Rep. Andy Josephson, D-Anchorage, asks a question about Senate Bill 48, the carbon credits bill, on Tuesday, May 16, 2023, in the House Finance Committee. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
By: Sean Maguire, Alaska Beacon
Rep. Andy Josephson, D-Anchorage, asks a question about Senate Bill 48, the carbon credits bill, on Tuesday, May 16, 2023, in the House Finance Committee. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
The Alaska House Finance Committee on Wednesday advanced a draft operating budget with a roughly $3,800 Permanent Fund dividend.
For a decade, the annual PFD check has been part of the Legislature’s annual budget-making process. A $3,800 PFD would follow a formula from a 1982 statute.
Lawmakers on a budget panel adopted the full, statutory dividend in the evening after long debate. Anchorage Democratic Rep. Andy Josephson, co-chair of the House Finance Committee, cautioned legislators that the vote means Alaskans “will absolutely have the impression” that “a very liberal dividend” will be paid this year.
Republican Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy proposed a full PFD as part of his budget proposal in December. A $3,800 dividend check is estimated to cost roughly $2.47 billion, the largest single spending item in the budget.
Ketchikan independent Rep. Jeremy Bynum proposed that the PFD would come from two sources. Almost $1 billion would be drawn from the general fund of the state treasury. A simple majority of lawmakers is required to spend from that account.
However, close to $1.5 billion would come from the state’s main savings account, the $3 billion Constitutional Budget Reserve. Three-quarters of the House and Senate would need to support spending from that account.
If the three-quarter vote fails, the dividend paid to Alaskans in 2026 would drop to around $1,500. Some lawmakers cautioned that would still leave the state roughly $100 million in deficit.
The roughly $3,800 PFD was approved 6-5 by the House Finance Committee. All five minority House Republicans supported a check of that size, alongside Nome Democratic Rep. Neal Foster, co-chair of the House Finance Committee.
The remaining five members of the Democrat-dominated House majority voted no.
Supporters of a full PFD said that high oil prices justified a larger dividend this year. In 2022, Alaskans received a $3,284 dividend and energy relief check when Russia’s invasion of Ukraine sent oil prices skyrocketing.
Rep. Frank Tomaszewski, R-Fairbanks, said that the “people of Alaska are hurting right now” and are facing difficult circumstances from high energy bills.
The U.S.-Israel war in Iran has seen oil prices spike to well over $100 per barrel. The Alaska Department of Revenue projected last month that would see the state collect $1 billion more revenue than expected over the current fiscal year and the fiscal year that starts July 1.
Lawmakers have already earmarked a substantial portion of that additional revenue to pay Alaska’s outstanding bills.
The operating budget now advances to debate by the full Alaska House. Once approved in that chamber, it advances to the Alaska Senate for its consideration before heading to the governor’s desk.
One of the outdoor sculptures at the University of Alaska Anchorage campus is integrated into a fountain, pictured here on May 16, 2022. More than half of the University of Alaska system students attend UAA or one of its satellite campuses. (Photo by Yereth Rosen/Alaska Beacon)
University of Alaska staff announced a vote to form a union on Wednesday. The union would represent 2,300 permanent staff across the three universities and a dozen community campuses.
Staff voted to form the union Coalition of Alaska University Staff for Equity, or CAUSE, which would be part of the national United Auto Workers union, in a 1,106 to 610 vote, with 64% voting yes.
UA staff that would be represented by the union include student services staff, researchers, fiscal and administrative staff, development staff, science communicators, information systems specialists, library workers, athletics coaches and many others, according to a statement announcing the vote.
“Amid growing uncertainty around state and federal funding for the University, staff cited several reasons for forming a union: consistency and competitiveness in pay and benefits; greater transparency in promotion, career development, and retention; fair workload; and more,” the statement said.
“This is an exciting day for staff at UA,” said Mike DeLue, a researcher with the International Arctic Research Center at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, in the emailed statement.
“We did our research, discussed and debated, and overwhelmingly chose to unionize. As soon as the result is certified, we’re ready to sit down with the University and work constructively on addressing the issues that motivated us to form a union in the first place. Improving our working conditions will help us serve more students, enhance UA’s research capacity, and support Alaska communities,” he said.
The results of the union vote are expected to be certified on April 8, barring any objections or challenges filed by either of the parties, said Jonathon Taylor, director of UA public affairs, by email on Wednesday.
Taylor also cited financial uncertainty as one of the reasons the university opposed the union effort, which he said was communicated to employees ahead of the vote.
“The university opposed unionization because we believed it would reduce flexibility, slow decision-making, and limit our ability to respond to financial uncertainty,” he said. “That position was operational, not ideological.”
“UA respects the outcome and the right of staff to organize,” he said by email. “We’ll be bargaining in good faith with CAUSE-UAW in accordance with Alaska labor law.”
Taylor noted that existing wages and working conditions will remain in place while the contract is negotiated. He said initial contracts take roughly 400 days to negotiate. He said a 3% salary increase the university requested of the Alaska State Legislature in next year’s budget for all unionized and non-union staff will not apply to the new union members since they are in the process of forming the union and have not yet negotiated a new contract.
“Under Alaska labor law and case law, a contract with a bargaining unit must be in place for negotiated raises to be requested and approved by the legislature,” he said. Taylor said the issue was communicated to staff ahead of the union vote.
“Non-represented staff remain eligible for that increase,” he said.
But Charlie Banks, an organizer for the union effort and an academic advisor with the University of Alaska Anchorage, said Thursday that it is the university’s choice, and the new union members should be eligible.
“We believe that the university has the ability to issue the pay increases to us,” she said in a phone interview.
She said support for salary increases is also a show of support for retaining staff, which she says is a common goal of both the union and the university.
“We agree with university admins concerns about difficulties with recruitment and retention. One of the main reasons for this is that Alaska is not keeping up with its peers in maintaining competitive packages for workers,” she said. “Not surprisingly, our peer institutions that have staff unions have much stronger recruitment tools because their contracts are responsive to their needs.”
The new staff union follows the 2024 unionization of UA graduate workers to form the Alaska Graduate Workers Association within the United Auto Workers Local 1907. The union represents graduate teaching assistants, researchers and fellows. They bargained their first three-year contract within 96 days, which secured higher pay, an updated grievance process and a change from at-will to just-cause employment, according to reporting from the student-run newspaper The Northern Light.
The new staff union joins the national UAW union, which includes approximately 120,000 higher education workers across the country, including staff at the University of Washington and University of California.
Sen. Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel, speaks during a joint session of the Alaska Legislature on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. (James Brooks photo/Alaska Beacon)
By: Sean Maguire, Alaska Beacon
Sen. Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel, speaks during a joint session of the Alaska Legislature on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. (James Brooks photo/Alaska Beacon)
The Alaska Senate on Wednesday advanced a constitutional amendment that would establish a dedicated fund for public education.
If passed, lawmakers could design a new source of state revenue to go toward the fund that would be used specifically for schools. The resolution states that the Legislature could only appropriate money from the fund for public education.
The Alaska Constitution explicitly prohibits the dedication of funds in most cases. Supporters say that prohibition was intended to give the Legislature flexibility in budgeting, and avoid mandated funds.
Bethel Democratic Sen. Lyman Hoffman said before Wednesday’s vote that education is his No. 1 priority. A dedicated education fund could be a “tremendous tool” to improve schools in Alaska, he said. Hoffman co-chairs the Senate Finance Committee which sponsored the constitutional amendment.
The Legislature last year approved an historic increase in school funding through the state’s complex formula, overriding two separate vetoes by Republican Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy. Still, advocates say that substantially more school funding is needed with school districts facing sizable budget shortfalls and decades of deferred maintenance.
Two Alaska school districts in January sued the state, arguing that Alaska’s education funding levels violate a constitutional duty to fund schools adequately. School districts across Alaska have long complained about crumbling buildings that have reached crisis level.
Republican Sen. Bert Stedman represents Sitka, home of Mt. Edgecumbe High School, a state-run boarding school which has reported leaking roofs and buildings in disrepair. Stedman said Alaska is one of the nation’s richest states, but the condition of its schools is “kind of embarrassing.”
Surrounded by school children in the Senate’s public galleries, Stedman said that “we should be doing better for our kids.”
“Every generation needs to make a little step forward and this is our little step,” he said in support of the resolution before the final vote.
The Alaska Senate approved the resolution on a 17-3 vote. At least 14 of 20 senators are needed to support a constitutional amendment. Two-thirds of the Alaska House of Representatives would need to vote for the same resolution to put the proposal before voters at the November election.
All 14 members of the bipartisan Senate majority supported the constitutional amendment, alongside three minority Senate Republicans — Sens. Robert Yundt of Wasilla, Mike Cronk of Tok and James Kaufman of Anchorage.
Three minority Senate Republicans voted no: Sens. Robb Myers of North Pole, Cathy Tilton of Wasilla and George Rauscher of Sutton.
Myers said the drafters of the Alaska Constitution sought to block the proliferation of dedicated funds, which would consume the annual budget.
He said that establishing a dedicated fund for education “removed any sort of flexibility for the Legislature.” He said that avoiding annual debates about school funding was “not necessarily a good thing.” Education spending could effectively be “out of sight, out of mind,” he said.
Myers said the state has numerous other priorities such as health care and natural resource management, but they would not receive the same dedicated funds.
The resolution now advances to the House. If approved by 27 of 40 House members, it would then be placed before voters at the Nov. 3 election. A simple majority of voters is needed to approve an amendment to the Alaska Constitution.
A governor cannot block a constitutional amendment from appearing on the ballot with their veto pen. The Alaska Constitution was last amended in 2004.
NOTN- The City and Borough of Juneau is scrapping its participation in the long-planned gondola project at Eaglecrest ski area after costs ballooned from single-digit millions to an estimated $37 million, leaving the city on the hook to repay Goldbelt during an already tight budget season.
Finance Committee Chair Christine Woll said the Juneau Assembly voted Wednesday night to move forward with pulling out of its agreement with Goldbelt, which had helped finance the project. The city expects to repay about $12 million that Goldbelt invested, roughly $9 million of which has already been spent.
“We knew that increases at Eaglecrest were going to be significant over time, just because of aging infrastructure, and we knew that the public tax dollars probably couldn’t sustain paying for those increases at Eaglecrest.” Woll said, “So the vision was that by installing a gondola that could help take advantage of summer revenue from our visitor industry, we could provide a more reliable, non-taxpayer dollar-funded income stream at Eaglecrest, but for a price tag that big, it no longer becomes something that the city has funds to invest in.”
The gondola was originally projected to cost about $7 million, later revised to around $9 million when the city and Goldbelt signed their deal, Woll said. The latest estimate, about $37 million to install, pushed the project far beyond affordability for the City.
“It’s just terrible, what a waste of money, but we’re gonna have to figure out how to pay it back.” Woll said.
The decision to cancel the project now leaves Eaglecrest in a precarious financial position. Its future budgets had assumed new income from gondola operations during the summer months.
Woll said the Assembly has directed Eaglecrest to return with a much-reduced operating budget that fits within the traditional taxpayer subsidy the ski area receives.
The gondola reversal comes as Juneau is just beginning to create it’s annual budget for FY 27.
“Ultimately, the assembly is going to have to make some hard decisions about service reductions. We’re aiming to make about $2 million more in cuts before June, when we have to pass the budget.” Said Woll.
As the federal government advances plans to roll back Roadless Rule protections on 58 million acres of national forests, Southeast Alaska conservation advocates are racing to mobilize public opposition, warning that repealing the Roadless Rule could open the Tongass National Forest to expanded clear-cut logging and place subsistence, fisheries and tourism in peril.
Nathan Newcomer, Southeast Alaska Conservation Council (SEACC) Tongass Campaigner, said the current administration has signaled from “day one” that it intends to eliminate the federal Roadless Rule, a regulation that limits road-building and industrial development on certain undeveloped national forest lands.
“They signed an executive order to try to get rid of the Roadless Rule. The Secretary of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins, also issued a statement intending to rescind the Roadless Rule nationwide.”
Despite the administration’s push, the conservation group says public sentiment has been overwhelmingly in favor of keeping the rule.
A Notice of Intent, the first step in the rulemaking process, opened a 21-day public comment period nationwide. During that brief window, the public submitted more than 627,000 comments Newcomer said.
“Over half a million people submitted public comments. There’s a group called the Center for Western Priorities that did an analysis of those public comments, and they found that 99% of the public comments were in favor of keeping the roadless rule in place. When do you see 99% of American citizens agreeing on something? That just goes to show you that people really like the Roadless Rule.”
In 2001 when the Rule was enacted by the Clinton Administration, more than 600 public hearings were held around the nation, and the public provided more than 1.6 million comments on the Rule, more comments than any other rule in the nation’s history.
Now, Newcomer says, the government is trying to unwind those protections without holding any comparable meetings.
“They’re not holding any public meetings anywhere, not only for Alaska, but nothing down south either. So that’s why we’re organizing these public hearings, not just in Juneau, but throughout southeast.” Said Newcomer.
Juneau’s hearing was scheduled for yesterday evening at the JACC downtown.
The event featured a panel discussion with President Mike Jones of the Organized Village of Kasaan, Atagan Hood, Vice President of Alaska Youth for Environmental Action, Jamalea Martelle of Artemis National Wildlife Federation and Nicole Weston, Owner of NW Photography.
A moderator guided the conversation, about why roadless protections matter in their communities. The event then shifted into a public hearing where attendees offered testimony themselves.
“We’re going to have several videographers on hand that are going to document everything, record everybody’s public testimony, then we’re going to transcribe that testimony, and then we’re going to officially submit it to the public record once the public comment period for the draft EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) is open.”
If the roadless rule is repealed, Newcomer warned, “If you get rid of protections for federal public lands, you’re talking about more large scale clear cut logging, that’s the main threat. And of course, when you start to clear cut, it’s going to have huge impacts on the wildlife, on our subsistence ways of life here in the Tongass, on the tourism, recreation economy. How many people came up on cruise ships to Juneau last year?”
Despite the scale of public opposition documented in the comment record, Newcomer said he does not believe the federal government, under current leadership, is likely to change course.
“But that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t make our voices heard and make a lot of noise and make sure that we’re all on the record saying that we don’t want this. Because there are also other elections that happen, right? And so power can shift, so it’s about demonstrating that the people care about these things, and that’s just kind of the work that I have to do, and that’s the work that we’re doing to make sure that the public’s voice is heard.”
He said he’s seen community organizing make a difference over longer timelines, even when initial decisions seemed foregone.
“Historically, Americans have said we would like to keep the Roadless Rule in place, and now this administration is trying to ram a policy through that the vast majority of us don’t want to see happen. That’s not the role of government.” Newcomer said, “Government needs to be by the people for the people. I think highlighting that is really critical, so that people understand that they have agency, Because there’s a lot going on in the world, right? And it’s really easy to get overwhelmed and to become apathetic, but you really do have agency. I’ve seen it time and time again in my life, where you might feel like the the clouds are closing in on you, and it’s getting dark and gloomy, but really, when you stand together and you speak in a solid voice in unity, it can have really powerful change. It might not happen today or tomorrow, but it could make a huge difference.”
Fishing vessels are seen in Homer’s harbor on Oct. 22, 2025. A resolution passed by state lawmakers urges federal officials to extend the ban on Russian seafood imports. Russian fish competes for market share with Alaska’s fish. (Photo by Yereth Rosen/Alaska Beacon)
A legislative resolution urging a continued and better-enforced ban on Russian seafood in the United States is headed to Gov. Mike Dunleavy.
Part of a series of actions by Alaska lawmakers to try to shore up the state’s ailing seafood industry, House Joint Resolution 29 won final passage last week and was transferred to the governor on Monday.
The resolution calls for continuation of the ban on Russian seafood imports imposed in 2022, after that country’s invasion of Ukraine. The ban was expanded in 2023 to cover imports of Russian seafood to the U.S. through a third-party country, usually China, where fish are processed.
The import ban is set to expire later this year. That makes the resolution timely, supporters aid.
Among the supporters is Jeremy Woodrow, executive director of the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute.
Woodrow, in testimony to the Senate Resources Committee on Feb. 27, said a stockpile of Russian fish that was in the U.S. before the ban went into full effect is just now being depleted.
“We need more time to really capture the U.S. marketplace. Our industry has not recovered yet,” Woodrow said. Even though last year’s fishing season was better, it was still one of the worst years in the last 20 years, he said.
“This is one measure that will help our fishermen. We’re starting to see the fruits of this ban coming into play, but we need more time to provide stability to our industry. We need more time to see it come to fruition,” he told the committee.
In addition to seeking an extension of the import ban, the resolution calls for stronger monitoring and enforcement to “ensure fair trade, protect the state’s seafood industry, and promote sustainable and ethical seafood production.”
Legislative resolutions do not have the power of law, but they can influence actions by Congress, the federal executive branch or other institutions.
The Russian seafood import ban resolution was not among the measures introduced by the Joint Legislative Task Force Evaluating Alaska’s Seafood Industry, formed in 2024. However, it addresses an aspect of international trade, one of the issues raised by the task force. The task force’s report recommended an update to a Russia-focused resolution passed by the legislature in 2022, Senate Joint Resolution 16.
Russian king crab is displayed at a Costco in Anchorage on Nov. 14, 2022. The crab, from the Barent Sea, was distributed by Arctic Seafoods of San Francisco, and was part of inventory stockpiled before the U.S. government banned fish imports from Russia. (Photo by Yereth Rosen/Alaska Beacon)
The eight-member task force, comprising Senate and House members from fishery-dependent districts, issued its recommendation report in January 2025, at the start of last year’s session. Recommendations for action resulted in the introduction of a series of bills intended to help the industry, which has struggled with low fish prices, glutted international markets, high costs and other challenges.
Other bills focus on tax credits and revenues
One of the task force’s bills, aimed at encouraging seafood product development and diversification, is headed for a vote in the Senate this week.
That measure, Senate Bill 130, concerns the state’s fisheries product development tax credit system. Currently, seafood companies are allowed to deduct the cost of new equipment used to develop value-added products from salmon, herring, pollock, sablefish and Pacific cod. The bill would expand that to all fish species, including shellfish. That is in line with the recommendation in the task force report, which identifies arrowtooth flounder, fish meal and crab shells as examples of some underused or discarded products that could be processed into something marketable.
The bill, in the amended form before the Senate, also seeks to expand the range of technology for which investment would qualify for credits, and it would extend the sunset date for the credit to 2037. Currently, the tax credit is due to expire next year.
The revenue impact of the bill, if it wins final passage, is difficult to determine because there are several unknown variables, said the fiscal note prepared by the state Alaska Department of Revenue. Estimated annual revenues losses to the state would range from $1 million to nearly $4 million, according to the fiscal note.
Another task force bill, aimed at helping fishery-dependent local governments, had not moved out of the Senate Finance Committee as of Tuesday. That measure, Senate Bill 135, would allow municipalities to increase their share of fisheries business tax and fishery resource landing tax revenues. Currently, the state and local governments split those tax revenues equally. The bill would allow local governments to get up to 75% of the tax revenues.
The legislature passed two seafood task force bills last year, each of which had wide support. However, Dunleavy vetoed one of the bills.
The bill that escaped the governor’s veto, House Bill 116, allows for the formation and operation of member-owned commercial fishing insurance cooperatives. Such cooperativesexist in other states and were used by some Alaska fishers. The bill passed unanimously.
The vetoed bill, Senate Bill 156, would have transferred $3.69 million from a defunct state loan fund to the Alaska Commercial Fishing and Agriculture Bank. The state-owned bank needed the boost to keep serving the seafood industry, bill supporters argued. But Dunleavy argued that the cost of the action was too great for the state budget to bear.
Members of the House and Senate voted to sustain Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s veto of SB 113, a corporate income tax bill tied to education funding by a vote of 45 to 16. 46 votes were needed to override the veto on Jan. 22, 2026 (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)
The Alaska Senate on Tuesday advanced a constitutional amendment that would lower the threshold for veto overrides of spending decisions.
The Alaska Constitution currently has two thresholds to override a governor’s vetoes: it takes two-thirds of legislators to override a veto of a policy bill and three-quarters of lawmakers to override a budget veto or a veto of legislation that spends money.
Anchorage Democratic Sen. Matt Claman’s proposed the constitutional amendment that would reduce vetoes of spending decisions to the same two-thirds threshold.
Sen. Matt Claman, D-Anchorage, speaks at a March 19, 2024, news conference held by the Senate majority caucus. (Photo by Yereth Rosen/Alaska Beacon)
Claman’s resolution passed the Senate along caucus lines on a 14-6 vote. All 14 members of the bipartisan Senate majority voted for the resolution while each member of the all-Republican Senate minority voted no.
At least 14 of Alaska’s 20 Senators are needed to reach the two-thirds threshold to advance a constitutional amendment. Twenty-seven of the 40 House members would need to approve Claman’s resolution for the proposed amendment to appear on November’s ballot.
The last time the Alaska Constitution was amended was in 2004.
Claman, a Democratic candidate for governor, said the drafters of the Alaska Constitution intended to create a strong executive branch. But the high hurdle to override a veto on spending decisions had “undermined the balance of power between the Legislature and the executive,” he said.
Alaska is the only state with a three-quarter veto override threshold for spending decisions.
In a statement following the vote on Tuesday, minority Senate Republicans said the governor’s veto power was one of few tools to curb the Legislature’s wide-reaching power. Members of the caucus stated that Gov. Mike Dunleavy had used that authority to veto tax bills, among other measures.
“The framers of our Constitution saw the wisdom in giving the governor considerable power to reduce state spending,” said Tok Republican Sen. Mike Cronk, the Senate minority leader. “The fiscal override threshold is high for a reason.”
While the Legislature has voted to override a governor on 40 occasions for policy bills since statehood, veto overrides for spending decisions have only occurred five times, Claman said.
The most recent override of a spending veto occurred last August in a special session Lawmakers voted to reject Dunleavy’s veto of more than $50 million in public school funding. The vote was 45-14, the minimum number of lawmakers needed to override a budget veto.
If approved by the House, the constitutional amendment would appear on the ballot at the Nov. 3 election. If approved by a majority of voters, the constitutional threshold for budget vetoes would then be lowered starting in 2027, also the beginning of a new governor’s term.
Unlike legislation, an Alaska governor cannot veto a constitutional amendment.
Joint Education Committee Hearing, March 30 2026, courtesy of Gavel Alaska
Alaska education leaders told lawmakers Monday, that the state’s public schools are in a “crisis” due to rising vacancies, high teacher and principle turnover and growing student needs, all while enrollment declines.
Testifying before the joint education committee, meaning both the House and the Senate, superintendents, principals, special education directors and recruitment experts described the education system as strained by flat funding.
They stressed housing and visa barriers for teachers, and a growing share of students needing intensive support.
Jennifer Schmitz, director of the Alaska Educator Retention and Recruitment Center, said Alaska’s annual turnover has reached about 30% for teachers and 35% for principals.
“We are in a crisis time right now with teacher turnover and principal turnover,” Schmitz said.
Districts are also depending on hundreds of international teachers and emergency teaching certificates to staff classrooms.
In many districts, she said, international teachers have become deeply rooted in communities and students rely on them for stability.
But new federal visa costs and restrictions, including a potential $100,000 price tag for some H‑1B visas, threaten those positions, especially for rural schools.
“We are in an educational crisis, and we are doing harm to the children of Alaska. An urgent response is needed to address the dire vacancy rates and the need for in person educators and support personnel across Alaskan schools.” Said David Nogg, principle of Goldenview Middle school.
In a separate Senate Labor and Commerce Committee hearing, lawmakers heard similar testimony when discussing Senate Joint Resolution 28, warning that steep federal fee hikes and new placement limits on visa programs are not only worsening worker shortages in schools but tourism and other key industries across the state as well.
“Visa workers are vital to filling Alaska’s diverse workforce. Foreign worker visa programs are extremely useful for highly seasonal industries such as tourism. Alaska has the largest seasonal employment swing in the country, this is not a marginal fluctuation, it is a structural feature of our economy.” Said Mike Mason, legislative assistant to Senator Löki Tobin.
Education leaders also pointed the Base Student Allocation (BSA), saying, even after last year’s increase, inflation has eroded its value.
“All boats rise and fall on the same tide, and for Alaska school districts, that tide is the BSA,” Randy Trani, Superintendent of the Mat-Su district said, calling for “timely, reliable, predictable” funding so districts can plan and focus on academics instead of annual cuts.
School finance officials also stressed that most dollars already go directly to students and there are funding needs beyond the classroom that districts are struggling to meet.
Anchorage budget director and Alaska Association of School Business Officials president Katie Parrott said about 75% of districts’ operating spending in FY2025 went to instruction, while only 2% went to district-level administration and 5% to administrative support like payroll and HR.
“There are a lot of competing priorities eating into these slices of the pie.” She said, “It’s truly imperative that the state does increase and inflation proof funding for pupil transportation as one of the key strategies to address chronic absenteeism, make sure kids are getting to school that they have equitable access.”
Throughout the hearing, educators said they remain committed to students and to Alaska, but warned that constant uncertainty is pushing many out of the profession or out of the state, saying, “when you starve a system, you see the impacts of that.”
Forrest Wolfe is seen in an undated campaign photo for his run for the Alaska House of Representatives for District 21, in East Anchorage, in 2022. (Campaign photo provided by Wolfe)
A legislative aide to Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy, and a former candidate for the Alaska House of Representatives, was arrested and charged with driving under the influence of alcohol on Thursday in Juneau.
Forrest Wolfe, 40, was pulled over by Juneau Police at about 10:30 p.m. on Mar. 26, according to court documents, after driving erratically through a busy area of downtown Juneau. Wolfe was the sole occupant of the vehicle, a red Chevrolet Tahoe, when he was pulled over on Franklin Street.
Wolfe exhibited a strong odor of alcohol and gave conflicting stories of his previous activities, then stopped answering questions, according to the police report. Wolfe failed a field sobriety test and then later a chemical test for alcohol, showing his breath alcohol level at 0.10, which is above the legal limit of 0.08. He was arrested and charged with a criminal misdemeanor.
Wolfe serves as deputy legislative director for Dunleavy, a role he began in January, according to his public LinkedIn profile.
A spokesperson for Dunleavy’s office declined to comment on the arrest or any penalties by his employer on Monday, citing privacy as a personnel matter.
Wolfe ran for the Alaska House in 2022 as a Republican representing District 21 in East Anchorage, and narrowly lost to Rep. Donna Mears, D-Anchorage, by just 150 votes.
Prior to serving in the governor’s office, Wolfe served as a legislative liaison for the Alaska Department of Administration for about a year, in 2025. He worked as legislative staff for more than a decade, since 2012, for various Republican representatives.
Wolfe posted a $500 bail and was released from Lemon Creek Correctional Center on Friday morning, according to Alaska Public Media.
Wolfe has had previous run-ins with Juneau Police for minor infractions, and was arrested and convicted for drunk driving in 2011.
The vast National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska extends west of ConocoPhillips’ massive Willow oil project. (ConocoPhillips)
Global energy leaders have convened here this week, spiffed up in dark suits and polished shoes, to discuss the industry’s most pressing issues: war in the Middle East, Venezuela, artificial intelligence.
But behind the scenes at this annual conference of industry executives — known formally as CERAWeek by S&P Global but nicknamed the “Super Bowl of energy” — a big story about Alaska oil is unfolding.
It involves a massive lease sale in the Arctic, a remarkable show of interest from global oil giants that had faded from Alaska’s frontlines and an emerging race to find deposits potentially worth billions of dollars. Industry proponents say a flood of crude from the largely undeveloped western Arctic, if companies can locate and produce it, could open a new era for the state’s industry.
In what was by far the highest-value federal lease sale in the vast National Petroleum Reserve–Alaska in more than two decades, oil companies last week snatched up more than 1 million acres across the western Arctic.
The scale of interest, with 11 companies participating and a record $163 million spent on bids, was itself notable. But so were the identities of some of the bidders. Two, in particular, surprised even industry insiders: ExxonMobil and Shell.
Both supermajors have a history in Alaska.
ExxonMobil still owns shares of existing Arctic oil fields and the trans-Alaska pipeline. But Shell no longer operates in the state and hasn’t drilled a well in Alaska since its failed offshore exploration campaign more than a decade ago. And ExxonMobil hadn’t bid on leases in years.
Energy historian Dan Yergin, left, speaks with Wael Sawan, chief executive of Shell, at the CERAWeek oil industry conference in Houston this week. (Grant Miller Photography/CERAWeek by S&P Global)
Their renewed interest — along with continued investment from established players like ConocoPhillips and Colorado-based wildcatter Bill Armstrong — accelerates an industry revival that was already playing out on the North Slope.
Just a few years ago, new production and investment in the region lagged as some companies struggled to raise money and even pulled out of Alaska amid successful advocacy campaigns against Arctic drilling.
But major geologic discoveries by Armstrong — and a pair of big new oil fields now under construction — have made the North Slope a more attractive investment. And the industry also has political tailwinds coming from a Trump administration keen to boost resource extraction in Alaska.
“This sale absolutely shows the world the potential for Alaska,” Armstrong, one of the primary bidders, said in an interview at CERAWeek. “This could be a game-changer for the state.”
Bill Armstrong (Max Graham/Northern Journal)
The region still faces obstacles to development, like high costs and competition from other basins where drilling is cheaper.
And the lease sale is just a preliminary step, far from an assurance of future production: No new wells have been drilled yet, and companies often spend years doing exploratory work before deciding whether to start pumping oil.
Conservation groups, meanwhile, continue to fight the industry’s expansion in the reserve — where, they note, federal law instructs policymakers to not only to oversee oil development but also to protect the environment and cultural values. Multiplelawsuits are challenging the Trump administration’s oil-friendly policies in the Arctic, and advocates have asked a judge to invalidate leases set to be awarded after last week’s sale.
Four small lakes sit on the northwestern side of Teshekpuk Lake, a key wildlife habitat within the National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska that’s also seen interest from oil companies. (Craig McCaa/U.S. Bureau of Land Management)
“What we saw last week were companies pushing into some of the most sensitive areas of the reserve,” said Suzanne Bostrom, an attorney with a conservation-focused Anchorage law firm, Trustees for Alaska, that represents some of the organizations suing the administration. “We and the groups that we work with are going to continue to fight for this area, and fight for the protections that it deserves,” Bostrom added.
But even amid the pending legal questions, the sale’s results are still a step toward new development; further investment and competition in the petroleum reserve are likely to follow, conference participants told Northern Journal in Houston this week.
A surprising sale
Leading up to the sale, there were signs that oil companies could show up in force.
It was the first auction in NPR-A in seven years, and more acreage was up for grabs than in many previous sales. The offerings included large swaths of tundra and wetlands that Democratic administrations had designated off-limits to drilling.
And after years of comparatively tepid industry interest, recent oil discoveries have expanded the known resources on the North Slope, said Bob Fryklund, a top oil and gas analyst at S&P Global Energy, a research firm.
“It’s kind of been a sleeper basin,” he said.
This map of Alaska’s North Slope shows the National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Two oil companies are building large developments near the reserve’s eastern edge, and a major lease sale recently auctioned off land deeper into the reserve. Prudhoe Bay is the hub of existing North Slope development.
A decade ago, the petroleum reserve was beyond the western edge of the North Slope’s oil infrastructure, making it more expensive to bring in equipment and drill.
But the industry has been moving in its direction: Construction is now underway at two big new oil fields in the area — ConocoPhillips’ Willow project and Santos’ Pikka project. Both will tap into a long-overlooked oil-rich geologic formation, known as the Nanushuk, that Armstrong initially discovered near the reserve’s eastern boundary.
It was no surprise, then, that ConocoPhillips, Santos and Armstrong all showed up at the recent auction, analysts said.
An exploration rig drills for oil at ConocoPhillips’ Willow prospect in the National Petroleum Reserve – Alaska. (ConocoPhillips)
Few people, however, predicted that so many other companies would put in bids, or that major corporations like ExxonMobil and Shell would participate.
ExxonMobil, committing more than $7 million on some 138,000 acres, came as a particularly big surprise.
That company, headquartered in Houston, owns shares in the existing Point Thomson and Prudhoe Bay oil fields on the North Slope. But it doesn’t manage either field, and the company has not been active in exploration and new development in the state: Until last week, ExxonMobil had not bid on a federal or state oil and gas lease in Alaska in more than a decade, according to data provided by Welligence, an industry research firm.
Meanwhile, Shell, in a partnership with a Spanish company, Repsol, submitted some of the highest bids. The two companies offered more than $2 million on many individual tracts, and committed more than $90 million in total.
A map produced by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management shows winning bids from last week’s lease sale.
Experts said the return of those players was likely influenced by the ongoing development in the area.
Although neither the Willow nor Pikka project is producing yet, the multibillion-dollar investments by ConocoPhillips and Santos may have given other companies more faith in the surrounding geology and the ability to pump oil in the area, analysts said.
“What you saw Shell do, and even Exxon, was validation of the work done by other players on the North Slope in recent years,” an oil company executive said in Houston, speaking on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.
Industry headwinds subside
Shell’s interest represents a reversal from its announcement a decade ago that it was pulling out of Alaska. The company had spent some $7 billion on its failed effort to drill for oil offshore in the Chukchi Sea, citing Obama administration policies and high costs when it departed the state.
In 2020, another major, BP, also pulled out of Alaska, selling its assets to Hilcorp, a privately owned Texas business.
Those decisions both seemed like signals of the industry’s decline in the state, as the daily flow through the trans-Alaska pipeline shrank to 500,000 barrels from a high of 2 million decades earlier. An era of oil giants spending freely on big new projects was giving way to one of smaller companies wringing the last drops of crude out of aging fields.
An oil and gas rig drills at a Hilcorp development in the Cook Inlet basin in Southcentral Alaska. (Nathaniel Herz/Northern Journal)
At the time, companies were contending not only with the usual impediments to drilling in Alaska, like high costs and opposition from environmental groups, but also with growing political pressure from climate-minded shareholders and activists opposed to expanding fossil fuel production. Even oil executives acknowledged that advocacy against the oil industry, which is a major driver of climate change, was deterring investment in Alaska.
But even as the burning of fossil fuels continues to warm the planet, global demand for oil remains high — and industry confidence in the North Slope’s potential appears only to be growing.
The newly discovered oil deposits there “have proven that Alaska is not over,” Fryklund said.
ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil and Santos declined to make officials available for on-record interviews. Shell did not respond to a request for comment.
“This marks an important step in our continued commitment to responsible energy development in Alaska and the U.S.,” an Exxon spokesperson said in an emailed statement.
Once the company’s leases are finalized, ExxonMobil will work with the state and local communities as it evaluates “potential next steps for the area,” the statement said.
“I wish I were 30 years younger”
For those who work in the oil industry, the central plank of Alaska’s economy, the sale stirred excitement, and some relief: New activity in the federal reserve could bring more gigs for contractors that have long wondered if there would be enough development on the North Slope to sustain their businesses.
“We’ve all had this little worry of, ‘Well, what’s next?’” said Greg Miller, vice president of operations at Cruz Construction, a Palmer-based company with oil-related contracts on the Slope. “Now, there’s a little bit of reason to be a little bit more hopeful and positive about the next 10, 20 years.”
The sale won’t lead to immediate growth for Miller’s business, he said. But new exploration activity, if and when it happens, will create jobs: A single project can provide a year’s worth of wages for as many as 100 employees at Cruz, Miller added.
For the president of another Alaska oil services company, Kevin Durling, the hype around the petroleum reserve is reminiscent of the boom days when oil started flowing through the trans-Alaska pipeline, in the 1970s and 1980s.
The trans-Alaska oil pipeline pumps some 500,000 barrels a day. (Nathaniel Herz/Northern Journal)
“I wish I was 30 years younger,” he said.
The state’s conservation community, meanwhile, has reacted with disappointment, and concern for the western Arctic ecosystem.
The vast, largely undeveloped region contains important habitat for migratory birds, and it sustains tens of thousands of caribou, some of which calve around Teshekpuk Lake, a major water body in the northern part of the petroleum reserve.
“I’ve had better weeks at work. No question about that,” said Andy Moderow, senior policy director at Alaska Wilderness League, one of the environmental groups suing the Trump administration. But, he added: “The war is still well in front of us.”
One potential hurdle for development is a legally disputed conservation area around Teshekpuk Lake. The protections, across about 1 million acres, were set aside by the Biden administration for the nearby Iñupiaq village of Nuiqsut, where many people still depend on caribou and other wildlife for food.
The Trump administration canceled the protections late last year, touting the area’s oil and gas potential and aiming to authorize leasing there. Nuiqsut’s leaders then sued, saying the move violated a prior agreement and threatened the village’s subsistence traditions.
Two days before the lease sale results were announced, a federal judge restored the Teshekpuk protections while the lawsuit played out.
But the area still attracted bids from a few companies — including ExxonMobil.
The administration has not said whether it plans to award leases in the disputed area to high bidders — or how, exactly, it intends to navigate the apparent conflict between the sale results and the court ruling.
Nathaniel Herz contributed reporting from Anchorage.
Northern Journal contributor Max Graham can be reached at max@northernjournal.com. He’s interested in any and all mining related stories, as well as introductory meetings with people in and around the industry.
This article was originally published in Northern Journal, a newsletter from Nathaniel Herz. Subscribe at this link.
