U.S. Rep. Nick Begich III, R-Alaska, speaks to a joint session of the Alaska Legislature on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. (James Brooks photo/Alaska Beacon)
By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon
U.S. Rep. Nick Begich III, R-Alaska, speaks to a joint session of the Alaska Legislature on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. (James Brooks photo/Alaska Beacon)
The filing deadline for this year’s Alaska Permanent Fund dividend is March 31, and if Rep. Nick Begich III has his way, this year’s dividend will be tax free.
On March 3, Alaska’s lone member of the U.S. House introduced a bill that would exempt the dividend from federal taxes.
When Begich mentioned it during his address to state lawmakers this week, it garnered a standing ovation in the state Capitol.
Begich said afterward that passing the bill into law “is going to be a lift,” but in his first year as a Representative, Begich has found an unusual amount of success. On the day he introduced the tax-free dividend measure, he had a sixth prime-sponsored bill pass the U.S. Senate and advance to President Donald Trump.
Those six bills include two Congressional Review Act resolutions that repealed regulations adopted by the administration of President Joe Biden.
When members of Alaska’s Congressional delegation speak to the Legislature, it’s usually a platform to talk about their recent accomplishments, and Begich had plenty to talk about this year.
The number of bills he passed through Congress in his first year is a record, his office said.
According to the Center for Effective Lawmaking, when Begich’s sixth bill becomes law, he will tie former Rep. Rick Renzi, R-Arizona, for the most bills that became law in a freshman term.
The 119th Congress still has several months to run, and if Begich manages a seventh, he would set the record.
“No other House freshman in our data (going back to 1973) had six or more,” said Colin Achilles, the center’s associate director, by email.
At least some of Begich’s success is attributable to groundwork laid by his immediate predecessors, Democratic Rep. Mary Peltola and Republican Rep. Don Young.
He’s also received help from Alaska’s two senators, Republicans Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, who have been able to guide his legislation through the Senate after passing the House.
Begich’s House-and-Senate passed bills to date include:
A legal change making it easier for disabled Alaska Natives to qualify for some federal aid programs;
A measure repealing Biden-era limits on oil and gas leasing within the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge;
A law that distributes extra land to Alaska Native village corporations by eliminating an inactive trust;
A bill granting land to the Alaska Native village corporation for Saxman, in Southeast Alaska;
And a bill extending the amount of time that Alaska Native Vietnam War veterans or their families have to pick grants of federal land.
While the measures repealing Biden-era actions advanced along party lines, taking advantage of Republican control of the House, Senate and Presidency, Begich’s other bills have gotten unanimous support in the House, from Democrats and Republicans alike.
Speaking to the Alaska Legislature, Begich said that “not every bill is a touchdown pass, but every bill puts (points) on the board. We are getting points on the board for the state of Alaska, and we will continue to look for opportunities to do that.”
After his speech, he acknowledged that the dividend bill is something closer to a deep pass than a short run down the middle, but it helps to be ready for an opportunity.
“You have to have these bills in existence in order for them to have an opportunity to pass. And sometimes a must-pass piece of legislation will show up, and you’ll have an opportunity to attach a priority for your district,” he said. “In our case … we wanted to make sure that we had this in the clip ready to go. When that opportunity arrives, sometimes it happens faster than you think it will. Sometimes it takes a while, but you have to have the legislative text ready to go for the moment that arrives, and that’s what we’re doing on that bill.”
The Alaska State Capitol is seen on Wednesday, March 4, 2026. (James Brooks photo/Alaska Beacon)
By: Corinne Smith and James Brooks, Alaska Beacon
The Alaska State Capitol is seen on Wednesday, March 4, 2026. (James Brooks photo/Alaska Beacon)
A potential $500 million windfall is giving the Alaska House of Representatives a headache.
On Friday, the Alaska Department of Revenue released a forecast predicting that the state of Alaska will collect hundreds of millions of dollars more oil revenue by June 30 than previously expected.
That forecast landed in the middle of an ongoing debate over whether or not to spend from savings to cover almost $530 million in extra expenses, largely added by Gov. Mike Dunleavy, to the state budget since last spring.
The Senate approved a proposal to pay for roughly three-quarters of those expenses and it is now in the state House, awaiting a vote that could come as soon as Monday.
Tensions rose on Friday, with no agreement among House lawmakers on how to pay for the proposal.
The House is led by a 21-person multipartisan coalition whose members have been urging fast action on the issue. They say it is particularly important to fund $70 million for the state’s transportation projects to unlock more than $630 million in additional federal funding.
Without sure money, majority lawmakers say projects can’t go out to bid and construction firms can’t make purchasing and hiring decisions.
The majority wants to use the state’s Constitutional Budget Reserve, a savings account, to provide guaranteed funding.
The majority can pass a bill on its own, but it can’t spend from savings on its own. It takes 30 members of the House and 15 from the Senate to approve spending from the Constitutional Budget Reserve, the state’s principal savings account.
The Senate has already given that approval, but in the House, at least nine members of the 19-person, all-Republican House minority would have to support the majority, and so far, they’re not willing to do that.
Part of that reluctance is because as currently written, the supplemental budget bill allows lawmakers to spend up to $373.6 million from the reserve regardless of whether or not the war-caused bonus becomes real.
If oil prices stay high and the reserve money isn’t needed, the majority could spend it on other things without further input from the minority. That’s because it takes only 21 votes to advance a budget bill.
The money would return to the reserve only if it was unspent at the end of the fiscal year.
If lawmakers don’t spend from savings and the Iran war ends unexpectedly quickly, causing oil prices to fall, the minority could vote to spend from savings later to fill the gap.
The result is an ironic set of circumstances — Trump has said that the war will be short, but minority House Republicans’ action is effectively a bet on a long war.
Minority members say they’re being fiscally responsible. So do members of the majority, who add that there’s an opportunity cost for any delay — Alaska construction companies can’t make plans for the summer until they know what projects they’ll need to build.
Majority members also expressed frustration that the supplemental budget was largely requested by the governor, who they say has been absent in negotiations.
In addition, legislators and Gov. Dunleavy could also find themselves with a problem if oil prices fall after legislators have adjourned for the summer.
Legislators typically write budgets based on forecasts from the Department of Revenue, but this year’s forecast is especially uncertain, the department said.
Rep. Calvin Schrage, D-Anchorage, co-chair of the House Finance Committee and a member of the majority, said he’s skeptical of banking on the forecast.
“I have a lot of concern over budgeting based on that forecast, because that’s all it is. It’s a forecast. It’s not realized money, it’s not money in hand,” he said Friday.
“Even with this optimistic forecast, you are just barely, maybe able to balance the budget — if everything goes perfect. We still don’t have additional supplementals,” he said, referring to more budget amendments that could be requested by the governor.
Schrage said lawmakers will be scrutinizing the forecast in the coming days and weeks, and he said there’s still the possibility the Legislature may need to draw from savings.
But minority Republicans said they considered drawing from savings fiscally irresponsible.
“Taking a draw from our savings account to put into the general fund to fund things that were, by all accounts and purposes, able to be funded without it would have been irresponsible,” said Rep. Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna, on Friday.
House Minority Leader DeLena Johnson, R-Anchorage, said she’s confident in the forecast projections. “There’s some actuals there too. So I’m very comfortable with actuals, and I also know, if there’s changes, we can come in and we can come in and make them, and make a different vote. I’m not as worried about that.”
Speaker of the House Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, expressed frustration at the delay.
“This is pure politics. We should have had the supplemental budget funded. A long time ago,” he said. “The House Majority coalition prioritized the funding of the entire package that was proposed by the governor. Every single item came from the governor. And so here we are, you know, in a really precarious state, because we’re at the point where every week that goes by gets us a week closer to that federal match not being achieved for the summer construction season.”
Edgmon and other majority legislators have voiced frustration about “moving goal posts” on the budget bill. While there are more than $530 million in proposed additions, the bill in front of House lawmakers contains only three-quarters of that amount because majority members wanted to attract members of the minority for the savings vote.
The remainder will still have to be addressed later, regardless of what happens in the upcoming vote.
Edgmon said it’s not clear to him what the Republican minority wants in exchange for a budget reserve vote.
“We don’t know what the ask is,” he said. “But it’s all about leverage, and unfortunately, it’s falling on the shoulders of a lot of smaller contractors around the state.”
As of Friday afternoon, it appeared as if the budget bill was on course to pass, but without approval to spend from savings.
If that occurs, the state of Alaska will be in the awkward position of hoping for a war long and difficult enough to keep oil prices high for months.
Rep. Nick Begich III, R-Alaska, shakes hands with state Rep. Ky Holland, I-Anchorage, as he leaves a joint session of the Alaska Legislature on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. (James Brooks photo/Alaska Beacon)
By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon
Rep. Nick Begich III, R-Alaska, shakes hands with state Rep. Ky Holland, I-Anchorage, as he leaves a joint session of the Alaska Legislature on Tuesday, March 10, 2026. (James Brooks photo/Alaska Beacon)
In a speech to the Alaska Legislature this week, Alaska Rep. Nick Begich III urged state lawmakers to boost the development of a proposed trans-Alaska natural gas pipeline.
“The federal path is largely cleared, but investors also need state level clarity, fiscal predictability and simplicity,” Begich said. “Scrutinize it carefully, model it thoroughly. But my request to you is not to become a roadblock.”
But legislators who are dealing with the pipeline on a daily basis say they don’t have answers to basic questions, including how much the pipeline will cost and whether the gas it carries will be affordable to Alaskans.
“I have not seen any figures,” said Sen. Cathy Giessel, R-Anchorage and chair of the Senate Resources Committee.
Senate President Gary Stevens, R-Kodiak, said legislators are not going to be a roadblock.
“We’re not going to throw sand in the works. Everybody wants a pipeline. We all hope that it comes about, but it’s got to be done properly and make sure that we know what’s going on.”
Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, said he has heard “from very credible sources” that the price of gas through the pipeline could be $50 per million cubic feet by 2046.
The current cost of gas from Cook Inlet for Southcentral Alaska is about $10 per MCF.
“Just imagine if you have utilities locked into 30-year contracts for gas at $50 an MCF. That would be catastrophic,” Wielechowski said. “That’s the sort of thing that we’re trying to protect Alaskan consumers all up and down the Railbelt from — an absolute catastrophe to our economic system.”
As currently proposed, the pipeline project consists of two phases. The first phase includes an 807-mile pipeline from the North Slope to the west side of Cook Inlet, with a tie-in to existing natural gas infrastructure around Anchorage.
The second phase would extend the pipeline to the Kenai Peninsula, where an export terminal would be built. The second phase would also include a processing plant on the North Slope.
Since the acquisition, Glenfarne has signed a number of nonbinding agreements with potential gas purchasers and gas sellers, but it has not disclosed estimates for the project’s cost, and it hasn’t disclosed what it expects the cost of gas to be.
Last year, company officials said they expected to make an investment decision by the end of 2025. In a subsequent filing with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, they said they would make the decision in February. A new timeline hasn’t been made public.
The lack of data is particularly problematic because legislators are considering whether to offer a property tax break to pipeline developers.
Those taxes are significant. Because Alaska does not have a statewide income tax or sales tax, its state budget suffers when people move into the state. More people means more demand for things like schools, parks and roads, but no increased revenue to pay for those things.
“That bill should be next week,” Dunleavy said during a Thursday news conference with U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, confirming the 0.2% rate will be part of the new legislation.
“Last couple weeks, we’ve been working with municipalities, getting their input as to what this should look like before (we) put the bill out,” he said. “So look forward to probably next week on that PILT bill, so that we can look at the economics of this line and also ways to ensure that municipalities benefit from this directly.”
This week, Begich expressed some support for a lower property tax rate, saying it could encourage people to invest in the pipeline.
“The classic 2% tax burden that would apply, say, to a $50 billion asset, would be a billion dollars in cash flow early in the project’s life cycle,” Begich said. “If that cash flow coming out of the project lowers the rate of return for investors, they’re not going to show up and invest. And so we need to make sure that our tax policy is A, doing what’s right for Alaskans. B, is not impeding the ability for the project to move forward. And I think we can do both of those things with some creative thinking and conversations with the industry.”
While a lower tax rate would benefit pipeline developers, it has the potential to harm residents who live near the pipeline.
If pipeline construction and operation mean more people moving to Alaska and municipalities are unable to raise revenue to meet the resulting demand for services, local governments could be forced to raise taxes or cut basic services in order to pay for the pipeline subsidy.
Last week, the Senate Resources Committee introduced Senate Bill 275, which imposes some transparency requirements on the pipeline project, eliminates a tax exemption relevant to the project, and imposes a new surcharge on gas processing plants.
That bill was introduced just days before Begich urged lawmakers not to be a “roadblock.”
Giessel, who chairs the resources committee, said she didn’t think Begich’s comments were directed at her or her committee’s bill.
“We’re not being a roadblock. We’re doing exactly what we’re supposed to do according to our constitution,” she said.
Asked whether he was thinking of Giessel’s bill during his speech, Begich said, “It was not my direct intention. No, I think it’s always worth having the conversation about the tax structure, about the incentive structure, though that’s an ongoing discussion that happens at the state legislature in Alaska. I think it’s important that when we have those conversations, they’re done in a way that is going to encourage, rather than discourage, industry from coming in and saying, ‘Yes, this is a good place for us to invest in.’”
Speaking to reporters after his speech, Begich said the state would benefit by getting more information from Glenfarne.
“I welcome more information,” Begich said. “I recognize that they’ve got certain restraints on what they can share. But look, I’d like to see more information shared. I’d like to see more of the economics of the project shared so we can understand what the full potential is and what’s on the table. I believe that’s going to come with time, but more information is better.”
"I voted" stickers are seen on display in the headquarters offices of the Alaska Division of Elections in Juneau on Tuesday, Nov. 12, 2024. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
“I voted” stickers are seen on display in the headquarters offices of the Alaska Division of Elections in Juneau on Tuesday, Nov. 12, 2024. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
NOTN- Alaska lawmakers considered a wide-ranging elections bill today that supporters say would expand voter access and strengthening election security.
The House Finance Committee scheduled hearings on Monday as well as this morning on Senate Bill 64, a measure covering a broad range of election policies, including voter registration, campaign rules and election administration.
The bill would create a ballot curing process which would allow absentee voters to fix mistakes like missing signatures.
According to testimony submitted to lawmakers, more than 1,300 ballots were rejected in 2024, many due to correctable issues like improper witness signatures.
The proposed bill would also require the state to create an online ballot-tracking system so voters can see when their ballot is sent, received and counted. The bill includes prepaid postage for absentee ballots to improve access for voters, especially for voters in rural communities.
The bill also calls for a rural community liaison within the Division of Elections to work with tribes and municipalities to improve early and absentee voting access in remote areas.
Supporters, including the League of Women Voters of Alaska, Alaska Voter Hub and the Alaska Federation of Natives say the reforms are necessary because of Alaska’s geography and the challenges rural voters face with mail service, staffing shortages and limited polling locations.
The Alaska State Capitol is seen on Monday, March 9, 2026. (James Brooks photo/Alaska Beacon)
By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon
The Alaska State Capitol is seen on Monday, March 9, 2026. (James Brooks photo/Alaska Beacon)
The Alaska Senate voted unanimously Wednesday to spend more than $300 million from savings and reverse some of Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s most recent budget vetoes.
In a pair of 20-0 votes, the Senate approved a bill that would spend $373.5 million from the Constitutional Budget Reserve to pay for a variety of expenses and fill a deficit in the current budget year.
“This is money to fund the budget that was passed last year for things that the governor already spent on,” said Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage.
The bill now goes to the House, which failed last month to approve the needed spending from the budget reserve.
Among the expenses in the new supplemental budget bill is $70.2 million needed to unlock federal transportation grants. Dunleavy vetoed that funding last year amid a dispute with the Legislature about the proper source of the money.
Also in the bill is $98.7 million for the state’s wildfire response fund and up to $75 million for the disaster relief fund. That latter figure is dependent upon negotiations with the federal government about who will pay for the response after ex-Typhoon Halong devastated southwest Alaska last year.
The largest single item in the bill is $129.6 million needed to refill the state’s higher education investment fund, which was used to cover expenses due to a separate veto-involved dispute between the Legislature and governor.
That fund covers scholarships paid to Alaska high school students who meet academic standards and attend in-state schools.
The Senate-passed bill is significantly smaller than a $531 million version that had been previously considered. It shrank at the urging of the Senate’s six-person, all-Republican minority caucus.
It takes three-quarters of the House and three-quarters of the Senate — 30 Representatives and 15 senators, respectively — to spend from the budget reserve.
That’s a high hurdle, particularly because the Senate’s bipartisan majority caucus has just 14 members and the House’s multipartisan majority has just 21 members.
In both cases, compromises with the all-Republican House and Senate majorities are needed to spend from the reserve.
On Monday, the Senate pulled the supplemental budget bill from its schedule with no advance notice. Sen. Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel, said at the time that the Senate Majority had unexpectedly lost a minority vote it needed to spend from the reserve.
That spurred hours of closed-doors negotiations between the Senate minority and members of the majority.
Since the United States and Israel started bombing Iran on Feb. 28, the price of oil — and, in turn, Alaska’s potential oil revenue — has risen, giving legislators another way to erase a looming deficit.
“We went over and talked with (the Senate Finance Committee) co-chairs and just said, ‘Hey, obviously, the price of oil is changing,’” said Senate Minority Leader Mike Cronk, R-Tok.
At the minority’s urging, the co-chairs removed almost $150 million from the bill — extra spending for state prisons, money for Medicaid, and millions in backup “headroom” for unforeseen expenses, among other items.
Cronk said the items removed during the compromise discussions could come back later, in the state’s regular budget bill, and the goal was to create “a real supplemental fast track” bill.
According to figures provided by staff for Hoffman, if Alaska North Slope oil prices average roughly $75 per barrel between now and June 30, the end of the state’s fiscal year, the state will earn enough oil revenue to pay for the removed items without spending from savings.
Since the start of the legislative session, construction companies have been lobbying for quick passage of a supplemental budget bill because they fear losing hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of federally funded construction projects scheduled to take place as soon as this summer.
The Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities has disputed the need for early funding, and on Wednesday, Sen. George Rauscher, R-Sutton, attempted to strike that item from the supplemental budget.
He withdrew his proposed amendment after encountering opposition, saying he was satisfied with the smaller bill on the floor.
“We’ve come down a long way from $500 million,” he said.
After the Senate voted on Wednesday morning, members of the House majority attempted to call a vote to confirm the Senate’s changes.
Members of the House minority objected, and the vote is now scheduled later, at 2:30 p.m. Thursday.
House Minority Leader DeLena Johnson, R-Palmer, said members of the minority wanted to wait until Friday, when a new state revenue forecast is expected.
“We’re talking about a $300 million draw. We may not need to take that full amount out of savings when we have money coming in,” she said, referring to the way the price of oil has surged during the Iran war.
Asked whether the new, lower draw from the reserve is more acceptable to members of the minority, Johnson said she wasn’t sure yet.
“There’s probably a number that’s better than others, but I mean, as low as possible is our number,” she said.
Wooden gavel with books in background. Law and justice concept
By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon
Wooden gavel with books in background.
The state of Alaska filed civil lawsuits Tuesday against six crowdfunding websites, accusing them of illegally soliciting donations for thousands of Alaska charities without consent.
In complaints filed at Anchorage Superior Court, the consumer protection unit of the Alaska Department of Law said GoFundMe, PayPal, Charity Navigator, Pledgling Technologies, JustGiving and Network For Good each violated the Alaska Charitable Solicitations Act thousands of times.
That act, in place since 1993, requires state registration for anyone who seeks donations on behalf of a charity.
The suits ask a judge to order the sites shut down the pages devoted to Alaska nonprofits and immediately disburse any donations to those nonprofits. It also asks for “separate civil penalties … of not less than $1,000 and not more than $25,000 per violation.”
According to the complaints, the six crowdfunding sites scraped IRS data to obtain the information of thousands of Alaska nonprofits, then set up donation pages for each of those nonprofits without their consent.
That scraping was part of a nationwide campaign that encompassed almost a million and a half federally registered organizations.
In some cases, the sites charged fees or encouraged “tips” to themselves during the donation process. In many cases, they poured donations into a third-party account and only released donations to charities who stepped forward to claim them, according to the complaints.
Attorney General-designee Stephen Cox said the state became aware of the issue after California reporters and state officials began investigating why GoFundMe created donation pages for 1.4 million nonprofits without their consent or knowledge.
GoFundMe later took down many of those pages, but other crowdfunding websites did not. On Tuesday morning, donation pages were still visible on Charity Navigator, one of the defendants named in the new Alaska lawsuits.
Earlier this week, almost two dozen state attorney generals sent a letter to GoFundMe, demanding answers to questions about its policies.
Alaska did not sign that letter, in part because officials here believed the response was too weak.
In a prepared statement, Cox said, “Alaska law is clear: if you’re going to raise money in a charity’s name, you must first get the charity’s consent. These lawsuits are about protecting donors, protecting nonprofits, and preserving the public trust that makes charitable giving possible.”
Laurie Wolf is President and CEO of the Foraker Group, which advises Alaska nonprofits and provides them with administrative support.
By phone on Tuesday, Wolf said the issue is a matter of consent: “They are impersonating 1.2 million nonprofits across this country, they’re impersonating them without their consent or even their knowledge.”
She said the issue became particularly important last fall, when people across the United States and the world became aware of the devastation caused by ex-Typhoon Halong in Western Alaska.
Many people, not knowing local Alaska charities, simply donated via links they found on internet searches. Some of those donations may have never reached their intended recipients.
If a crowdfunding website operates independently of the charity it intends to benefit, it might interfere with the charity’s own fundraising, she explained.
Someone might never be recognized for their gift and become angry, hurting the charity’s long-term relationship with their community.
“They take away the ability for the organization to make choices for itself about how it wants to build trust and relationships with its donors, and how it wants to put its brand and its mission out in the public sphere. They’ve taken away all of our choices about that,” she said.
In addition, donations may be subject to fees or never reach a charity at all, particularly if the charity is unaware that a crowdfunding website is holding money for it to collect.
The Foraker Group went so far as to conduct an experiment and had an employee donate to the group through several of the defendants’ platforms. In multiple cases, it took weeks before the donation reached its intended recipient, and in some cases, the donor’s identity was concealed, making it impossible for the charity to properly thank them.
GoFundMe was the only defendant to respond to emailed inquiries before the Beacon’s reporting deadline on Tuesday.
“GoFundMe’s mission is to help people help each other by making it easier for donors to discover and support the causes they care about. We are committed to helping nonprofits reach new supporters by connecting them with the millions of people on our platform who want to make a difference. Nonprofit Pages were created using publicly available information to help people support nonprofit organizations, with donations going to the intended nonprofit,” said Jeff Platt, communications manager for GoFundMe.
“After hearing feedback from nonprofit leaders in October, we acted quickly to make Nonprofit Pages fully opt-in, removed and de-indexed unclaimed pages, and turned off search engine optimization by default. The immediate changes we made directly addressed the concerns of the nonprofit community, and reflect our continued commitment to transparency, accountability, and partnership with the nonprofit sector,” he said.
That bill passed the Alaska Legislature amid a surge of concern about telemarketers soliciting donations by phone.
Then-Rep. Ron Larson, a Democrat from the Matanuska-Susitna Borough, sponsored the act and told fellow lawmakers at the time that “lookalike organizations” were “ripping off” legitimate charities.
“Alaskans are generous people. But generosity depends on trust,” Cox said in his prepared statements. “GoFundMe and similar platforms used nonprofits’ good names to solicit donations without coordinating with the organizations actually doing the charitable work. That means some Alaskans may have donated thinking they were supporting a specific charity, when the charity never authorized the page and may never have received the donation — or may have received less than donors intended because of fees.”
Spring Creek Correctional Center is seen in an undated photo. (Photo courtesy of Alaska Department of Corrections)
The Dunleavy administration has proposed a $523 million budget for the Alaska Department of Corrections for the next fiscal year, which House lawmakers with a finance subcommittee advanced without substantial changes last week.
It’s the largest corrections budget proposal to date, according to state data. It includes just over $514 million requested in state funding, $475.5 million of which is unrestricted general funds for the agency’s 13 state prisons and jails and estimated 2,127 employees. DOC officials expect an additional $9.3 million in federal funding for inmates held on federal charges.
The Department of Corrections has become one of the state’s most expensive departments in recent years. This year the Department of Health, which has requested $1.1 billion in unrestricted general funds, and the Department of Education and Early Development, which has requested $1.4 billion, would spend more. The Permanent Fund dividend could also be a bigger expense — if the state pays out a $1,000 dividend like last year, it would cost the state $660 million.
While the number of people in Alaska’s prisons and jails has remained relatively consistent, costs are soaring. Last year, DOC officials reported that state corrections booked nearly 26,000 people and just over 16,000 unique individuals, so roughly 9,000 people were repeat offenders. DOC also held nearly 450 people in involuntary commitments, which is for those who are deemed a danger to themself or others, or gravely disabled as a result of mental illness. The state cost for incarcerating an individual is an average of $223 per day.
Initially, corrections officials submitted a $500 million budget request, but later added an additional request for $20 million for staffing and inmate transportation, and $3.3 million for healthcare and medical staffing.
The proposed budget breaks down to roughly 60% for state prison institutions, lawmakers heard on Feb. 24. Roughly 20% is for health and rehabilitation, 10% for pretrial, probation and parole, 4% for administration, 3% for maintenance and operations and just 0.4% to administer the Board of Parole.
Costs to staffing Alaska’s prisons have ballooned in recent years, along with healthcare costs for an aging inmate population and increasing health needs, DOC officials told members of a House finance subcommittee for corrections.
“Staffing being the first, and then the second being our medical costs,” Jen Winkelman, corrections commissioner, told lawmakers. “The fees for medical in Alaska is through the roof, and every single individual that’s coming to us — that we don’t know we’re going to be getting — have significant medical issues.”
DOC has a 11.5% staff vacancy rate statewide, according to a spokesperson in February. DOC officials told lawmakers that recruitment and retention is an ongoing challenge, especially because prisons must be staffed 24/7.
DOC reports staffing and decade of ‘policy changes’ as major cost drivers
April Wilkerson, deputy commissioner for the department, told lawmakers in a presentation on Feb. 24 that DOC officials analyzed the budget over the last ten years, and saw a total increase of an estimated $182 million for operational costs in that time. She said roughly one third of cost increases since fiscal year 2016 were driven by employee contracts, salary and benefit increases.
April Wilkerson, deputy DOC commissioner, and Kevin Worley, DOC administrative services director answer questions from lawmakers on the department’s budget on Feb 12, 2026. Jen Winkelman, DOC commissioner is seen in the audience. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)
“Collective bargaining agreements, salary adjustments and health insurance changes — that makes up over 30% of the growth of the general funds within the department’s budget, which is outside of the department’s control,” Wilkerson said.
Wilkerson said an estimated 40% of cost increases have been due to “policy changes” from the Legislature. She pointed to the repeal of Senate Bill 91 enacted in 2020, when lawmakers increased prison sentences for most felonies and misdemeanors, and increased penalties for violating conditions of release. She also pointed to the state’s increased contributions to employees’ retirement benefits in 2022.
Lawmakers asked DOC officials for policy recommendations to curb costs across the department. Rep. Donna Mears, D-Anchorage, also asked the commissioner to address the problem of the department spending over its allocated budget.
“Funds allocated to DOC last year included cuts that the department just said, ‘Nope, we can’t do that.’ I think on a larger basis, there needs to be more discussions about that,” Mears said. “There’s this tension between the executive branch and requests for the department to make cuts, and that’s not happening.”
DOC officials reported all 13 state prisons spending over budget for the fiscal year ending in June, resulting in the department requesting an additional $20 million from the legislature to cover personnel costs, plus an estimated $3 million to cover health care costs.
Winkelman said the department had to partially make up for legislative cuts in their budget last year. A department spokesperson confirmed the supplemental budget request makes up for a $13.8 million reduction made by lawmakers last year.
Winkelman told lawmakers the department has not been able to fill its vacancies, which has resulted in high overtime costs. She said DOC has had to manage a legislative directive to cut costs by closing a housing unit at Spring Creek Correctional Center in Seward. “We were tasked with closing a housing unit, and we did that, and it is not achieving the savings, and as a matter of fact, it’s bottlenecked some of our population management,” she said.
Winkelman also pointed to unexpected health care costs for inmates as a driver of the department’s increased budget need. “We just recently had an inmate leave us that was with us for a year, that cost us over a million dollars in medical. We didn’t plan for that. We didn’t know that she was going to have that much of a cost associated. So going back to your question, and not being able to achieve some of these,” she said, referring to state budget allocations. “Because we don’t know what’s going to come through the back door.”
Winkelman recommended the creation of a new task force to tackle the question of how to curtail and manage the corrections budget.
“We were going to need some sort of a task force with other agencies, with the legislature, with law enforcement,” Winkelman said. “Some sort of a group to take a look at the broader system to figure out which policy changes are going to make that difference in order for us to be able to stay within our means.”
Rep. Ky Holland, D-Anchorage, said he found the proposal concerning: “If a task force is needed, why aren’t all the folks that are doing these jobs coming together and doing the work of a task force? Why do we have to somehow create that and then fund it?”
Holland said it was difficult for him to see that lawmakers are required to pay increasing budgets for DOC because of legal staffing requirements and said he wished the state’s education system had the same safeguards. “I wish we could tell our teachers that they had a maximum class size of the number of students that they had in a classroom because we had a standards council that had the force of law,” he said.
Winkelman said DOC officials are trying to address the budget challenges. “We are constantly at the table trying to figure out how to solve this, if you will,” she said.
She then walked back the task force idea, and said hiring a consultant could be another option. “I think our recommendation is to maybe hire a consultant, hire an expert in this world, to kind of take all the pieces together,” she said.
Winkelman acknowledged Holland’s concerns about the state’s financial pressure with competing budget priorities, and said she understands the corrections budget is eating into funding for schools.
“Right now, above working for the Department of Corrections for 25 years and fighting this battle, I’m a mom with two kids in school, and that’s most important,” she said. “I’m fighting this battle every day of how expensive Corrections is, and I know it is taking from our school systems.”
House members with the finance subcommittee for corrections heard several weeks of presentations about the department’s budget and asked questions of DOC officials. Rep. Mike Prax, R-North Pole, introduced several amendments to the budget, proposing millions in cuts until the department could provide further explanation on how the items would be spent and fulfill the department’s goals. But the committee voted them down before advancing the budget proposal without changes.
The corrections budget now moves to the full House Finance Committee for further consideration.
Representative Andi Story presenting to the House Education Committee, Screengrab courtesy of Gavel Alaska and KTOO
NOTN- Alaska lawmakers are weighing a proposal to let school districts use a three-year average of student counts or the prior year’s enrollment to calculate state funding.
This bill, supporters say would give districts more certainty as they build budgets and issue teacher contracts.
“We force school districts to budget in such an irrational way.” Said Representative Andi Story, “This backwards budgeting consumes a great deal of valuable time to reshuffle numbers, from personal experience this causes great pain in the community.”
The biggest change in the bill is how Alaska calculates average daily membership, or ADM, which is the student count used to determine state education funding.
According to the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development, the ADM is a count of enrolled K-12 students taken for 20 days ending the last Friday in October of each year, the ADM is adjusted due to a few factors including school size, district cost, and special needs.
Under the bill, districts would generally receive funding based on the higher of their most recent student count or a three-year average.
“Alaska should create a 3 year averaging approach statewide to replace the current Hold Harmless Provision.” Story said during her presentation.
The Hold Harmless Provision currently protects school funding if their ADM drops by 5% or more each year, which allows the previous year’s student count to be used as a base to mitigate a drop in funding.
“It could also provide districts with greater stability and planning.” Story said, “As districts would not be so concerned about unexpected changes in enrollments at the October count period. About 19 states use an approach that either averages, combines or provides the better of multiple years of student counts.”
Under the framework discussed at today’s House Education Committee meeting, if the policy took effect July 1, 2026, districts could choose a three-year average from the 2022, 2023 and 2024 October counts, or they could use the single-year count from 2025 once that data is finalized.
That choice, according to Story, would allow growing districts to lean on their most recent numbers, while stable or declining districts might favor a three-year average that smooths out drops.
Lawmakers on the panel pressed for more data on how the change would affect different districts over time. Story said she plans to bring back a committee substitute incorporating feedback and allowing further amendments.
A plume of smoke rises after an explosion on Feb. 28, 2026 in Tehran, Iran. (Getty photo)
All three members of Alaska’s delegation to Congress showed their support for the new war with Iran last week, voting against resolutions intended to restrain President Donald Trump.
The Alaska legislators’ votes were in line with their past actions. Last year, when Trump ordered a bombing campaign against Iranian nuclear facilities, all three said they supported the strikes.
The current war is significantly larger than last year’s attacks, and Trump has said he is seeking Iran’s “unconditional surrender” and wants to have a role in picking its next leader.
Neither he nor senior administration officials have given firm long-term plans, and they have not ruled out the deployment of soldiers on the ground in Iran.
Begich issued a statement on Feb. 28 calling the war “a necessary and targeted response” and said he supports regime change in the country.
“The path forward cannot be centered on further appeasement but the removal of this corrupt, fanatical leadership that has brought suffering to the Iranian people and threatens our peace at home. In so doing, we can provide the people of Iran the opportunity to change leadership, reclaim their sovereignty, and chart a new course,” the statement said in part.
Begich is in the middle of a re-election campaign, and his two leading challengers issued statements opposing the war.
By email, Democratic U.S. House candidate Matt Schultz criticized Begich’s vote and suggested he would have chosen differently.
“Our tax dollars should build schools and hospitals here at home, not bankroll endless foreign wars. But Washington always seems to find billions for war while Alaskans pay the price with sky-high costs and watch investments in our future get delayed, downsized, or ignored,” he said.
“The cost of war isn’t just dollars and cents, it’s measured in human lives and suffering. As a pastor, I believe every life is sacred. That’s why the Constitution requires Congress to approve war: so no president can send Americans into conflict without a real plan and the support of the American people.”
A spokesperson for independent U.S. House candidate Bill Hill referenced that candidate’s posts on social media when asked about his position.
“Our leaders should be investing in lowering costs and making life better for working Americans, not putting American lives at risk in foreign wars without congressional approval,” Hill wrote in a Wednesday post on Facebook.
“Six U.S. service members have died and billions of dollars have been spent in a matter of days. Meanwhile here at home, our schools are in crisis, healthcare costs keep rising, veterans are at risk of losing benefits, and everyday costs are just too damn high,” he wrote. “We can’t afford a costly war with no end in sight.”
On the Senate side, Murkowski said the resolution presented to her this week would have required the removal of soldiers from hostilities, stopping military operations immediately.
“The abrupt cessation of all offensive operations would not leave any Americans — soldiers, diplomats, or civilians — in the Middle East in a safer position,” her statement said in part.
Murkowski said Trump has “committed U.S. troops to active engagement in combat with an enemy that has targeted and killed Americans for decades. We have lost six soldiers in this fight with the potential for more casualties. What our troops need now is for our Congress, and this country, to know that they are supported. It is for this reason that I oppose Senator Kaine’s War Powers Resolution — based on the practical implications of its passage.”
Sullivan has supported military action against Iran for years and told reporters on Feb. 28, “I’m not someone that, in general, would support kind of taking out world leaders,” he said. “But I think these guys, … my belief is that they’re less world leaders than terrorists, right?”
“This country’s been at war with us for almost a half century,” he said, referring to Iran, “and they’ve killed thousands and wounded thousands of our best and brightest.”
Sullivan is also facing a re-election campaign this year, but unlike on the House side, there isn’t a bright line between the incumbent and his leading opponent on this issue.
Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Mary Peltola hasn’t made any public statements about the Iran war, and her campaign social media accounts have been silent on the subject.
When contacted Thursday, her campaign spokesperson said she had no comment.
That makes it unclear whether she supports or opposes the war.
Brian Jackson, elections program manager for the Alaska Division of Elections, holds an SD card containing results from Alaska's Aug. 16, 2022 state primary. The cards and paper ballots from the primary are shipped to state elections headquarters in Juneau after the election. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon
Brian Jackson, elections program manager for the Alaska Division of Elections, holds an SD card containing results from Alaska’s Aug. 16, 2022 state primary. The cards and paper ballots from the primary are shipped to state elections headquarters in Juneau after the election. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
The head of the Alaska Division of Elections will not share legal advice that led to the state’s decision to send an extended voter list to the U.S. Department of Justice.
Alaska is one of only two states — Texas is the other — to hand over the data since the administration asked all 50 states last year. Ten others have said they plan to comply, according to records kept by the Brennan Center, a critic of the administration’s request.
Neither elections officials nor the Alaska Department of Law have explained why the state voluntarily complied with the request and signed the memo, or how compliance fits within the Alaska Constitution’s right to privacy.
That state’s Secretary of State said in a letter to federal officials that filings in a lawsuit showed that the department had shared sensitive information, including Social Security numbers, with “unauthorized persons,” and as a result, he could not guarantee that Idahoans’ identities would be safe.
In a pair of legislative hearings this week, Alaska lawmakers were unable to learn why Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom, Beecher, and the Alaska Department of Law reached a different conclusion.
Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, grilled Beecher during a Wednesday hearing, pressing her to release the legal advice she received before the Division of Elections turned over its voter list.
“This is an issue of grave concern for hundreds of thousands of Alaskans, and you have the ability to provide us with those documents. You have the ability to waive any potential privilege. Would you be willing to do that?” he asked.
“At this point, I am not willing to waive that privilege,” she said.
Sen. Elvi Gray-Jackson, D-Anchorage, asked Beecher whether the department made a mistake by sharing the voter data and signing the memo that would allow the federal government to single out individual Alaskans.
“I do not, at this juncture, believe that the division made a mistake in signing the MOU,” she said.
This week’s toughest questions came from Democratic lawmakers. Beecher and Dahlstrom are both Republicans, and Dahlstrom is also a candidate for governor in this fall’s elections.
Republican lawmakers were generally silent in this week’s hearings.
Rep. Andrew Gray, D-Anchorage and chair of the House Judiciary Committee, said he was “in an awkward position” and reached out to a variety of experts in an attempt to avoid bias in a hearing he held on Monday.
During that hearing, Rep. Kevin McCabe, R-Big Lake, said he sees the state’s compliance as something like following the speed limit.
“When the federal government makes a law, we’re expected to follow it … it’s the federal government’s job, through whomever, to ensure that law is followed, and from what I understand, the federal government was merely attempting to make sure that Alaska followed the National Voter Registration Act,” he said.
The information transmitted to the Department of Justice goes beyond the publicly available voter information purchasable from the Division of Elections for $20.
It contains personally identifying information, such as birthdates, driver’s license numbers and partial Social Security numbers.
In a legal analysis performed last month, legislative attorneys called the DOJ’s request “unprecedented” and said the division’s handover would be legal only if the federal government requested the information “in compliance with federal law” and used “the information only for governmental purposes authorized under law.”
As of Wednesday, three separate federal judges — in Oregon, California and Michigan — have ruled that the federal government’s request is not in compliance with federal law.
Of the 48 states and the District of Columbia that have been asked for their voter lists, 29 and DC are fighting the federal government in court. The federal government has won none of those cases to date.
Legislative attorney Andrew Dunmire said he is also unaware of any federal law that allows the federal government to single out individual voters for removal from voter lists, as the MOU states.
On Wednesday, Beecher said the Department of Justice has not yet requested that any voters be removed from Alaska’s list. In addition, Dahlstrom said in December that the state would comply with the MOU only if the federal government’s actions are legal.
But with the Alaska Department of Law and the Division of Elections stonewalling legislators, it isn’t clear what the state considers a legal request.
Speaking to legislators this week, former Alaska attorney general Bruce Botelho advised lawmakers to continue searching for the legal advice given to elections officials by the Alaska Department of Law.
He also suggested that legislators consider filing a lawsuit to have the agreement with the Department of Justice declared illegal.
