The chair of Alaska’s human rights commission has sued a political writer for defamation over his description of her work on a failed attempt to preserve a historic building in Seward.
Dorene Lorenz of Juneau filed the suit on Friday in Juneau Superior Court, seeking damages from Jeff Landfield and the other owners of the Alaska Landmine, a popular Alaska political website that publishes a mixture of news, commentary and parody.
Landfield, who backed Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election, also publishes the Alaska Political Report, a sobersided news digest priced at $1,299 per year for lobbyists and others interested in activity at the state Capitol.
Lorenz’s suit stems from a social media post in which Landfield ridiculed a recent appearance by Lorenz at a United Nations event in Switzerland.
Landfield went beyond that appearance, which he labeled “bizarre,” and said, “This woman is an absolute nut. Remember when she got in trouble for using … state money for the Jesse Lee Home for herself?”
Lorenz asked for a retraction. Landfield refused, and reiterated his belief in a video posted on Facebook.
Lorenz filed her lawsuit in response, saying Landfield’s claim is false. She asked for financial damages for slander and defamation, a correction and retraction.
Lorenz, who has experience representing herself in court, filed the lawsuit on her own behalf.
“She’s a f***ing lunatic,” Landfield said of the lawsuit on Tuesday.
“Anyone who has themselves as a client is a fool, as the old saying goes,” he said, adding that he looks forward to the discovery process and showing what happened with the Jesse Lee Home.
That building was a former orphanage and the home of Alaska Flag designer Benny Benson in the early 20th century.
During the administration of Gov. Bill Walker, state lawmakers allocated almost $7 million to restore the building, but grants given to a Lorenz-chaired nonprofit called the Friends of the Jesse Lee Home were terminated after a series of “reporting issues and accountability issues.”
Lorenz said by text on Tuesday that most of the grant money was never disbursed to the nonprofit she administered.
In 2018, Fred Parady, then deputy commissioner of the Alaska Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development, told Alaska Public Media that he didn’t think anyone involved with the project stole money.
In her legal complaint, Lorenz notes that Landfield was aware of that reporting and repeated his claim anyway.
Under Alaska law — which mirrors federal law — a public official filing a defamation claim needs to prove that someone knew what they were saying was a lie or that they willingly ignored evidence that their statement was a lie.
By text message, Lorenz said the 2018 reporting by Alaska Public Media shows that the state believed that the Friends of the Jesse Lee Home were spending too much money on classes within the school and not enough on the building itself.
“Landmine has asserted otherwise, with actual malice, and continues to do so,” she said. “Not cool.”
Salmon returning from the ocean attempt to jump Brooks Falls in Katmai National Park and Preserve’s Brooks River on July 12, 2018. Alaska’s commercial salmon harvest this year was nearly twice as big as last year’s small harvest. (Photo by Russ Taylor/National Park Service)
Alaska commercial fishers caught much more salmon in 2025 than they did last year, but the money they earned was modest, according to the statewide harvest report.
The state commercial salmon haul totaled 194.8 million fish, the 12th largest since 1985, according to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game’s preliminary annual summary, released this month.
Measured in pounds, the 2025 harvest was about average compared to the last 40 years the agency has been keeping an all-species record, the Fish and Game summary said.
But the amount of money paid to harvesters delivering their fish – known as ex-vessel value – was the 13th lowest since 1975, when adjusted for inflation. This year’s total was $541 million, the department said.
Copper River sockeye salmon fillets are displayed at New Sagaya Midtown Market in Anchorage on June 12, 2025. Sockeye salmon is also called red salmon. This year, sockeye salmon accounted for 58% of the value of Alaska’s total commercial salmon harvest, though it reprsented only about a quarter of the fish caught. (Photo by Yereth Rosen/Alaska Beacon)
This year’s totals represent a big improvement from last year, when only 101.2 million salmon were harvested. It was the third lowest haul since 1985 and the ex-vessel value was $304 million, the third lowest since 1975 when adjusted for inflation. In weight, the 2024 harvest totaled 450 million pounds, the lowest on record.
Alaska salmon, particularly Chinook, have been shrinking in size over the past decades, a trend that scientists attribute to a variety of factors, including climate change and ocean conditions.
This year, sockeye salmon accounted for the most value among Alaska’s five salmon species, continuing the long-term pattern in the industry. A little over a quarter of the landed fish were sockeye, but they made up 58% of the value, according to the Department of Fish and Game’s summary.
Pink salmon, the most plentiful and cheapest of the Alaska species, made up 61% of the total fish harvested and 21% of the total ex-value. The pink salmon harvest was about 14% less than expected at the start of the season, the department said.
At the other end of the volume spectrum, the statewide Chinook harvest, which accounted for only 181,892 of the 194.8 million total, was 26% higher than predicted in the preseason forecast, the department said.
Chum salmon accounted for 10% of the harvest and coho accounted for 1%, the department said.
The harvest totals are preliminary and subject to revision as more information is received, the department said.
The offices of the Alaska Permanent Fund Corp. are seen Monday, June 6, 2022 in Juneau, Alaska. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
Craig Richards, a longtime member of the board in charge of the Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation, has been replaced.
On Monday afternoon, Gov. Mike Dunleavy announced he had selected Ralph Samuels, a former state legislator, businessman and tourism expert, to serve on the board in a public seat formerly occupied by Richards, whose term was slated to expire this year.
The board directs Alaska’s $85 billion Permanent Fund, whose investments are the source of more than 60% of the state’s general-purpose revenue. That money is used annually for services and the annual Permanent Fund dividend.
Richards had served on the board since 2015, first under then-Gov. Bill Walker, and then under Dunleavy, who appointed him to a four-year term as a public member of the board in 2021.
Richards did not immediately answer a message left on his cellphone. It was not immediately clear whether he had sought another term but was passed over by the governor.
Samuels also did not immediately answer a message left on his cellphone.
A statement announcing Samuels’ appointment did not include a comment from Richards or note his departure.
Of Samuels, the governor said, “He is a lifelong Alaskan with an innate understanding of our state’s business and political landscape. As a Trustee he will bring that experience and insight to managing Alaska’s sovereign wealth fund not only for today, but for future generations of Alaskans.”
Under Richards, who chaired the Board of Trustees from 2018 through 2022, the board launched a controversial in-state investment program that has yet to deliver positive results.
The board in recent years has also intensified its warnings about the threat that the fund may run out of spendable money in the coming years.
An analysis paper commissioned during Richards’ time on the board suggests that a constitutional amendment may be needed to change the Permanent Fund’s structure to firmly cap the amount of money that may be spent from the fund and to consolidate the fund’s current two-account structure.
Fresh produce is seen at the Alaska Commercial Company grocery store in Bethel on Oct 15, 2025. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)
U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins’ call for a close reexamination of the 42 million people who receive federal food aid has befuddled advocates and lawmakers, coming mere days after recipients began to see benefits that had been stalled during the government shutdown.
Details remain scant a week after Rollins during an interview on the right-wing Newsmax network first publicly broached the startling idea that every beneficiary would have to reapply for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, often called food stamps.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture, asked for an explanation, referenced existing requirements and suggested more changes in SNAP rules could be in store.
“Secretary Rollins wants to ensure the fraud, waste, and incessant abuse of SNAP ends,” a USDA spokesperson wrote Wednesday. “Rates of fraud were only previously assumed, and President Trump is doing something about it. Using standard recertification processes for households is a part of that work. As well as ongoing analysis of state data, further regulatory work, and improved collaboration with states.”
The 2008 law governing SNAP leaves states responsible for administration. Part of that role includes periodically making sure that the low-income people in the program meet the qualifications for inclusion, but the law allows states to determine how often that occurs.
“It’s not clear what she would be proposing that is different from what is already happening,” said Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst for food assistance at the left-leaning think tank Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.
One interpretation of Rollins’ comments is that she would remove all 42 million individuals from SNAP’s rolls and ask them to resubmit applications. Bergh said that would lead to people losing money they need for groceries. About 40% of those enrolled in SNAP are children.
“If she’s suggesting that they’re going to somehow redo that process for more than 40 million people who already demonstrated their eligibility and who already have to periodically recertify their eligibility, that would be pretty duplicative and would likely create pretty significant paperwork backlogs that would cause people who are eligible to lose the food assistance that they need,” Bergh said.
Administration critics have suggested that, while the comments are unlikely to lead to policy changes, they introduce even more confusion for a program that was used as a political token during the record government shutdown that ended this month.
Making people reapply would underscore the Trump administration’s opposition to the nearly $100 billion program, which accounts for 70% of federal nutrition assistance. USDA says the average SNAP household in fiscal 2023 received a monthly benefit of $332, or $177 a person based on the average SNAP household size of 1.9 people.
“Secretary Rollins and the Trump administration have cut food assistance for 42 million Americans multiple times this year,” U.S. House Agriculture ranking member Angie Craig said in a Wednesday statement to States Newsroom. “Now, they’ve once again shown that they do not understand the program.”
What did Rollins say?
In the Nov. 13 interview on Newsmax, Rollins said SNAP was beset by widespread fraud, citing data that 29 mostly Republican-run states submitted to the department. Acquiring data from the 21 other states would give the department a way to wholly remake the program, she said.
“Can you imagine when we get our hands on the blue state data, what we’re going to find?” she said. “It’s going to give us a platform and a trajectory to fundamentally rebuild this program, have everyone reapply for their benefit, make sure that everyone that’s taking a taxpayer-funded benefit through SNAP or food stamps that they literally are vulnerable, and they can’t survive without it. And that’s the next step here.”
In an interview Monday on Fox News, host Maria Bartiromo asked Rollins about the move to have recipients “reapply.”
“Business as usual is over,” Rollins answered in part. “The status quo is no more. We know that the SNAP program is rife with fraud.”
She added that guarding against fraud would help those the program is meant to serve.
The comments touched off widespread confusion about what specifically Rollins meant.
Asked about the initiative during a Thursday press conference, Craig, a Minnesota Democrat, said she was unclear about how it would work and predicted that Rollins would take credit in the future for the existing low rate of fraud.
“We’re hearing off the record that, you know, maybe people don’t know what the hell they’re talking about,” she said. “In fact, I think they’re trying to take credit for the already very strict standards and the actual low fraud rate in the SNAP program … So we can find no real plan there. Not even sure there’s concepts of a plan there.”
In response to a States Newsroom request this week for details about the initiative, USDA provided the statement that did not answer how the department would proceed or under what authority, but said Rollins was seeking to reduce fraud in the program.
Spokespeople did not respond to follow-up questions, or a request to respond to Craig’s remarks Thursday.
Low fraud rate
Program experts say fraud is not a widespread problem for SNAP.
An April report from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service found that retailers illegally trafficked about 1.6% of SNAP benefits from fiscal 2015 to 2017.
Fraud by households applying for SNAP, which appear to be the main target of Rollins’ proposal, is even lower.
According to a USDA report, about 26,000 applications were referred for an administrative review or prosecution on suspicion of fraud. That number accounts for about 0.1% of the 22.7 million households enrolled in the program, according to the Pew Research Center.
“Long-standing data sources indicate that intentional fraud by participants is rare,” Bergh said.
At Thursday’s press conference, Craig called Rollins’ comments “bullsh*t” and “propaganda.”
“Secretary Rollins goes on TV and talks about all the fraud,” she said. “This most effective anti-hunger program in our history has a fraud rate of 1.6%. It’s actually one of the most effective, well-run programs in the country … The bullsh*t this administration is peddling is egregious.”
More targeted reforms
Even experts who advocate for reforms to SNAP say eligibility fraud is not a major issue.
Romina Boccia, director of budget and entitlement policy at the libertarian Cato Institute, said high-net-worth individuals can receive SNAP benefits, but aren’t committing fraud by doing so.
“Some of the issues with SNAP … aren’t because of fraud or abuse, but they are because of bad program rules,” said Boccia.
Boccia also cited an “incentive misalignment” inherent in the state-federal program. States have little incentive to control payments because the federal government funds the program, she said.
Forcing all beneficiaries to reapply would likely reduce the cost of the program by reducing the number of its beneficiaries, including by forcing out higher earners who may not consider the benefits they don’t actually need to be worth the onerous reapplication process, Boccia said.
But it would also result in a percentage of low earners dropping off the program, as well as many who would be affected by the administrative backlog that would come with processing tens of millions of new applications, she said.
Shutdown, the big beautiful bill, and confusion
Bergh said Rollins’ comments “add insult to injury” because they come after congressional Republicans and President Donald Trump signed a major tax cuts and spending law that is expected to shrink federal SNAP spending by $187 billion over 10 years. The law added work requirements for many SNAP recipients and shifted some costs to states.
That was followed by the six-week shutdown that saw a dizzying back-and-forth over whether November SNAP benefits would be paid.
“There has been huge amounts of chaos and confusion and disruption for both states and participants in recent weeks, largely due to the shutdown, but also because simultaneously, the administration has required states to implement many of the reconciliation bill’s SNAP cuts,” Bergh said.
Craig, in her statement, also said Rollins’ comments would hurt the people who need the program.
“I am astounded by the secretary’s careless disregard for the hungry seniors and children who can afford to eat because of this program,” she said.
Sara Naomi Bleich, a public health policy professor at Harvard University, said in a phone interview the confusion from Rollins’ comments compounded hardships produced by the Republican reconciliation law, known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
“Big picture with the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is that there’s basically this tidal wave coming to families that have low income,” Bleich, who worked at USDA during the Obama and Biden administrations, said. “They’re going to lose Medicaid. They’re going to lose SNAP. There could be collateral impacts on the school meals. This is going to be a really hard time for families to navigate.”
Homes are surrounded by debris in Kwigillingok, Alaska, Monday, Oct. 27, 2025, after being damaged earlier in the month by Typhoon Halong. (AP Photo/Lindsey Wasson)
AP- Storms that battered Alaska’s western coast this fall have brought renewed attention to low-lying Indigenous villages left increasingly vulnerable by climate change — and revived questions about their sustainability in a region being reshaped by frequent flooding, thawing permafrost and landscape-devouring erosion.
The onset of winter has slowed emergency repair and cleanup work after two October storms, including the remnants of Typhoon Halong, slammed dozens of communities. Some residents from the hardest-hit villages, Kipnuk and Kwigillingok, could be displaced for months and worry what their futures hold.
Kwigillingok already was pursuing relocation before the latest storm, but that can take decades, with no centralized coordination and little funding. Moves by the Trump administration to cut grants aimed at better protecting communities against climate threats have added another layer of uncertainty.
Still, the hope is to try to buy villages time to evaluate next steps by reinforcing rebuilt infrastructure or putting in place pilings so homes can be elevated, said Bryan Fisher, the state’s emergency management director.
“Where we can support that increased resilience to buy that time, we’re going to do that,” he said.
Many Alaska Native villages are threatened by climate change
Alaska is warming faster than the global average. A report released last year by the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium found 144 Native communities face threats from erosion, flooding, thawing permafrost or a combination.
Coastal populations are particularly vulnerable, climate scientist John Walsh said. Less Arctic sea ice means more open water, allowing storm-driven waves to do damage. Thawing permafrost invites more rapid coastal erosion. Waves hitting permafrost bounce like water off a concrete wall, he said, but when permafrost thaws, the loose soil washes away more easily.
Wind and storm surge from the remnants of Halong consumed dozens of feet of shoreline in Quinhagak, disturbing a culturally significant archaeological site. Quinhagak, like Kipnuk and Kwigillingok, is near the Bering Sea.
Just four times since 1970 has an ex-typhoon hit the Bering Sea coast north of the Pribilof Islands, said Rick Thoman, a climate specialist with the Alaska Center for Climate Assessment and Preparedness. Three of those have been since 2022, starting with the remnants of Merbok that year.
The damage caused by ex-typhoon Halong was the worst Fisher said he has seen in his roughly 30 years in emergency management. About 700 homes were destroyed or severely damaged, estimates suggest. Some washed away with people inside and were carried for miles. Kipnuk and Kwigillingok — no strangers to flooding and home to around 1,100 people — were devastated. One person died, and two remain missing.
Some homes and buildings that were torn off their foundations and floated away are seen near the village of Kwigillingok, Alaska, Monday, Oct. 27, 2025, after Typhoon Halong hit the region earlier in the month. (AP Photo/Lindsey Wasson)
Options are limited and expensive
At-risk communities can reinforce existing infrastructure or fortify shoreline; move infrastructure to higher ground in what is known as managed retreat; or relocate entirely. The needs are enormous — $4.3 billion over 50 years to protect infrastructure in Native communities from climate threats, according to the health consortium report, though that estimate dates to 2020. A lack of resources and coordination has impeded progress, the report found.
Simply announcing plans to relocate can leave a community ineligible for funding for new infrastructure at their existing site, and government policies can limit investments at a new site if people aren’t living there yet, the report said.
It took decades and an estimated $160 million for the roughly 300 residents of Newtok in western Alaska to move 9 miles (14.5 kilometers) to their new village of Mertarvik. Newtok was one of the first Alaska Native communities to fully relocate, but others are considering or pursuing it. In Washington and Louisiana, climate change has been a driving force behind relocation efforts by some tribes.
But many villages, including Kipnuk and Kwigillingok, “don’t have that kind of time,” said Sheryl Musgrove, director of the Alaska Climate Justice Program at the Alaska Institute for Justice. The two are among 10 tribal communities her group has been working with as they navigate climate-adaptation decisions.
Kipnuk before the last storm had been planning a protect-in-place strategy but hasn’t decided what to do now, she said.
Musgrove hopes that in the aftermath, there will be changes at the federal level to help communities in peril. There is no federal agency, for example, tasked with coordinating relocation. That leaves small communities trying to navigate myriad agencies and programs, Musgrove said.
“I guess I’m just really hopeful that this might be the beginning of a change because I think that there is a lot of attention to what happened here,” she said.
Federal support is in question
With money from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and Inflation Reduction Act, the U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs in 2022 created the Voluntary Community-Driven Relocation Program and committed $115 million for 11 tribes’ relocation efforts, including $25 million each for Newtok and Napakiak. In Napakiak, most of the infrastructure is expected to be destroyed by 2030, and the community is moving away from the banks of the Kuskokwim River.
That is not enough to move a village, and additional funding opportunities are scattered across other agencies, including the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association.
Sustained federal support is uncertain as the Trump administration cuts programs related to climate change and disaster resilience. Trump in May proposed cutting $617 million from the Bureau of Indian Affairs’ tribal self-governance and communities programs but did not specify which programs.
The Department of Interior said in an email that new grant funding is “under review as part of a broader effort to improve federal spending accountability,” but that the Bureau of Indian Affairs was “helping tribes lay the groundwork for future implementation when funding pathways are clarified.”
Other federal money that could help Alaska villages has already been cut. Federal Emergency Management Agency awards to Newtok and Kwigillingok for projects related to relocation didn’t arrive before the administration in April halted billions of dollars in unpaid grants.
Trump has also stopped approving state and tribal requests for hazard mitigation funding, a typical add-on that accompanies federal support after major disasters.
NOTN- The legal fight over the future of the historic Telephone Hill neighborhood will now proceed entirely in Superior Court, after district judge Kristen Swanson declined to rule on the city’s eviction cases tied to the planned redevelopment project.
City Attorney Emily Wright said Judge Swanson dismissed the eviction actions in District Court, to Superior Court Judge Daniel Browning of Sitka.
“Superior Court handles more complex matters than District Court, so Judge Swanson was only going to rule on the issue of, should we (CBJ) have possession of the houses, and should these tenants have to leave immediately?” Said Wright, “The tenants, plus a few others, have filed a civil lawsuit, and in that lawsuit are talking about the evictions, but they’re also talking about the larger questions of, what is the city doing on Telephone Hill? Should that continue? And so really, Judge Swanson’s not going to hear the small little piece. She’s going to send it over to the Superior Court to handle everything.”
The lawsuit alleges the city improperly evicted residents and violated state and federal historic preservation laws in its push to clear Telephone Hill for redevelopment.
Wright said the city accepts Swanson’s decision and plans to request an expedited hearing before Judge Browning.
“We are going to ask for expedited hearings on that case. Because even though, civil cases can take a very, very long time. The city is trying to move forward on the testing of the houses.” She said.
The city’s engineering department has already begun hazardous materials assessments on homes that are vacant. Three homes remain occupied.
“The city engineering department is working their way through doing the hazardous materials assessment, and we’re starting with the houses that are empty. We need to get to those other houses before this next step so we’re going to ask for expedited consideration in the Superior Court matter, which probably means a hearing, sometime after Thanksgiving.”
The city plans to redevelope Telephone Hill into higher-density housing and had issued Nov. 1 eviction notices.
Aaron Christian Peterson appears in front of the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary on Nov. 19, 2025, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. (Screenshot)
A confirmation hearing for President Donald Trump’s pick to fill a judicial vacancy in Alaska was largely uneventful on Wednesday.
Aaron Christian Peterson was nominated by Trump this month after getting support from U.S. Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, and on Wednesday, the U.S. Senate’s judiciary committee held a hearing on Peterson’s nomination and two other prospective judges bound for other states.
Senators’ attention largely focused on the other two men — David Fowlkes for a judgeship in Arkansas, and Nicholas Ganjei for a seat in Texas — and senators frequently used their time in the hearing to discuss their own views, rather than seek information about the nominees.
“Here I am asking the questions and giving the answers — it’s like the bar exam, except I’m giving the answers,” said Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Missouri, at one point in the hearing.
Peterson, who lives in Eagle River, is a natural resources attorney for the state of Alaska and has extensive experience as a criminal prosecutor.
Speaking to the committee, he said he has “a deep familiarity with the laws that are specific to Alaska,” naming the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act as one example.
“I have a wide variety of experience in the arenas that are likely to come before the district court, and hopefully I’ll be able to preside over those matters if I’m fortunate enough to be confirmed,” he said.
Sen. Mazie Hirono, D-Hawaii, asked all three nominees if they had ever been accused of sexual harassment or made unwanted sexual advances toward someone.
All three said no.
Alaska’s most recent pick for the U.S. District Court, former Judge Josh Kindred, was appointed during the first Trump administration but resigned and was disbarred after an investigation found had committed significant sexual misconduct while in office.
Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California, asked all three nominees whether they believe Congress is prohibited from imposing a code of ethics on the U.S. Supreme Court.
Peterson, answering third, echoed his potential colleagues and said it would depend on the circumstances, but that he does have concerns about whether such a thing would violate the U.S. Constitution’s separation of powers doctrine.
Currently, the U.S. Supreme Court is closely aligned with President Trump, and members of the court have repeatedly accepted financial and physical gifts from people affected by issues before the court.
Republicans generally oppose new ethics restrictions on the court; Democrats generally favor them.
Hawley asked the judicial nominees whether they believe a district court judge has the ability to issue injunctions that can halt nationwide actions.
Sullivan, who does not sit on the judicial committee, read a prepared statement introducing Peterson.
“Aaron is a lifelong Alaskan. He knows and understands our great state and the federal laws that reflect on Alaska. I think he will be a great federal judge. I urge his nomination be sent to the Senate floor with positive votes from all the members of this committee,” Sullivan said.
Peterson was one of several people suggested to the president by a committee formed at Sullivan’s behest to consider nominees for two current vacancies on the federal bench in Alaska.
That committee deliberated in secret, and the list of applicants — and of proposed nominees — has never been revealed.
Murkowski used a more traditional process to propose nominees to the president, relying on advice from the Alaska Bar Association. Peterson’s name did not appear in that application process, and the Bar Association did not respond to a request for comment on Thursday.
Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Nebraska and chair of the judiciary committee, said members of the committee will submit written questions to the nominees by Nov. 26.
After that, the committee is expected to vote on the nominees and send them to a vote of the full U.S. Senate for confirmation.
Fresh produce is seen at the Alaska Commercial Company grocery store in Bethel on Oct 15, 2025. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)
Alaskans who qualify for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program received half of their benefits nearly a week late as a result of the federal government shutdown this month. Their full benefits were two weeks late, even though the state had emergency funds to prevent that.
Officials say the state never used the $5 million per week it set aside to keep people from waiting for food benefits because the state’s system had to be reconfigured to use state money rather than its usual federal funding source. SNAP is a federal food assistance program that is run by the state.
Division Director Deb Etheridge said the state is now prepared to react quickly if a similar situation arises in the future.
“We went through all the steps we needed to create an opportunity for a state-only benefit to be issued through our EBT contractor,” she said. “So in the event that anything like this happens again, we can move swiftly to issue that state-only benefit.”
Gov. Mike Dunleavy signed an emergency order declaration on Nov. 3, following a request by state legislators and similar action by other states.
Etheridge said information technology and system operations teams had to scramble to come up with solutions, but by the time they found a way to get money to Alaskans, the federal government had begun to partially fulfill its obligations.
She said the state was closing in on a solution when the federal government released 50% of the money for benefits on Nov. 4. She said that money was processed and ready for Alaskans to spend by Nov. 6.
Etheridge said the eligibility technicians that process benefits were not excessively burdened by the shutdown.
“Eligibility workers were doing business as usual, processing cases and managing, obviously, increased phone calls — people wanted to know where their benefits were,” she said. “The pressure came on our system operations and our IT.”
The shutdown delayed service in a state division with a history of slowdowns in recent years. The DPA has battled long backlogs in processing food benefit applications as a result of staff shortages and technology issuessince 2022. The division made progress against its backlog before slipping again in 2023. Paperwork slowdowns kept thousands waiting again earlier this year.
Etheridge says the division is currently working to make sure people displaced by the October storms in Western Alaska continue to receive benefits, even if they have lost access to critical paperwork.
FILE – In this undated photo provided by the United States Geological Survey, permafrost forms a grid-like pattern in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, managed by the Bureau of Land Management on Alaska’s North Slope. (David W. Houseknecht/United States Geological Survey via AP, File)
AP- Congress has passed a measure to overturn a plan enacted during the Biden administration that put off limits to oil and gas leasing nearly half a vast petroleum reserve in Alaska. Critics see the vote as political meddling that creates confusion over the future management of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska.
Tuesday’s House vote followed passage by the Senate during the government shutdown of the resolution disapproving a management plan for the reserve that was finalized in 2022 under then-President Joe Biden. The offices of Alaska’s Republican congressional delegation members have said the resolution “fulfills the objectives” of an Alaska-specific executive order signed by President Donald Trump earlier this year. The executive order called for reinstating a plan dating to the first Trump administration that sought to make available for leasing about 80% of the reserve.
The measure next goes to Trump for consideration.
There has been outsized attention on Alaska since Trump’s return to office, with moves to expand development of oil and gas and other resources cheered by state political leaders who had considered the Biden administration overly restrictive in its approach.
The votes are among the latest taken under the Congressional Review Act that are aimed at nullifying land management plans adopted under Biden. A statement from the congressional delegation last month said the review act provides an expedited way to overturn certain federal rules and forbids an agency from issuing another substantially similar rule unless it’s authorized by law.
But Alex Cohen, director of government affairs for the Alaska Wilderness League, called use of the act a “super, super blunt instrument.” Regulatory policy instead requires “very careful, considered stakeholder engagement, scientific analysis,” he said.
The approach taken by Congress also raises questions about what constitutes a substantially similar rule, Cohen said, adding there is a lack of clarity around what happens when a plan is overturned.
A bill passed earlier this year calls for oil and gas lease sales in the petroleum reserve, for which the last sale was held in 2019, and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Major companies sat out the first two lease sales held for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge; the first was at the end of Trump’s first term and the second near the end of Biden’s.
NOTN- Juneau residents will soon see changes at the checkout counter as the city moves to implement Proposition 2, which exempts food and utilities from sales tax starting November 20.
Barr said the goal is to make the transition “as seamless as possible” for both residents and businesses.
“Residents won’t have to do anything. You just simply won’t see sales tax on your receipts or your bills for food and utilities.” He said.
The measure, approved by voters earlier this year, eliminates the city’s 5% sales tax on groceries and household utilities. Barr said some exceptions apply, “There’s a couple of exceptions for utilities that you buy in person, like wood or wood pellets or the retail purchase of fuel. For those specific exemptions folks will have to come downtown or go online and get a card number from us, because, while food is exempt for everyone, utilities aren’t.” said Barr.
He said most utility vendors already have systems in place to differentiate between the two.
Proposition 2 defines “essential utilities” as those sold to individuals for non-commercial use within the City and Borough of Juneau. This includes the sale of electricity, heating fuel, water and wastewater service, refuse and recycling collection at a City and Borough of Juneau resident’s principal place of abode, and the non-commercial use of landfill facilities by CBJ residents.
CBJ released an official statement that clarifies some concerns on extra steps; Because most, if not all, utilities already designate commercial and residential rates for billing purposes, and to ensure that the intent of the ballot sponsors and the will of the voters is honored, CBJ is working with utilities to utilize their definition of residential and commercial while maintaining the intent of the ballot initiative. CBJ also provided definitions for guidance where utilities do not already designate rates as commercial or residential.
In practice, this means that residents are not required to obtain an exemption number or card to receive the exemption for billed utility use (electricity, water, etc.). However, residents may choose to apply for an exemption card if they intend to make retail purchases of eligible essential utilities (wood pellets, propane, etc.). If residents believe they are mistakenly designated as commercial by billed utilities, they may also apply for a utility sales tax exemption card and submit their exemption card to the utility to receive the exemption. Essential utilities exemption card application details will be available at juneau.org/finance/sales-tax and at the CBJ Sales Tax Office prior to the November 20 enactment date.
CBJ is working with utility providers on the implementation process. It may take time for providers to apply the new exemptions to their many thousands of accountholders.
