reason for using credit cards. Just 11% pointed to rewards.
Advertisement
For a growing share of consumers, credit cards are functioning less like discretionary spending products and more like liquidity management tools.
Advertisement: Scroll to Continue
What Matters Most
That evolution is also changing which app features matter most.
Among cash flow-focused consumers, 31% said scheduling payments or autopay encouraged them to spend more on a card, while 27% cited alerts and reminders. Credit-motivated consumers showed similarly high engagement with tools tied to available credit visibility and payment timing.
Rewards still influence spending behavior, particularly among financially stable households. Half of consumers who prioritize rewards said tracking or redeeming rewards through a mobile app encouraged them to spend more on the card.
Advertisement
But the report suggests that financial stress changes the hierarchy of engagement. As household budgets tighten, rewards become less central than predictability, visibility and control.
That shift helps explain why mobile apps increasingly influence which cards become top of wallet.
Among credit-dependent consumers, 77% said the quality of a credit card app influences which card they use most often. Credit-dependent consumers also reported the highest app adoption levels, with 77% using their primary card’s app regularly or occasionally.
The competition, in other words, is no longer simply about card acquisition. It is about becoming the card consumers rely on to navigate everyday financial management.
Digital Experience Becomes a Financial Retention Tool
The report also suggests that digital experience increasingly shapes retention risk.
Advertisement
Nearly 1 in 4 cardholders said a poor app or digital experience contributed to reduced card use. Among Gen Z consumers, that figure climbed to 45%.
At the same time, 7 in 10 cardholders said app quality influences which card becomes their primary card, underscoring how mobile interfaces are becoming embedded directly into consumer payment behavior.
For issuers, the implications extend beyond app design.
Consumers living paycheck to paycheck hold nearly as many credit cards as financially stable households, meaning financially stressed consumers are not disengaging from credit entirely. Instead, they are becoming more selective about which cards feel easiest to manage and most useful during periods of financial pressure.
Rewards and promotional offers still matter, particularly among affluent and financially stable consumers. But for a growing segment of households, the most valuable card may be the one that reduces uncertainty around balances, payment timing and available liquidity.
Advertisement
In a crowded multi-card market, financial visibility itself is becoming part of the product.