Connect with us

Alaska

Rural Alaska villages hope to eliminate barriers to federal funding for addressing climate change threats

Published

on

Rural Alaska villages hope to eliminate barriers to federal funding for addressing climate change threats


Whereas land is quickly eroding and the coastal strains are shifting, a 3rd of Alaska Native villages are seeing main penalties and little or no assist.

About 70 Alaska Native villages out of over 200 face erosion, flooding or thawing permafrost, which may imply a risk to security, lack of infrastructure and modifications to the atmosphere and conventional practices. Federal companies have been dedicating lots of of tens of millions of {dollars} to assist villages tackle the results of local weather change and put together for future threats, however communities have struggled to entry assist. With help coming from numerous companies via completely different packages, it may be straightforward to get misplaced whereas navigating choices, and it’s arduous to seek out those that may really assist.

A brand new report from the U.S. Authorities Accountability Workplace reviewed federal efforts to assist Alaska Native villages affected by local weather change and made suggestions for Congress and federal companies to higher help these communities. Particularly, the workplace advisable consolidating accessible assist, offering technical help to tribes making use of for funding and ensuring the packages supplied are relevant to Alaska Native tribes.

Advertisement

“They appear to have listened and put down all the main focus factors that have been mentioned. It’s a begin,” stated Twyla Thurmond, who’s from Shishmaref and is now a tribal liaison for Climigration Community. “I’m seeing actually stable suggestions, however there’s at all times a course of and getting one thing full. Is it as much as Congress to make it possible for these packages really do that? Like, what’s the subsequent step? That’s my largest fear.”

Whereas the suggestions may be helpful, some assume they don’t go far sufficient. Griffin Hagle, govt director of the Taġiuġmiullu Nunamiullu Housing Authority in Northwest Alaska, stated that the report “continues to bop round the truth that nothing wanting a wartime mobilization is required to confront the causes and results of local weather change.”

In Newtok, one of many many Alaska communities threatened by a altering local weather, eroding land has pushed the neighborhood to begin shifting to a brand new location, Mertarvik. The primary a part of relocation took years and the method remains to be incomplete because the village of just about 400 has been navigating accessible packages with completely different necessities, deadlines and functions.

Newtok must construct about 45 extra properties to maneuver everybody to the brand new location, and the neighborhood wants to mix help from a number of sources to fund the development. In the meantime, the 275 residents remaining in Newtok proceed to face vital dangers from erosion, which is anticipated to severely threaten the college this fall.

When going through environmental threats, villages usually should take care of instant injury to infrastructure. However on the similar time, they face the problem of making ready for future threats and growing resilience to them — for instance, by setting up erosion and flood safety berms or relocating to safer floor.

Advertisement

There isn’t a single federal program that may meet all of a village’s wants; a village will doubtless have to attract on a wide range of packages which can be fragmented throughout federal, state and tribal companies. For instance, if a village wants to maneuver properties situated too near an eroding riverbank, the Denali Fee, FEMA, Division of Housing and City Growth and USDA all administer packages that could possibly assist relocate the properties or assemble new ones. Different companies may must be concerned to put in the supporting infrastructure similar to water and wastewater techniques, roads and energy era.

Communities additionally usually want to mix help from a number of packages to finish a mission, partially as a result of the excessive value of building could exceed a single program’s grant award restrict.

“Varied companies that present assist don’t speak to one another, and oftentimes don’t speak to tribes, so folks simply really feel misplaced within the system looking for the suitable useful resource and discover the discovering that matches,” stated Melinda Chase, tribal liaison at Alaska Tribal Resilience Studying Community. “Many tribes could not know the way all of the companies may go collectively.”

Hagle stated the state of affairs in Level Lay exemplifies “the compounding results of lack of political will to behave” on present housing and local weather change crises. In certainly one of their initiatives, the housing authority is working to demolish a dilapidated former schoolhouse and construct three new duplexes.

“Not having a streamlined replicable useful resource to take care of the asbestos abatement on that outdated BIA college — which is on no account an unusual drawback in rural Alaska — is another hurdle within the path,” he stated.

Advertisement

[ Alaska villages will build new homes and improve water and sewer systems using federal COVID-19 aid]

To enhance coordination amongst federal, state and tribal entities, the Authorities Accountability Workplace advisable that Congress set up a coordinating entity that may work with all related companies and ensure federal investments attain Alaska Native tribes successfully.

“Every neighborhood that struggles very impactfully — particularly the 13 which can be in imminent hazard — they need to have already got a seat on the desk, and all their data must be consolidated on-line,” Thurmond stated. “There must be an interagency instrument on-line that every one the data goes to.”

In rural Alaska, the problem in making use of for a grant typically begins with printing out the required paperwork or accessing the web, which is usually patchy and costly, Thurmond stated. In some unspecified time in the future, she nearly missed an utility deadline as a result of the climate was unhealthy and the web connection wasn’t dependable.

“It takes loads of the funding simply to have the ability to entry the web. And loads of occasions it doesn’t work when there’s snow out, or blizzard, or it’s raining too arduous,” she stated. “We’ve got to attend for sunny days to have the ability to contact companies and take part in something Zoom associated. That’s an enormous frustration.”

Advertisement

The Authorities Accountability Workplace advisable that federal companies offering villages with technical help assist tribes choose the packages and apply for them.

Lowering obstacles for tribes searching for assist to handle local weather change additionally entails adjusting the present packages, based on the report. Of the greater than 30 related federal packages, the workplace reviewed 20 and located that every had no less than one attribute that would pose an impediment to villages attempting to acquire help.

For instance, some packages — similar to these offered by U.S. Military Corps of Engineers — require native governments to share prices, which may vary from 5% to 50% of a mission’s complete value. This can be a vital impediment for Native villages with subsistence economies, stopping villages from making use of for that assist, officers from Corps reported.

Thurmond agreed that the cost-share requirement is one thing that has at all times been an impediment for the neighborhood of Shishmaref.

“The impediment was discovering that magnitude of funding for cost-share when our communities are economically very poor,” she stated. “We don’t have $100,000, not to mention $300,000 or no matter it takes to get these initiatives up and rolling.”

Advertisement

One other impediment tribes meet when making use of for assistance is that some packages could also be accessible solely beneath sure circumstances, similar to after a pure catastrophe or an imminent risk to neighborhood infrastructure.

“It’s gradual, costly, arduous to entry, usually accessible solely after a catastrophe when individuals are in disaster now and are attempting to outlive,” Thurmond stated.

A lot of the companies — the Commerce Division, Protection Division, Homeland Safety, Inside Division and Denali Fee — supported the suggestions and agreed to implement them. The sixth company, HUD, agreed with the intent of the advice however acknowledged that it was vaguely worded.

Thurmond additionally stated the suggestions the Authorities Accountability Workplace offered sounded obscure, however constructive general. Her largest concern was whether or not they would really get carried out by the companies.

“There have been occasions the place we’ve offered related suggestions. We preserve typing them out and preserve talking out,” she stated. “This has gone on for many years. It’s simply arduous to think about execution and ensuring that these issues are adhered to the system.”

Advertisement

Hagle stated that extra decisive and substantial modifications are wanted to assist villages reply to the approaching risks.

“I at all times consider the distant early warning line,” he stated. “The U.S. authorities moved heaven and earth to construct these within the Nineteen Fifties to counter the Soviet risk, however we have now nothing approaching that stage of coordinated deal with the local weather emergency.”





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
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

Strong winds destroy deer shelter at Alaska Wildlife Conservation Center

Published

on

Strong winds destroy deer shelter at Alaska Wildlife Conservation Center


ANCHORAGE, Alaska (KTUU) – Strong winds in the Portage area on Monday destroyed a shelter building at the Alaska Wildlife Conservation Center that was used to house Sitka deer. The conservation center says 80 mph winds swept through Portage Valley.

The conservation center says no animals were injured, but they are quickly raising money to rebuild. Their goal is $30,000, and as of Thursday morning, they have already fundraised over $26,000.

Sales & Marketing Director Nicole Geils said, “The shelter was in their habitat. It was essential for providing them a safe Haven during harsh weather. It’s a really useful area for when we’re feeding and doing enrichment with the deer and it’s also a safe space for recovery after medical procedures when needed.”

Executive Director Sarah Howard described how she learned about the damage.

Advertisement

“We had a staff member that radioed, ‘The shelter’s gone!’ And a couple of us were at least able to make a little light of the situation. Like, did it go to Oz? And thankfully, it didn’t go too far, and the deer were okay,” Howard said.

The conservation center is still accepting donations through their website.

Strong winds destroy deer shelter at Alaska Wildlife Conservation Center(Courtesy Nicole Geils)
Strong winds destroy deer shelter at Alaska Wildlife Conservation Center
Strong winds destroy deer shelter at Alaska Wildlife Conservation Center(Courtesy Nicole Geils)

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



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Alaska

After school funding dispute, 4 Alaska districts move on without federally promised money

Published

on

After school funding dispute, 4 Alaska districts move on without federally promised money


Until last month, the U.S. Department of Education said Alaska underfunded four of its largest school districts by $17.5 million. As a result of a recent agreement, the schools in Anchorage, Fairbanks, Juneau and Kenai Peninsula Borough won’t directly receive any of that money.

However, two of the districts said they weren’t counting on receiving the money as they planned their current budgets, while the other districts either didn’t respond or declined to comment.

The $17.5 million is part of COVID-era pandemic funding, and until last month, how Alaska distributed that funding was at the heart of a years-long dispute between federal and state officials, and whether it was spent fairly.

The state repeatedly defended their school spending plan, while the federal government asserted the state failed to comply with guidelines and reduced spending on these districts with high-need or high-poverty areas, and withheld the sum they said was owed.

Advertisement

Federal officials said the state reduced spending to the Kenai Peninsula and Anchorage school districts by up to $11.89 million in the 2021 to 2022 school year, and all four districts by $5.56 million the following year.

Kenai Superintendent Clayton Holland said the district never budgeted for this particular federal COVID funding, as they were aware of the dispute.

“Had it gone through, we would have welcomed it, as we are facing a potential deficit of $17 million for next year” and have nearly exhausted the balance of funding the district can spend without restrictions, Holland said.

Anchorage School District officials did not respond to requests for comment.

The dispute came to an end on Dec. 20,  when the federal department told the state it was releasing the funding, citing a review of the state’s one-time funding boosts in the last two budgets, and considered the matter closed.

Advertisement

Alaska Education Commissioner Deena Bishop led the state’s defense effort, including appealing the penalty, and applauded the move by the federal Department of Education. She said the state always followed the state law governing school funding.

“The department said, ‘We don’t agree with your formula, you should have given these guys more.’ And we said, ‘No, no, no. Only our Legislature can make the law about our formula. That’s why we stood behind it,” she said in an interview Tuesday.

The dispute centered around what was known as a “maintenance of equity” provision of a federal COVID aid law, which banned states from dropping per-pupil spending during the pandemic. Bishop said that decreases in funding in the four districts were due to drops in enrollment, according to the state’s spending formula.

Bishop defended the formula as equitable, noting that it factors in geographic area, local tax bases, and other issues. “I just felt strongly that there’s no way that they can say that we’re inequitable, because there are third-party assessments and research that has been done that Alaska actually has one of the most equitable formulas,” she said.

“Our funding formula is a state entity. Our districts are funded according to that,” Bishop said. “And so basically, they [U.S. Department of Education] argued that the distribution of funds from the state funding formula, the state’s own money, right, nothing to do with the Feds, was inequitable.

Advertisement

“So they picked these districts to say, ‘You need to give them more.’ And we’re saying, ‘No, you don’t have a right to say that. We spent your money, how you said, but only the state Legislature can say’” how to spend state money, she said.

She said the state felt confident about their spending plan for American Rescue Plan Act funding.

In addition to temporarily withholding the funding, the federal government further penalized Alaska by designating it a “high risk” grantee.

Federal and state officials went back and forth on compliance, with the state doubling down, defending their school spending. By May, the state had racked up another $1 million in frozen federal funds.

Bishop said despite the holds from the feds, they continued to award the funds to districts.

Advertisement

“We felt as though we would prevail. So we never wanted to harm school districts who were appropriated those funds the way that they were supposed to,” she said. School districts followed the dispute closely.

Juneau School District’ Superintendent Frank Hauser said the district did not expect or budget for the funds.

“JSD was slated only to receive approximately $90,000 of the “maintenance of equity” funds, much less than Kenai, Fairbanks, or Anchorage,” he said in an email. “JSD will not receive that money now; however, we had not anticipated receiving it and had not included it in our budget projection.”

The Fairbanks North Star Borough School District declined to comment on the issue. A spokesperson said the district administration is awaiting clarification from the state education department.

On Monday, the administration announced a recommended consolidation plan for five elementary schools to be closed, citing a $16 million deficit for next year. A final vote on whether to close the schools is set for early February.

Advertisement

Now the state is in the process of applying for reimbursements from the federal Department of Education, and expects to receive that full $17.5 million award, Bishop said. If districts have outstanding pandemic-related expenses, she said those can be submitted to the state, and will be reimbursed according to the state’s COVID-19 funding guidelines. “We’ll process that, and then we’ll go to the Feds and get that money back,” she said.

In December, Gov. Mike Dunleavy applauded the federal announcement, calling the dispute “a tremendous waste of time,” in a prepared statement. He repeated his support for President-elect Donald Trump’s calls to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education.

“On the bright side, this saga is a wonderful case study of the U.S. Department of Education’s abuse of power and serves as further evidence for why I support the concept of eliminating it,” he said.

Dunleavy linked to a social media post he made on X, which read, in part, that eliminating the department “would restore local control of education back to the states, reduce bureaucratic inefficiency and reduce cost. Long overdue.”

Sen. Löki Tobin, D-Anchorage and chair of the Senate Education Committee, pointed to the timing for the outgoing Biden administration and federal leaders’ desire to release funding to Alaska schools.

Advertisement

“It’s very clear that if the presidential election had ended in a different result, we would not be having this conversation,” she said. “Instead, they would be continuing to work with the department to find a more elegant, a more clean solution.”

She said the federal letter announcing the end to the long dispute doesn’t mean the issue of equity was resolved.

“I think their letter to the Department of Education and Early Development here in Alaska was very clear that Alaska never did fully comply with the guidelines, but instead, due to a want and a fervent hope that the resources would get into the schools and into the communities that so desperately needed them, that they would choose to not pursue further compliance measures,” she said.

Last year, the Legislature passed a budget with $11.89 million included for the state to comply with the federal requirements, but that funding was vetoed by Dunleavy, who defended the state’s position, saying the “need for funds is indeterminate.”

The budget did include a one-time funding boost to all districts, but Tobin said the annual school aid debate left districts in limbo for future budget planning.

Advertisement

“We can see how this has cost school districts, how it has created instability, how it has resulted in a system that is unpredictable for funding streams for our schools,” Tobin said.

Kenai Superintendent Holland expressed hope that school funding would be prioritized by elected officials this year.

“The bigger issue for us, and for all Alaskan school districts, is what our legislators and governor will decide regarding education funding in the upcoming legislative session,” Holland said.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Alaska

Alaska's population increases from 2023 to 2024

Published

on

Alaska's population increases from 2023 to 2024


The state of Alaska saw an increase in population of 0.31% from 2023 to 2024, despite more people leaving the state than entering it.
The increase is attributed to births outpacing both deaths and outward migration, according to new data from the Department of Labor and Workforce Development. Based on Census Data from 2020 and state data, the population is estimated to have increased to 741,147 people



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending