Connect with us

Alaska

Arctic Alaska House race focuses on issues that candidates say unite the remote region

Published

on

Arctic Alaska House race focuses on issues that candidates say unite the remote region


The person who represents the nation’s northernmost legislative district in the Alaska House of Representatives is tasked with achieving a special balance.

Sprawling and remote House District 40 encompasses both the oil-rich North Slope and the less-wealthy Northwest Arctic Borough. That means it has two separate hub communities — Utqiagvik and Kotzebue. While both regions are majority Inupiat, they have significant differences in their economies, histories and cultures.

The incumbent House member, who is from Kotzebue, and the two candidates challenging him, one from Kotzebue as well and the other from Utqiagvik, acknowledge that the district’s makeup creates a special challenge. But all three — all of them Inupiat — say there are ways to bridge those differences.

Advertisement

Properly representing the district, with all its diversity and remoteness, requires working with cities, tribes and any organizations that represent residents, said Thomas Baker, the incumbent.

“You’ve got to work with each community individually, see what their wants and needs are, and then you work bigger and then you see what the overreaching, overarching needs are,” said Baker, whom Gov. Mike Dunleavy appointed to the seat in November to fill the vacancy left when then-Rep. Josiah Patkotak, I-Utqiagvik, was elected mayor of the North Slope Borough.

Despite the differences, there are common interests, said Baker, who was a Republican when appointed but is now unaffiliated. “We are the isolated north. We are the northern end of everything,” he said.

Democrat Robyn Niayuq Burke of Utqiagvik said a key difference is the wealth gap. Communities in the North Slope have the advantage of decades of oil money.

Burke, who is president of the North Slope Borough School District Board of Education, said she is keenly aware of how oil money has allowed her home borough to provide services that are unavailable in parts of the Northwest Arctic Borough. “It’s not lost on me, especially when I go to the Northwest Arctic and see that there are so many communities that don’t have water or have problems with their water,” she said.

Advertisement

Some of her understanding of needs outside the North Slope comes from her service as an officer with the Association of Alaska School Boards, she said.

Democrat Saima Ikrik Chase, currently Kotzebue’s mayor, also pointed to those wealth differences. That gives the North Slope communities more focus on policies, while the Northwest Arctic communities are more dependent on state-provided services, she said. Still, there are common concerns, like housing, education funding and teacher retention, she said. “They have the same issues. It’s just that they have more resources to depend on to get to where they need to get to,” said Chase, whose professional experience is in health care and emergency services.

Resource money is the obvious difference between the North Slope and the Northwest Arctic. The North Slope, site of Alaska’s big oil fields, has a vast borough infrastructure and service network built on oil money. The Northwest Arctic does not have nearly the same deep pockets, though it benefits economically from the Red Dog mine, one of the world’s largest zinc producers.

Some other differences stretch back further in history. Subsistence food gathering on the North Slope, which has shaped the culture, is largely about hunting bowhead whales and other marine mammals, while terrestrial mammals like caribou and fish, including salmon, make up the bulk of the subsistence harvests in the Northwest Arctic region, according to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Even though the Inupiaq language is spoken in both parts of the district, there are different regional dialects.

In the past, the North Slope and Northwest Arctic have been represented by some legendary and powerful lawmakers, like Al Adams and Frank Ferguson, both of Kotzebue.

Advertisement

Decades ago, each borough had its own representative in the state House. Now, they share one.

Effective advocacy for the district requires looking past whatever splits might exist between localities, corporations, nonprofits or other entities, said another of those powerful lawmakers who represented the district in the past, former state Sen. Willie Hensley.

“We need to not confine ourselves to our individual cells,” said Hensley, who is also from the Kotzebue region. Doing so in that Arctic region requires special skills. “You really need to put your best people in there,” he said.

Primary results suggest Chase-Burke contest

Results from the primary suggest that Baker faces an uphill climb. Chase and Burke finished in a near-tie at about 35% each, with Chase eking out a three-vote margin over Burke. Baker lagged with 29% of the vote. Since Burke and Chase have similar positions on the issues, ranked choice voting in this three-way contest is expected to be important to the outcome.

All three candidates noted that turnout in August was low, and that results could change considerably in November, when voters will also consider the presidential candidates. Additionally, the two Democrats also noted that during the primary election, there were malfunctions at certain outlying communities that either interfered with people’s ability to vote or impeded the vote count.

Advertisement

Burke pointed to three North Slope precincts that failed to open. “I had people who reached out to me and said, ‘I tried to vote for you, but I just couldn’t,’” she said. Chase pointed to delays in counting votes in some outlying Northwest Arctic precincts.

While they come from different regions in the district, Burke and Chase have similar positions — and similar complaints about Baker’s record.

Possibly topping that list is Baker’s vote in March that upheld Dunleavy’s veto of a permanent increase in the base student allocation, core of the formula that decides the per-student funding provided by the state. The override failed by a single vote.

For Burke, who had traveled to Juneau to lobby for the increase, Baker’s action on that issue was a tipping point in her decision to run for the seat.

She blasted the action in an op-ed published days after the veto override failed.

Advertisement

“Baker’s vote virtually assured deep education cuts that make it improbable to adequately staff our schools or provide basic materials. As damaging as his vote is for the North Slope, it is even more devastating for the Northwest Arctic Borough, which does not have our property tax base from oil infrastructure,” she said in the op-ed, published in the Arctic Sounder and Anchorage Daily News.

Chase, too, said she was upset with Baker’s position, as were many of her neighbors.

“A lot of our residents here in the north were like, ‘What?’ Because, No. 1, he comes from a family of teachers and it’s like, ‘Come on, man, your sibling is a teacher, and your grandmother was a teacher.’ So I guess his actions speak louder than his words on that,” she said.

Baker, defending his decision on that vote, said it would have been pointless to override the veto because Dunleavy would have simply vetoed the money for the next year needed to pay the increase in the formula.

It isn’t clear whether that hypothetical would have come to pass. Dunleavy ultimately signed a budget containing a one-time funding bonus equivalent to the permanent boost envisioned by the Legislature. But the failure of the bill means that there is no long-term change.

Advertisement

His vote on the veto override notwithstanding, Baker said he supports an increase in the BSA, which is why he voted for the final budget and its one-time $680 boost. But addressing education challenges in the far-north district will require more adjustments, he said. “The BSA does need to be higher, but at the same time, the cost of fuel needs to be lower, the cost of energy needs to be lower,” he said. “We deal with a lot of issues in rural Alaska that other parts of the state and the country don’t deal with.”

Splits with Native leaders

Another point of criticism is Baker’s attempt to rejigger the state’s subsistence policies, a subject on which he clashed with Native organizations.

Baker introduced a bill to amend the state constitution, House Joint Resolution 22, that was aimed at unifying state and federal subsistence management — but his version omitted the word “rural,” in contrast with federal law’s requirement for a rural Alaska subsistence priority. Baker’s effort got pushback from the Alaska Federation of Natives, creating an unusual situation in which Alaska’s largest Native organization, along with other prominent Native organizations within his district, opposed legislation sponsored by a Native lawmaker.

“Rep. Baker’s bill came out of the blue,” Julie Kitka, then AFN’s president, said in a March 20 hearing at the House Resources Committee.

AFN and other Indigenous organizations, though they advocated in past decades for a state constitutional amendment, have come to prefer federal management as more dependable and more supportive of Indigenous rights.

Advertisement

Baker, who is on the council that advises the federal government on subsistence management in the Northwest Arctic, defended his constitutional amendment idea, adding that he, too, favors a rural priority.

“The main goal with that piece of legislation was to get the conversation started because it is an ongoing issue that no one was really addressing in the legislature,” he said.

Both Burke and Chase criticized Baker’s effort as ill-conceived and lacking proper consultation with affected people and organizations.

The proposed constitutional amendment lacked support from any other Native lawmaker, and it died in committee.

Election legislation is another area where Baker split from Alaska’s other Native legislators.

Advertisement

Those members staunchly supported a legal change that would have removed the requirement that absentee voters secure witness signatures from designated officials. That witness-signature requirement has proved to be impractical and burdensome in rural Alaska and effectively discriminates against Native voters, said lawmakers who favored the change.

In floor debate on May 15, Sen. Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel, defended the elimination of the witness-signature requirement. Hoffman referred to the high rate of rural mail-in votes that were invalidated during the 2022 special election to fill the vacant U.S. House seat. “Because of the witness verification provision, I’ve had 15% of my voters — 15% of my voters — their votes were thrown out. Imagine how you would feel if that happened in your district,” he said.

But when the Senate-passed bill came to the House floor, Baker voted against taking it up, splitting from the other Native House members. The tally was 20-20, so Baker’s vote on the matter was criticized as the decision that killed a bill with a provision important to his own rural constituents.

Months later, Baker said the amended version of the bill was rushed, and he remains unsure of his position on it. “I can’t say that I would have supported that bill because there was no time to review it,” he said.

He also noted that it reached the floor after the midnight adjournment deadline, making it possibly invalid even if it has passed. Dunleavy vetoed several other bills that passed the Legislature after midnight, saying they were unconstitutional.

Advertisement

Burke, in contrast, has been adamant in seeking changes to help rural voters. The current system is plagued with problems, like the lack of polling place access experienced in the primary, she said. And Alaska Natives pay the price, she said in another op-ed essay published in the Anchorage Daily News.

“Barriers to voting in rural Alaska are persistent and glaring, including limited access to early voting tablets, the inability to translate official election information into Alaska Native languages, and the failure to receive absentee election materials before the voting window opens,” she said in the op-ed.

Party affiliations and trends

Baker has another distinction from other legislators representing predominantly Native districts.

He was the first Republican in more than six decades to represent his district or any part of it. The only other Republican representing the Northwest Arctic region was John Curtis, who served one term in the first legislative session after statehood.

After the legislative session, Baker switched his registration to nonpartisan, something that he said was spurred by his experience in the House representing the district. Party allegiances can get in the way of serving the district, he said. “Sometimes there’s going to be a more conservative way to tackle a District 40 problem. Sometimes there will be a more liberal way to do it,” he said. Seeing how much work goes into the job “that was the reason — becoming someone that could work in the middle of the road.”

Advertisement

Originally published by the Alaska Beacon, an independent, nonpartisan news organization that covers Alaska state government.





Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Alaska

Alaska is reporting 18 in-custody deaths so far this year, tying a grim record

Published

on

Alaska is reporting 18 in-custody deaths so far this year, tying a grim record


Barbed wire fencing surrounds Goose Creek Correctional Center on Tuesday, Aug. 29, 2023 outside of Wasilla. (Loren Holmes / ADN)

The Department of Corrections this week reported the 18th death of an inmate this year, tying the record for the highest number of annual in-custody deaths in at least the past decade.

Kane William Huff, who had been imprisoned at Goose Creek Correctional Center near Wasilla, died Dec. 11, according to a DOC statement. Huff, 46, was serving a sentence for a 2018 conviction on two counts of sexual abuse of a minor, according to online court records. DOC officials said he had been in custody since 2015.

Huff was found unresponsive in the prison’s infirmary, where he had been housed, said Department of Public Safety spokesman Austin McDaniel. Alaska State Troopers, who handle in-custody death investigations, have closed their investigation and are awaiting autopsy results from the State Medical Examiner Office, McDaniel said. Troopers don’t believe Huff died by suicide or that foul play was involved, he said.

The last time as many people died in state custody was in 2022, when a record seven inmates also died by suicide, according to a department snapshot of deaths since 2015.

Advertisement

The Department of Corrections began consistently keeping inmate death statistics in 2001, said spokesperson Betsy Holley. The department also posts data showing in-custody deaths since 2015. That year, 15 people died while in DOC custody.

The state’s official count for 2025 doesn’t include the death of 36-year-old William Farmer, who died in a hospital in January after he was severely beaten by his cellmate at the Anchorage Correctional Complex the month before.

An upward trend of in-custody deaths in the past several years has alarmed some prisoner rights advocates and prompted state lawmakers to ask Department of Corrections officials to address the deaths in multiple hearings this year. The department has also found itself under fire for inmate suicides.

This year, at least four inmates have died of natural or expected causes, such as disease or a medical event, while at least five have died by suicide, according to information provided by Alaska State Troopers.

Officials have also said that a Spring Creek Correctional Center prisoner died of an overdose in April.

Advertisement

Another inmate, 53-year-old Jeffrey Foreman, died in July after being restrained by guards after an altercation with his cellmate at the Anchorage Correctional Complex.

[Correction: An earlier version of this story incorrectly described the year the Department of Corrections started consistently keeping inmate death statistics. It was 2001, not 2015.]





Source link

Continue Reading

Alaska

Hawaiian, Alaska airlines to use locally made biofuel | Honolulu Star-Advertiser

Published

on

Hawaiian, Alaska airlines to use locally made biofuel | Honolulu Star-Advertiser




Source link

Continue Reading

Alaska

LNG pipeline legislation debate divides Alaska lawmakers after consultant calls it ‘essential’

Published

on

LNG pipeline legislation debate divides Alaska lawmakers after consultant calls it ‘essential’


ANCHORAGE, Alaska (KTUU) Alaska lawmakers are divided over whether new legislation is needed for a liquified natural gas pipeline, with the state’s energy consultant calling it “essential” while some legislators say existing laws are sufficient.

“A successful project will likely require suitable enabling legislation from the state legislature, among other key prerequisites,” state-contracted energy consulting firm GaffneyCline, hired by the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee for up to $200,000 in April 2024, says in a document made public for the first time Monday.

The 62-page document, presented to the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee last month, concludes that legislation is essential for the pipeline to be viable but more needs to be done to get the project across the finish line.

“A detailed economic model of the project is required before the legislature can take an informed view as to the appropriate degree of government take that the project can sustain, and how this could evolve over time,” the document states.

Advertisement

Alaska’s News Source reached out to Glenfarne Tuesday for comment on who presents the economic model and when that model could be presented. Spokesperson Tim Fitzpatrick referred on the report for GaffneyCline.

“We will continue to work closely with the legislature to discuss policy issues that may affect Alaska LNG and work collaboratively on solutions that enable Glenfarne to provide Alaskans with affordable energy security as rapidly as possible,” he said in a statement.

The document’s release comes amid optimism from pipeline developers and federal officials but growing skepticism from some state lawmakers.

During a November Legislative Budget and Audit Committee which discussed the same topic, House Speaker Bryce Edgmon, NA-Dillingham, left believing “the upcoming 2026 legislative session could be dominated by policy measures related to advancing the Alaska gas line project.”

“We don’t have any of this,” Edgmon said last month, relating to laws GaffneyCline says are essential.

Advertisement

Rep. Mia Costello, R-Anchorage, former House minority leader and co-chair of the Alaska Gasline Caucus, said she believes legislation for the pipeline is not needed, citing previous legislative involvement.

“Large scale LNG projects around the world are successfully developed through commercial agreements, private capital, and existing regulatory processes not legislative intervention,” Costello said in a statement. “Alaska already has established permitting, taxation, and regulatory framework capable of supporting energy development. Legislative involvement risks introducing political uncertainty, delaying timelines, and discouraging investors who prioritize stability and market driven decision-making.”

However, Sen. Elvi Gray-Jackson, D-Anchorage, told Alaska’s News Source the policy measures currently in place are more than a decade old, created for a different project, and don’t easily mesh with the task in front of them today.

“When project leadership … and financial models change, it’s our responsibility to revisit the policy framework that governs the state involvement, and that’s what we’re going to do as a legislature,” Gray-Jackson said.

Legislative action?

The asks pipeline developers want in those policies could be steep.

Advertisement

On the list of asks is a concept called “fiscal stability,” essentially a promise if Alaska changes its tax or regulatory policies later, the state would make up any financial losses to investors, according to a GaffneyCline presentation shown to lawmakers on the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee.

Those guarantees can mean a “tax freeze” — locking in the current tax system for the life of the project — potentially 20-30 years, according to GaffneyCline’s presentation to lawmakers. If Alaska later raises taxes or imposes new regulations, the presentation said the state would have to compensate investors to maintain their original profit expectations.

Another ask is the lowering of property taxes for the pipeline, something GaffneyCline’s November presentation said could cost the project $1 billion and add 9% to the cost of delivered gas.

Gov. Mike Dunleavy plans to introduce a bill to lower property taxes for the pipeline, spokesperson Jeff Turner confirmed Tuesday. No other LNG bills are planned at this time, he added.

Time crunch

Whatever the legislature decides to do, they’ll need to do it quickly. The regular session convenes Jan. 20, and for the following 120 days, the process to create a package of policies and framework addressing LNG issues will likely be front of mind.

Advertisement

That comes after Glenfarne Alaska LNG set expectations in October that construction for the pipeline will begin in late 2026 and be operational by mid-2029.

“What Alaskans should take away from the report is that we need to hope for the best, but prepare for the situation not moving as fast as Glenfarne and the other players are thinking,” Gray-Jackson said.

Lawmakers have signaled a mixture of optimism for what the pipeline could create, but it comes with skepticism, too. Gray-Jackson said she was “cautiously optimistic.”

“Frankly, I don’t know where we’re at as far as the legislature is concerned because we haven’t gotten any real answers from Glenfarne,” Gray-Jackson said.

A Glenfarne spokesperson said last month they are active in providing information to the state legislature.

Advertisement

“Glenfarne is making rapid progress on Alaska LNG and regularly meets with legislators to provide updates and discuss important state and local policy considerations,” Glenfarne communications director Tim Fitzpatrick said. “We appreciate the legislature’s continued engagement to help make Alaska LNG a success for the state.”

“I understand the potential, huge, multi-generational impact of the state, as well as being very positive,” Sen. Bert Stedman, R-Sitka, told Alaska’s News Source following the Legislative Budget and Audit Committee meeting in November.

“Concentrating on the benefit of the project that we know, if it’s successful, it’s going to be very beneficial, and if it’s unsuccessful, it could be detrimental for generations.”

“Will the project even come unless we present the right scenario?” House Majority Leader Chuck Kopp, R-Anchorage, asked Nick Fulford, GaffneyCline senior director and global head of gas and LNG.

“You mentioned the buyers want 20–30 years of stability … our fiscal framework might be a little bit out of alignment, if I’m hearing you correctly,” Kopp said.

Advertisement

“If those things are all true, our needs, our situation, us being out of alignment, we’re going to have to look at possibly a reality that this line doesn’t even get [built],” the representative added.

Federal permits completed

The project completed 20 federal permits and environmental reviews last week, according to the Permitting Council, clearing what the governor called “the last major regulatory hurdle.”

“Alaska LNG received the major federal permits needed to proceed in 2020,” Fitzpatrick said. “Some of these permits have a five-year renewal cycle, which was completed last week and all of Alaska LNG’s major permits are current and in effect. Glenfarne has an ongoing process to maintain permits and authorizations for Alaska LNG.”

With the permits cleared, the pipeline inches toward a final investment decision (FID). Natural Gas Intelligence, a natural gas news provider, described an FID as “the last step of determining whether to move forward with the sanctioning and construction of an infrastructure project.”

A source familiar with the pipeline developments previously told Alaska’s News Source to expect an FID early next year.

Advertisement

“Alaska LNG will strengthen our economy, create long-term jobs, and provide reliable energy to Alaskans and our global partners for generations to come,” Dunleavy said.

“I am thrilled to see the Alaska LNG project finish federal permitting actions ahead of schedule,” said Permitting Council Executive Director Emily Domenech in the press release.

“This combined effort reflects our commitment to the State of Alaska and to achieving President Trump’s energy dominance agenda.”

Domenech visited the state alongside the congressional Natural Resources Committee in August, when Dunleavy signed a deal with the Trump administration aimed at bringing more resource development investment will come to Alaska.

LNG, however, was not heavily discussed at the meeting.

Advertisement
Governor Mike Dunleavy (right) shows a signed memorandum of understanding promising “improve(d) coordination and transparency in permitting major infrastructure projects across the state,” his office said.(Rachel McPherron)

“Completing federal permitting for Alaska LNG ahead of schedule shows how the Trump administration is restoring America’s Energy Dominance by cutting unnecessary delays and unleashing our abundant resources,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in the release. “This project strengthens U.S. energy security, creates jobs for Alaskans, and reinforces our commitment to a permitting system that works at the speed of American innovation.”

National momentum

The federal push comes as as GaffneyCline’s presentation said both LNG supply and demand are expected to boom globally. Liquefaction, or the process of turning gas into liquid, is expected to increase by 42% by 2030, reaching about 594 million tons per year.

This summer, Dunleavy vetoed several bills and cut more than $100 million from the state budget, largely due to reduced state revenues from oil price declines.

“The oil situation has deteriorated,” Dunleavy said in a video statement before his budget was revealed. “The price of oil has gone down; therefore, our revenue is going down.

“Basically, we don’t have enough money to pay for all of our obligations. So, as a result of that, you’re going to see some reductions in this year’s budget.”

Advertisement

The pipeline project has support from both the state and federal levels. President Donald Trump has pledged to ensure an LNG project gets built “to provide affordable energy to Alaska and allies all over the world.”

On Jan. 20, Trump signed the “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential” executive order, which the administration says prioritizes “the development of Alaska’s liquefied natural gas (LNG) potential, including the sale and transportation of Alaskan LNG to other regions of the United States and allied nations within the Pacific region.”

Despite the optimistic timeline, Alaska has seen multiple LNG pipeline proposals fail over the past two decades due to financing challenges, regulatory delays and market conditions.

Environmental groups and some Alaska Native groups have also raised concerns about the pipeline’s potential impact on wildlife and traditional lands.

See a spelling or grammar error? Report it to web@ktuu.com

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending