Alaska
Bill to expand definition of ‘village’ qualifying for water funds passes Alaska House • Alaska Beacon
What in Alaska counts as a village? When it comes to state money for drinking water improvements, the definition can be fraught.
In a close vote, the Alaska House on Wednesday passed a bill that would add six road-system communities to the list of rural communities that qualify for the Department of Environmental Conservation’s Village Safe Water program.
Technically, the measure, House Bill 114, would expand the definition of “village” as used by the program, to include communities of up to 1,500 people from the current 1,000 threshold. It would also allow unincorporated census-designated places to be added to the list of eligible villages.
If it wins final passage in the Senate, the measure would expand the list of program-eligible villages to include Talkeetna, Sutton-Alpine and Buffalo Soapstone in the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, Funny River on the Kenai Peninsula, Tok in the Interior and Prudhoe Bay on the North Slope.
The bill’s consideration comes at a time when abundant federal money, much of it made available through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, is flowing into Alaska for rural water and sanitation upgrades. Much of that funding comes to the Village Safe Water program through the Environmental Protection Agency’s Alaska Native Villages and Rural Communities Water Grant Program.
The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Kevin McCabe, R-Big Lake, said the Village Safe Water program has done much over the years to improve Alaskans’ lives and that more Alaskans should have access to its benefits.
The program “stands as a beacon for our commitment to public health and environmental stewardship providing essential aid to upgrade sanitation and water facilities in rural areas,” McCabe said in floor debate.
Four years after the last federal census, the Village Safe Water program is now due for a revision in the way qualifying villages are defined, McCabe said. The last such revision was in 2011, after the 2010 Census, he noted.
The 22-18 vote followed floor debate that was emotional at times.
Opponents said they worried that adding the six road-accessible communities to the village list would put them in competition for funds with truly needy and remote rural communities.
“There are a number of communities that are struggling – struggling to get basic water infrastructure, that don’t have access to the road system, that don’t have the ability to take an hour and half drive to Fred Meyer’s, that have to deal with a number of insanely high grocery prices, that have to deal with realities that are completely departed from the rest of the state,” said Rep. CJ McCormick, D-Bethel. His rural district encompasses Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta villages that are poverty-stricken, remote and, in many cases, lacking basic water and sanitation services.
Rep. Alyce Galvin, D-Anchorage, recounted a visit she made to a Tanana Chiefs Conference event where she learned about the dire water and sanitation needs in remote Indigenous communities in Alaska’s Interior. Solutions for those villages could be delayed if new communities compete for program funds, she said.
“We’re looking at making a change that will have a deep effect on many Alaskans who have been waiting a long time for their share of the pie. What I mean by that is, there are a finite number of dollars going to water and sewer projects,” she said. In contrast to the truly rural areas, which are remote, challenged by environmental conditions and high costs, for communities closer to urban areas, “there are boroughs, there are municipalities, there are ways we can put together money,” she said.
Rep. Ashey Carrick, D-Fairbanks, said the six communities that would be added include some connected to very large cities. Talkeetna, for example, is an hour’s drive north of the fastest-growing urban communities and less than two hours’ drive from Anchorage, she said.
“And then there’s Prudhoe Bay. I almost have to laugh at that one because I’m not quite sure how an industrial population technically connected by a haul road used to haul a huge variety of goods and services up the road is technically a village,” she said.
Others criticism focused on what opponents said was a lack of vetting by the public and by rural-serving organizations. Rep. Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, named the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium and the Alaska Federation of Natives as organizations that needed to be better consulted.
“If this measure doesn’t make it through this year – and I have my doubts – let’s have this conversation. Let’s do it right. Let’s bring everybody to the table,” he said.
Bill supporters, however, said an expansion of eligibility for the Village Safe Water program is justified and that water and sanitation needs extend beyond rigid geographic boundaries or classifications.
Rep. Mike Cronk, R-Tok/Northway, reeled off a list of villages in his sprawling Interior district that are on the road system but are officially classified as villages and are facing some of the same water and sewer problems that exist off the road system: Northway, Tetlin, Tanacross, Dot Lake, Eagle, Chitina, Tazlina, Copper Center, Gulkana, Mentasta, Gakona, Minto, Circle and Tanana. And he added in larger communities with significant Native populations: Kenny Lake, Nenana, Manley, Central and his hometown of Tok. Tok would be among the six communities added to the list of qualified villages.
He grew up in Northway, he noted, and the first house he bought was a cabin without running water. “I had two kids, and I hauled water, and we used an outhouse. So I know how that feels,” he said.
Rep. Frank Tomaszewski, R-Fairbanks, another bill supporter, said that even in Fairbanks, Alaska’s second-largest city, there are hundreds and possibly thousands of people who live in “dry cabins,” homes without running water.
House Majority Leader Dan Saddler, R-Eagle River, recounted 1990s-era pledges of former Gov. Tony Knowles to “put the honey bucket in the museum,” a slogan that the Democratic governor used to refer to retiring the plastic-bag-lined buckets that rural residents sometimes use as toilets.
“Over the last 30 years we have spent hundreds of millions of dollars and untold hours of labor to do that, using federal money, using state money, using state labor, to the undisputed benefit of Alaskans,” he said. There has been “tremendous progress” over the years through the Village Safe Water program, he said. “This measure, I believe, seeks to extend the benefit of that program simply to more Alaskans,” he said.
McCabe, in his wrap-up pitch for the bill, pointed out that villages getting grants through the state program must pass through a qualification test that assigns scores.
And he defended the idea of Village Safe Water grants for Talkeetna, a community about 60 miles up the highway from his hometown of Big Lake.
“People are stopping alongside the road on the way to Talkeetna to their dry cabin in the middle of the winter in the dark, when it’s icy and cold, to fill up their water jugs,” he said. “I’m wondering why Talkeetna can’t have some part of the pie that we talked about, that the representative from Anchorage talked about.”
The bill is now on track to be considered by the Senate, though it may get a reconsideration vote in the House.
GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Alaska
The Alarming Prices Of Groceries In Rural Alaska — And Why They’re So Expensive – Tasting Table
Many households across America have been struggling with their grocery bills due to inflation that hit the global markets after the COVID-19 pandemic, but for families in Alaska, especially in rural communities, the prices of basic goods have reached alarming heights. Alongside inflation, the main issue for the climbing prices is Alaska’s distance from the rest of the U.S., which influences the cost of transport that’s required to deliver the supplies.
Given that Alaska is a non-contiguous state, any trucks delivering grocery stock have to first cross Canada before reaching Alaska, which requires a very valuable resource: time. According to Alaska Beacon, “It takes around 40 hours of nonstop driving to cover the more than 2,200 highway miles from Seattle to Fairbanks” on the Alaska Highway. That’s why a fairly small percentage of the state’s food comes in on the road. For the most part, groceries are shipped in on barges and are then flown to more remote areas, since “82% of the state’s communities are not reachable by road,” per Alaska Beacon. As such, even takeout in Alaska is sometimes delivered by plane.
Planes, trucks, and boats all cost money, but they are also all vulnerable to extreme weather conditions, which are not uncommon in Alaska. Sometimes local stores are unable to restock basic staples like bread and milk for several weeks, so Alaskans struggle with high food insecurity.
How much do groceries cost in Alaska?
Groceries in Alaska cost significantly more than in the rest of the U.S., but even within the state itself, the prices vary based on remoteness. You’ll find that prices of the same items can double or even triple, depending on how inaccessible a certain area is. The New Republic reported that prices in Unalakleet, a remote village that’s only accessible by plane, can be up to 80% higher than in Anchorage, Alaska’s most populated city. For example, the outlet cited Campbell’s Tomato Soup costing $1.69 in Anchorage and $4.25 in Unalakleet. Even more staggering is the price of apple juice: $3.29 in the city, $10.65 in the village. Such prices might make our jaw drop, but they’re a daily reality for many Alaskans.
As one resident shared on TikTok, butter in his local store costs $8 per pound — almost twice the national average. Fresh produce is even more expensive, with bananas going for $3 a pound, approximately five times the national average. It’s therefore not surprising that most of the people who live in Alaska have learned to rely on nature to survive.
Subsistence living has great importance for many communities. They hunt their own meat, forage for plants, and nurture their deep cultural connection to sourdough. For rural Alaskans, living off the land is a deep philosophy that embraces connection with nature and hones the survival knowledge that’s passed down through generations — including how to make Alaska’s traditional akutaq ice cream.
Alaska
Backcountry avalanche warning issued for much of Southcentral Alaska
High avalanche danger in the mountains around much of Southcentral Alaska prompted officials to issue a backcountry avalanche warning Saturday for areas from Anchorage to Seward.
The Chugach National Forest Avalanche Information Center said that a combination of heavy snowfall, strong winds and low-elevation rain Saturday “will overload a weak snowpack, creating widespread areas of unstable snow.”
The warning is in effect from 6 a.m. Saturday to 6 a.m. Sunday.
Human-triggered and natural slides are likely, and avalanche debris may run long distances into the bottoms of valleys and other lower-angle terrain, the center said.
In Saturday’s avalanche forecast, which noted high avalanche danger at all elevations in the Turnagain Pass and Girdwood areas, the center said avalanches were likely to fail on weak layers about 1.5 to 3 feet deep.
Forecasters recommended that people avoid traveling in avalanche terrain, staying clear of slopes steeper than 30 degrees.
“Avalanche conditions will remain very dangerous immediately after the snow finishes,” the avalanche center said in its warning.
The center also said conditions may cause roofs to shed snow, and urged that people watch for overhead hazards, use care in choosing where to park vehicles and watch out for children and pets.
Areas covered under the backcountry avalanche warning include the mountains around Anchorage, Girdwood, Portage, Turnagain Pass, Lost Lake and Seward.
Farther north, the Hatcher Pass Avalanche Center in its forecast Saturday said danger was considerable at upper elevations and moderate at middle elevations.
Snowfall in Anchorage and Mat-Su
A winter weather advisory remained in effect until 9 a.m. Sunday from Anchorage up to the lower Matanuska Valley, including the cities of Eagle River, Palmer and Wasilla.
The National Weather Service said total accumulations of 4 to 8 inches of snow were possible, with localized areas potentially receiving up to a foot of snow.
The snowfall was expected to peak Saturday evening before tapering off Sunday morning, the weather service said.
Alaska
In US Supreme Court case over which absentee ballots count, Alaska doesn’t pick a side
Alaska’s appointed attorney general on Friday filed a friends of the court brief in a case before the U.S. Supreme Court involving whether absentee ballots that arrive after Election Day can be counted.
The filing does not side with either party in the case, which arose in Mississippi.
Instead, it informs the court of the logistical hurdles in Alaska — far-flung villages, lack of roads and severe weather — that make it difficult to receive absentee ballots by Election Day.
Alaska, like roughly half the other states in the U.S., allows some ballots cast by Election Day to be received later, the brief says.
The case, Watson v. Republican National Committee, challenges a law in Mississippi that allows absentee ballots received shortly after Election Day to count if they are postmarked by Election Day.
The Republican National Committee, the Mississippi Republican Party, the Libertarian Party of Mississippi and a Mississippi voter challenged the law in 2024. They argue that under federal law, ballots must received by state officials by Election Day to be counted.
The case could have national implications by influencing midterm elections, and comes amid baseless assertions from President Donald Trump that mail-in voting results in “MASSIVE VOTER FRAUD.”
The Alaska brief was filed by Jenna Lorence, the first Alaska solicitor general after Attorney General Stephen Cox created the role and appointed the Indiana attorney in October to fill it.
The 14-page brief says it does not support either party in the case.
The state’s impartiality drew criticism from an elections attorney, Scott Kendall, one of the main architects of the state’s ranked choice voting and open primary system.
“If you’re going to file something, take a position in favor of Alaska’s laws because they’re there for a very good reason,” Kendall said.
If the U.S. Supreme Court strikes down the law in Mississippi, that could lead to the disenfranchisement of many Alaska voters whose ballots arrive after Election Day, he said.
“Thousands upon thousands of Alaskans, through no fault of their own, wouldn’t be able to vote, and that’s not the democracy I signed up for,” Kendall said.
Under Alaska law, absentee ballots sent in state are counted if they are received “by the close of business on the 10th day after the election,” the filing says. Ballots from overseas must be received by the 15th day after the election.
Asked why the solicitor general did not take a position defending Alaska’s law or siding with either party, the Department of Law said in a statement emailed by spokesperson Sam Curtis:
“The State is committed to providing fair elections for Alaskans and will do so whatever rule the Court adopts. Alaska has previously filed these factual briefs to ensure courts understand the State’s unique perspective. Here, we wanted to ensure the Supreme Court knew how circumstances in Alaska make rules that might be simple in Mississippi more complicated in our State. We’re asking for clarity, so the Division of Elections and Alaska voters have straightforward rules to apply in the 2026 election.”
The filing notes that most Alaska communities are hard to reach.
“With over 80 percent of Alaskan communities off the road system, and extreme weather making access by boat or plane unreliable during certain months, including November, Alaska’s Division of Elections will continue to establish processes unlike any other State to ensure that its geography does not limit its citizens’ ability to vote,” the filing says. “Alaska asks that as this Court crafts a rule in this case, it provide clear parameters for Alaska to apply.”
The filing provides examples of how determining when a ballot was “received” by the Division of Elections is not always clearly defined, the Department of Law said.
In some cases, even in-person votes can struggle to reach the state elections division due to weather and geographical challenges, the filing says.
In 2024, poll workers in Atqasuk in northern Alaska tallied the votes cast on Election Day, but could not reach the elections division by phone that night.
So they “placed the ballots and tally sheets into a secure package and mailed them to the Division, who did not receive them until nine days later,” the filing says. “This exemplifies the hurdles that the Division regularly faces to receive and count votes from rural areas.”
The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals held that ballots must “be both cast by voters and received by state officials” by Election Day, the filing says.
“While that rule may invalidate laws like Mississippi’s delayed receipt deadline, what does it do in a situation like Atqasuk, where votes were cast and received by some poll workers on election day, but state officials did not receive the physical ballots or vote tallies until days later?” the filing says.
“Even more standardized voting situations in Alaska raise these questions,” the filing says.
“For example, when a voter casts an in-person absentee ballot in a remote area shortly before election day, the absentee voting official must send the ballot (in its unopened absentee ballot envelope) to the regional office, which may take some time,” the filing says. “Is the ballot ‘received’ the day it is turned over to the voting official? Or is it ‘received’ only once it reaches the regional office, where, for the first time, the Division evaluates eligibility before opening the envelope and counting the ballot within?”
“While it is clear when a ballot is ‘cast’ in Alaska (meaning that the vote cannot be changed), when certain ballots are actually ‘received’ is open to different interpretations, especially given the connectivity challenges for Alaska’s far-flung boroughs,” the filing says.
Alaska Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom, who oversees elections, said in a prepared statement that Alaska wants the Supreme Court “to provide clear guidance that protects election integrity while recognizing Alaska’s logistical challenges, so every eligible voter can make their voice heard.”
Cox said in the statement that Alaska wants the court to “consider how a rule that seems straightforward in some states might raise more questions in others. All we want is clarity in the rules.”
The filing also points out that for absentee ballots, many voters rely on the United States Postal Service.
“But unlike in other states, where mail delivery can be accomplished by simply driving to someone’s house via a continuous road system, USPS must use creative solutions to reach 82 percent of Alaskan communities,” the filing says.
In a separate matter, new guidelines from the U.S. Postal Service could also lead to votes not being counted across the U.S.
The postal service said on Dec. 24 it cannot guarantee that it will postmark ballots the same day they are put into a mailbox.
-
Detroit, MI1 week ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology5 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX3 days agoAnti-ICE protest outside Dallas City Hall follows deadly shooting in Minneapolis
-
Dallas, TX6 days agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Delaware2 days agoMERR responds to dead humpback whale washed up near Bethany Beach
-
Iowa5 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Health1 week agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits
-
Nebraska4 days agoOregon State LB transfer Dexter Foster commits to Nebraska
