Alaska Republican U.S. Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan (Alaska Beacon file photos)
Alaska’s two U.S. senators are split on whether or not it is appropriate for the U.S. military to kill suspected drug smugglers without trial or a declaration of war.
On Tuesday, the federal government said it had killed another six people aboard a boat in international waters of the Caribbean Sea, with President Trump claiming on social media that they were drug smugglers.
Since Sept. 2, the U.S. military has killed 27 people in the Caribbean Sea without a declaration of war or criminal trial, according to statistics kept by the New York Times.
In each case, the federal government has asserted without evidence that all the people killed aboard the boats were smuggling drugs.
Last week, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, voted to have the Senate vote on a resolution that would have ended the Caribbean Sea bombings unless approved by Congress.
Sixty votes were needed to call a vote. Only 48 senators — all Democrats, plus Murkowski and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Kentucky — voted in favor of bringing the issue to a vote.
“While I commend the administration’s concerted efforts to address the devastation of drug trafficking on communities across the country, I do not believe the information I have received justifies this interpretation of the President’s Article II powers,” Murkowski said, referring to the section of the Constitution that names the president the commander in chief of the military.
“I take very seriously my Article I responsibility when it comes to Congress’s power to declare war. I don’t think that full information on the legal and factual justification for armed attacks on suspected drug traffickers is too much to ask,” Murkowski said.
Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, joined the rest of the Senate’s Republicans and Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania in voting to support the bombings.
Afterward, he offered a written statement explaining his vote.
“Days ago, I was briefed by Secretary of State Rubio on Venezuelan narcoterrorist cartels flooding our country with deadly drugs. Nicolás Maduro — the illegitimate leader of Venezuela and a criminal indicted by U.S. prosecutors — refuses to cooperate with the U.S. and is clearly aiding these vicious drug traffickers who are responsible for killing tens of thousands of Americans. President Trump’s lawful strikes against these cartels are saving lives and, importantly, establishing deterrence. Under Article II, he has the authority to defend our homeland, just as President George H.W. Bush did when he ordered the invasion of Panama in 1989 to remove the drug-trafficking dictator Manuel Noriega,” the statement said.
“Senate Democrats’ resolution was another attempt to restrict the President’s ability to act — emboldening cartels and putting American lives at risk. These senators would never tolerate ISIS or al-Qaeda operating freely near our shores: eliminating a terrorist organization like Tren de Aragua that is literally killing thousands of Americans is no different. More Americans have died from drug overdoses in the past seven years than in both World Wars and the Vietnam War combined. Alaskans know this devastation firsthand, as poisons like fentanyl tear apart families in our cities and Alaska Native villages. Eliminating these cartels before they reach our shores protects our county and sends a strong message of deterrence.”
According to the proposed ordinance, when an officer-involved shooting occurs that causes death or serious injury to an officer or someone else, Juneau Police Department would release body-worn camera footage no later than 30 days after the incident. (Photo courtesy City & Borough of Juneau website)
(Photo courtesy City & Borough of Juneau website)
NOTN- The Alaska Department of Law’s Office of Special Prosecutions will not file criminal charges against former Juneau Police Officer Brandon LeBlanc for his use of force during a July 30 arrest that left a man unconscious and later medevaced out of Juneau for his injuries.
The decision follows a review of an Alaska State Troopers investigation into the incident, in which Officer LeBlanc took Christopher Williams Jr. to the ground during an arrest.
Williams struck his head on the pavement, was knocked unconscious, and was later medevaced to Anchorage for treatment.
Special Assistant Attorney General reviewed body camera footage, civilian video, officer interviews, and other evidence, and in a Statement from the office of Special Prosecutions, concluded that prosecutors could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that LeBlanc’s use of force was unjustified under Alaska law.
While acknowledging that Williams was seriously injured, the Office of Special Prosecutions determined that LeBlanc’s actions did not constitute deadly force and that the takedown maneuver used was considered a “nondeadly control tactic in law enforcement”, The state found LeBlanc believed he needed to gain control of Williams, who according to the statement, appeared intoxicated and was actively resisting being handcuffed.
The report noted that although LeBlanc’s comments during the incident including a threat to “slam” Williams and a remark after the takedown, raised questions about his motivations, the totality of circumstances did not meet the legal threshold for criminal charges.
The letter also criticized the City and Borough of Juneau’s decision to publicly release body camera and in-car video footage of the incident before the investigation was complete, saying the release occurred “over the explicit objection” of both the Department of Public Safety and the Department of Law. Prosecutors warned that such releases could jeopardize future cases by affecting jury impartiality.
The Office of Special Prosecutions said its review was limited to whether LeBlanc’s actions violated criminal law and did not address possible policy or disciplinary issues within the Juneau Police Department.
The State’s letter concluded:
“The State will not file criminal charges against JPD Officer Brandon LeBlanc relating to the July 30, 2025, use of nondeadly force against Christopher Williams Jr. in Juneau, Alaska.”
A gray seal surveys its surroundings, Tuesday, Sept. 30, 2025, off the coast of Brunswick, Maine. (AP Photo/Robert F. Bukaty)
AP- Republican lawmakers are targeting one of the U.S.’s longest standing pieces of environmental legislation, credited with helping save rare whales from extinction.
Conservative leaders feel they now have the political will to remove key pieces of the Marine Mammal Protection Act, enacted in 1972 to protect whales, seals, polar bears and other sea animals. The law also places restrictions on commercial fishermen, shippers and other marine industries.
A GOP-led bill in the works has support from fishermen in Maine who say the law makes lobster fishing more difficult, lobbyists for big-money species such as tuna in Hawaii and crab in Alaska, and marine manufacturers who see the law as antiquated.
Conservation groups adamantly oppose the changes and say weakening the law will erase years of hard-won gains for jeopardized species such as the vanishing North Atlantic right whale, of which there are less than 400, and is vulnerable to entanglement in fishing gear.
Here’s what to know about the protection act and the proposed changes.
Why does the 1970s law still matter
“The Marine Mammal Protection Act is important because it’s one of our bedrock laws that help us to base conservation measures on the best available science,” said Kathleen Collins, senior marine campaign manager with International Fund for Animal Welfare. “Species on the brink of extinction have been brought back.”
It was enacted the year before the Endangered Species Act, at a time when the movement to save whales from extinction was growing. Scientist Roger Payne had discovered that whales could sing in the late 1960s, and their voices soon appeared on record albums and throughout popular culture.
The law protects all marine mammals, and prohibits capturing or killing them in U.S. waters or by U.S. citizens on the high seas. It allowed for preventative measures to stop commercial fishing ships and other businesses from accidentally harming animals such as whales and seals. The animals can be harmed by entanglement in fishing gear, collisions with ships and other hazards at sea.
The law also prevents the hunting of marine mammals, including polar bears, with exceptions for Indigenous groups. Some of those animals can be legally hunted in other countries.
Changes to oil and gas operations — and whale safety
Republican Rep. Nick Begich of Alaska, a state with a large fishing industry, submitted a bill draft this summer that would roll back aspects of the law. The bill says the act has “unduly and unnecessarily constrained government, tribes and the regulated community” since its inception.
The proposal states that it would make changes such as lowering population goals for marine mammals from “maximum productivity” to the level needed to “support continued survival.” It would also ease rules on what constitutes harm to marine mammals.
For example, the law currently prevents harassment of sea mammals such as whales, and defines harassment as activities that have “the potential to injure a marine mammal.” The proposed changes would limit the definition to only activities that actually injure the animals. That change could have major implications for industries such as oil and gas exploration where rare whales live.
That poses an existential threat to the Rice’s whale, which numbers only in the dozens and lives in the Gulf of Mexico, conservationists said. And the proposal takes specific aim at the North Atlantic right whale protections with a clause that would delay rules designed to protect that declining whale population until 2035.
Begich and his staff did not return calls for comment on the bill, and his staff declined to provide an update about where it stands in Congress. Begich has said he wants “a bill that protects marine mammals and also works for the people who live and work alongside them, especially in Alaska.”
Fishing groups want restrictions loosened
A coalition of fishing groups from both coasts has come out in support of the proposed changes. Some of the same groups lauded a previous effort by the Trump administration to reduce regulatory burdens on commercial fishing.
The groups said in a July letter to House members that they feel Begich’s changes reflect “a positive and necessary step” for American fisheries’ success.
Restrictions imposed on lobster fishermen of Maine are designed to protect the right whale, but they often provide little protection for the animals while limiting one of America’s signature fisheries, Virginia Olsen, political director of the Maine Lobstering Union, said. The restrictions stipulate where lobstermen can fish and what kinds of gear they can use. The whales are vulnerable to lethal entanglement in heavy fishing rope.
Gathering more accurate data about right whales while revising the original law would help protect the animals, Olsen said.
“We do not want to see marine mammals harmed; we need a healthy, vibrant ocean and a plentiful marine habitat to continue Maine’s heritage fishery,” Olsen said.
Some members of other maritime industries have also called on Congress to update the law. The National Marine Manufacturers Association said in a statement that the rules have not kept pace with advancements in the marine industry, making innovation in the business difficult.
Environmentalists fight back
Numerous environmental groups have vowed to fight to save the protection act. They characterized the proposed changes as part of the Trump administration’s assault on environmental protections.
The act was instrumental in protecting the humpback whale, one of the species most beloved by whale watchers, said Gib Brogan, senior campaign director with Oceana. Along with other sea mammals, humpbacks would be in jeopardy without it, he said.
“The Marine Mammal Protection Act is flexible. It works. It’s effective. We don’t need to overhaul this law at this point,” Brogan said.
What does this mean for seafood imports
The original law makes it illegal to import marine mammal products without a permit, and allows the U.S. to impose import prohibitions on seafood products from foreign fisheries that don’t meet U.S. standards.
The import embargoes are a major sticking point because they punish American businesses, said Gavin Gibbons, chief strategy officer of the National Fisheries Institute, a Virginia-based seafood industry trade group. It’s critical to source seafood globally to be able to meet American demand for seafood, he said.
The National Fisheries Institute and a coalition of industry groups sued the federal government Thursday over what they described as unlawful implementation of the protection act. Gibbons said the groups don’t oppose the act, but want to see it responsibly implemented.
“Our fisheries are well regulated and appropriately fished to their maximum sustainable yield,” Gibbons said. “The men and women who work our waters are iconic and responsible. They can’t be expected to just fish more here to make up a deficit while jeopardizing the sustainability they’ve worked so hard to maintain.”
Some environmental groups said the Republican lawmakers’ proposed changes could weaken American seafood competitiveness by allowing imports from poorly regulated foreign fisheries.
Alaska Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom (Photo by Greg Knight/News of the North)
NOTN- Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom announced last week that she is officially running for governor, saying she hopes to lead Alaska toward “a stronger, more self-sufficient future” built on resource development, job creation and a focus on public safety.
In an interview with News of the North on Tuesday, Dahlstrom said she was motivated to launch her campaign because she wants to “make Alaska a place where families can put down roots, businesses can grow, and communities can thrive.”
“I decided to step up and run for Governor because I believe in Alaska’s future.” Said Dahlstrom, “I want our kids and grandkids to be able to stay here and have successful lives. And I know that we have some challenges, but we have many, many opportunities right in front of us, and I think I’m the person that can help bring some of these things to fruition.”
Dahlstrom, who has served as lieutenant governor since 2022 under Gov. Mike Dunleavy, previously served in the Alaska House of Representatives and as the state’s corrections commissioner. She says these experiences have shaped her vision for Alaska.
“Serving in the legislature, I was able to craft legislation that really tightened crime laws and made Alaska safer for everyone.” Dahlstrom said, “I feel confident the experience I have is going to be beneficial for Alaska.”
Dahlstrom said her top priorities include lowering energy costs, expanding resource development, and supporting job creation as a way to improve both economic and mental health across the state.
“Having a job is probably the one thing you need to help have good mental health. When people have a job, they feel successful about themselves, and they’re moving forward, their mental health is better.” Said Dahlstrom, “We’re high on mental health and substance use issues, and we need to be working towards fixing that.”
Dahlstrom also called for “unleashing Alaska’s resources,” including mining and drilling.
“I’m going to continue helping the government, the State, the President and others in Alaska in unleashing our resources, so we are able to mine and drill to get the wonderful things we have in this State, there’s going to be jobs everywhere, and it’s going to be a wonderful situation.”
If elected, Dahlstrom said her first 100 days in office would focus on meeting with legislative leaders and reviewing department budgets.
Dahlstrom, who moved to Alaska as a teenager and said she “fell in love with the state.”
“I came here when I was 18 for a vacation, and I just never wanted to leave,” she said.
Dahlstrom joins a crowded republican race for governor, following term-limited Mike Dunleavy.
A school bus passes in front of the Alaska Capitol on Tuesday, Feb. 6, 2024. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
By: Corinne Smith, Alaska Beacon
A school bus passes in front of the Alaska Capitol on Tuesday, Feb. 6, 2024. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
Officials with the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development have walked back a proposal to limit local governments’ funding for public schools, instead asking the State Board of Education to take no action on the item this week.
The State Board of Education was set to vote this week on a controversial measure that many school officials and education advocates say would bar local municipalities from providing much-needed funding and support services to local schools.
Instead the board voted unanimously on Thursday, at a DEED official’s request, to take no action and return the proposal to the department for further development.
A screenshot of the Alaska State Board of Education during their quarterly meeting, where Education Commissioner Deena Bishop addresses the proposed regulation change to local contributions on Oct. 8, 2025 (Screenshot)
“As a result of the feedback we received, the department will be recommending that the state board take no action on this item, return the proposed regulation to the board or to the department for further collaboration and input with key stakeholders,” said Heather Heineken, the division director for finance and support services for the department, to the board Wednesday, the first day of a two-day meeting.
The proposal came under sharp criticism and public alarm beginning in June, when DEED introduced the measure as an emergency regulation change. Officials said the move was intended to redefine the amount local municipalities provide for schools — called the local contribution — to include “services provided at no charge to a district by the city or borough.”
At the time, DEED officials said it was a way to address the balance of funding for schools ↣— in Alaska’s complex school funding formula which includes local, state and federal funding — and avoid failing a federal disparity test.
The disparity test is required by the U.S. Department of Education to regulate the spread between the highest and lowest funded districts, because of the way the state uses some federal funding, called impact aid. The state failed the test earlier this year, but is in the process of appealing the ruling.
Education Commissioner Deena Bishop, however, reversed that argument and told board members further discussion was needed with districts and financial offices to clarify what “in-kind” contributions are being made and how they were accounted for. She said that was needed to align with state law and standards for equity between districts.
“We’re not reacting to the federal government. What we are (doing) is trying to meet the state statute that calls for that equitable funding,” Bishop told the board on Wednesday.
Public raises alarm at unclear change to local contributions
State board members received more than 600 public comments, mostly opposing the measure, in June and July when the regulation was introduced, calling the proposed change vague and potentially limiting vital municipal funding for schools.
During public comment on Thursday, several district officials expressed opposition and concern.
Valdez School District Superintendent Jason Weber said the change could jeopardize essential city funding, including for transportation and school meals.
“Our Food Service Program is also at a breaking point. Even after raising lunch prices by $1 per meal last year, we’re still operating at a deficit. Every dollar cut from food service funding is $1 taken away from the plates of kids, these regulations would directly reduce the food we can provide for our students, something no community should have to accept,” he said.
“Each Alaskan community has unique needs and challenges the decisions about how to support and operate schools should be made by those who live and work closest to them, not through a one size fits all mandate from the state level, undermining local authority threatens the very foundation of community supported education in Alaska,” Weber said.
Juneau School District Superintendent Frank Hauser pointed to the state’s own appeal of the federal disparity test as evidence the change is unnecessary.
“According to DEED’s July 14 letter, the state would meet the disparity standard, not with a regulation change, which isn’t even mentioned, but by a different accounting method,” Hauser said.
Hauser asked board members to vote the regulation down.
“I am terrified of version 3.0 of this regulation. Each subsequent attempt at this regulation change has had exponentially more negative impacts, impacts beyond what the department realizes, even to REAAS, home school and correspondence students, instead of enacting the oft quoted definition of insanity, doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results, I ask you today to take a different direction and ask the department to stop with this effort altogether,” he said.
During public comment, district officials also raised concerns at a recent DEED Facebook post, which shared a statement over an image of a burning dumpster fire, calling several Anchorage officials’ out by name, saying that their information was “inaccurate” and saying DEED no longer was pushing the proposal. Commenters called the social media post “unprofessional” and not “positive or proactive communication.”
Anchorage officials had penned an op-ed in the Anchorage Daily News, opposing the regulation change, saying it could “gut” the district and strip $15 million in municipal funding, including for school buses and school resource officers.
State board members vote to return proposal to DEED
Before the vote, several state board members questioned whether the proposal should come back to the board.
“I guess I’m questioning now, is it really an issue, or is that needs to be addressed, or does it just need to go away?” asked board member Pamela Dupras on Thursday.
Bishop responded that DEED will gather more feedback, and work with districts to adhere to state law and requirements for equitability. She also pointed to the new Legislative Task Force on Education Funding that may take up the issue and recommend new legislation to define local contributions.
Bishop said DEED would work with district officials and finance departments to further clarify the requirements. “I’m glad that you’re pulling this back,” she said.
She also acknowledged the frustration of districts. “Every two weeks from August until now, I’ve been sharing the same message that, yes, we do not want to put this forward. So I understand the frustration with what was in writing, certainly superintendents that attended all those meetings knew the intent,” she said.
“I think just the stress about school funding, a lot of trust isn’t there,” Bishop added. “The Department wants to earn that trust back and continue with the work.”
An early voting station is set up in the atrium of the State Office Building in Juneau, Alaska on Monday, Aug. 5, 2024, the first day of early voting for the 2024 Alaska primary election. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
An early voting station is set up in the atrium of the State Office Building in Juneau, Alaska on Monday, Aug. 5, 2024, the first day of early voting for the 2024 Alaska primary election. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
NOTN- Juneau voters are set to approve two tax-cutting measures according to unofficial results from the City and Borough of Juneau’s municipal election released Friday.
Early results show challenger Nathaniel “Nano” Brooks leading incumbent Wade Bryson 4,652 votes to 4,242 in the city’s only contested Assembly race.
Greg Smith and Ella Adkison, both running unopposed, secured their seats for District 1 and the areawide Assembly positions, respectively.
In the race for the Board of Education, Steve Whitney leads, followed by Melissa Cullum, Jenny Thomas, Jeremy “JJJ” Johnson and Deedie Sorensen.
Speaking Wednesday morning, Weldon said due to high voter turnout, preliminary numbers for Ballot propositions 1 through 3 won’t likely change.
“Ballot Proposition 2, taking the sales tax off food, that’s not going to change. The seasonal sales tax is not going to change. Proposition 1 has a possibility of changing, but is likely going to stay that way.” Weldon Said.
Proposition 1, which would lower the city’s property tax cap from 12 to 9 mills, is ahead with 5,002 votes in favor and 4,807 opposed.
Proposition 2, which exempts food and residential utilities from sales tax, passed by a wide margin 6,842 votes to 2,995 .
Proposition 3, which would have created a seasonal sales tax aimed at shifting more of the burden to tourists, was rejected 5,681 to 4,174.
The updated totals include all ballots received and verified through Thursday. Additional mail-in ballots postmarked by Election Day are still being processed, with final certification expected on Oct. 21.
“We’ll just evaluate and figure out where we can fill the hole with cutting services a bit and other things, the biggest hit to the budget was taking sales tax off food without filling that hole. So that’s, you know, somewhere around $8 million.” Weldon said, “It’s easy to cut $8 million one time, but it’s a little more difficult to cut it year after year after year. But we’ll just go back to work and our finance means will be pretty interesting.” She said.
The Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve, where the Ambler Road project would pass through, is visible from Ambler, Alaska, Sunday, Sept. 28, 2025. (AP Photo/Annika Hammerschlag)
Senators voted 50-46 Thursday to repeal a land management plan for a large swath of Alaska that was adopted in the final weeks of Democratic President Joe Biden’s administration. Lawmakers voted to roll back similar plans for land in Montana and North Dakota earlier this week.
The timing of Biden’s actions made the plans vulnerable to the Congressional Review Act, which allows Congress to terminate rules that are finalized near the end of a president’s term. The resolutions require a simple majority in each chamber and take effect upon the president’s signature.
Trump ordered approval of the Ambler Road project earlier this week, saying it will unlock access to copper, cobalt and other critical minerals that the United States needs to compete with China on artificial intelligence and other resource development. Copper is used in the production of cars, electronics and even renewable energy technologies such as wind turbines.
The road was approved in Trump’s first term, but was later blocked by Biden after an analysis determined the project would threaten caribou and other wildlife and harm Alaska Native tribes that rely on hunting and fishing.
The Biden-era restrictions also included a block on new mining leases in the nation’s most productive coal-producing region, the Powder River Basin in Montana and Wyoming. On Monday, the Trump administration held the biggest coal sale in that area in more than a decade, drawing a single bid of $186,000 for 167.5 million tons of coal, or about a tenth of a penny per ton.
Trump has largely cast aside Biden’s goal to reduce climate-warming emissions from the burning of coal and other fossil fuels extracted from federal land. Instead, he and congressional Republicans have moved to open more taxpayer-owned land to fossil fuel development, hoping to create more jobs and revenue. The Republican administration also has pushed to develop critical minerals, including copper, cobalt, gold and zinc.
A decision on whether to accept the recent bid from the Navajo Transitional Energy Co. is pending, and the lease cannot be issued until the Montana land plan is altered. The dirt-cheap value reflects dampened industry interest in coal despite Trump’s efforts. Many utilities have switched to cheaper natural gas or renewables such as wind and solar power.
Administration officials expressed disappointment that they did not receive “stronger participation” in the Montana sale. In a statement, Interior Department spokesperson Aubrie Spady blamed a “decades long war on coal” by Biden and former Democratic President Barack Obama.
Republican Sen. Tim Sheehy of Montana said the repeal of the land-management plan in his state was “putting an end to disastrous Biden-era regulations that put our resource economy on life support.”
Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan of Alaska called the Biden-era plan for 13 million acres in the central Yukon region “a clear case of federal overreach that locks up Alaska’s lands, ignores Alaska Native voices … and blocks access to critical energy, gravel & mineral resources.”
The GOP legislation “restores balance, strengthens U.S. energy & mineral security and upholds the law,” Sullivan said in a statement.
Democrats urged rejection of the repeals, arguing that Trump’s fossil fuel-friendly agenda is driving up energy prices because renewable sources are being sidelined even as the tech industry’s power demands soar for data centers and other projects.
“We are seeing dramatic increases in the price of energy for American consumers and businesses and the slashing of American jobs, so that Donald Trump can give an easy pass to the fossil fuel industry,” Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia said Wednesday on the Senate floor.
Last week, the administration canceled almost $8 billion in grants for clean energy projects in 16 states that Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris won in the 2024 election.
Ashley Nunes, public lands specialist at the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group, said Republicans were unleashing “a wholesale assault on America’s public lands.” Using the Congressional Review Act to erase land management plans “will sow chaos across the country and turn our most cherished places into playgrounds for coal barons and industry polluters,” she said.
In a complaint filed Friday and a motion for summaryjudgment on Monday, the Legislature’s contracted attorney asks a Juneau Superior Court judge to decide whether or not a governor may issue an executive order during a special legislative session.
The lawsuit had been expected for months.
In August, Dunleavy issued an order seeking to create an Alaska Department of Agriculture, shortly before lawmakers convened for a special session called by the governor. Speaker of the House Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, and Senate President Gary Stevens, R-Kodiak, rejected the validity of the order.
Representatives for the governor’s office said they believed the order was valid and that it would take effect unless lawmakers voted it down.
The leaders of the House and Senate said they did not want to take up the order, because doing so risked setting a precedent, effectively declaring that executive orders could be issued during a special session.
The question that could be decided in court is whether issuing an order in a special session is legal. And does it matter if the order is identical to one that’s already been issued and voted upon?
Alaska is one of two states without a cabinet-level Department of Agriculture, and creating one is seen as a key first step for boosting food production in Alaska.
“The parties require the court’s prompt assistance to resolve this legal dispute before January 1, 2026,” wrote attorney Kevin Cuddy. “Otherwise, there is a risk that the state will move forward with a Department of Agriculture that may have been unconstitutionally created, and thus without legal authority to act.”
The Alaska Department of Law, which will represent the governor in the case, has been served with the lawsuit but has not yet filed its reply.
Patty Sullivan, a spokeswoman for the Department of Law, said by email, “We are working on a briefing schedule with the counsel for the Legislature and the court. Our goal is to expedite the case and ensure that a decision is made before the legislative session begins.”
Alaska’s constitution forbids lawsuits by the executive branch against the legislative branch; the inverse is not true. Lawmakers have now sued Dunleavy four times since he took office in 2018.
Alaska pollock, shown here from a harvest, make up the nation’s top-volume single-species commercial seafood catch. Alaska pollock, harvested mostly in the Bering Sea but also in the Gulf of Alaska, are processed into fish sticks, fish burgers, imitation crab meat and other common fish products. (Photo provided by NOAA)
For the organization that oversees commercial fisheries in federal waters off Alaska, the most significant impact of the federal government shutdown might materialize in December.
That is when the North Pacific Fishery Management Council is scheduled to issue harvest limits for Alaska pollock – the nation’s top-volume commercial harvested species – and other types of groundfish harvested in the Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska, such as Pacific cod and sablefish.
The Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska pollock harvests start in January.
To set the groundfish harvest levels, the council relies on federal scientists’ analysis of fish stocks in the ocean, work that is based in large part on scientific surveys conducted over the summer.
But during the shutdown, most National Marine Fisheries Service employees, including the scientists who analyze survey data to assess the conditions of commercially targeted fish stocks, are furloughed.
On Wednesday, the last day of the council’s October meeting, the members considered how to deal with scientific uncertainty if the government shutdown prevents completion of the detailed analysis that is usually provided in time for the December meeting.
Council member Nicole Kimball referred to a warning issued eight days prior by Bob Foy, director of the NMFS Alaska Fisheries Science Center, the organization that does the stock assessments. Foy said then that a shutdown lasting more than five days would compromise the ability to complete stock assessments and that a shutdown beyond 15 working days would “dramatically impact” those assessments.
The 15-day threshold is not too far away, Kimball said.
“How does the council and the public understand what to expect in December, in between the October and December meeting, relative to stock assessments?” she asked.
Diana Evans, the council’s deputy director, said impacts are yet to be determined, but the public will be notified of them as soon as possible.
“We don’t think we can answer that until we have a better sense of exactly where we land and how many days of work are remaining between the time that government workers are back and able to resume that work and the meeting,” she said.
Advocates with environmental organizations said they worry about shutdown effects on scientific information needed for harvest decisions, which would add to the effects of mass firings and retirements at NMFS and other agencies.
“I’m terrified at the prospect of flying blind into the next fishing season, especially as the Trump administration has decimated the ranks of scientists who monitor the health of our oceans,” Cooper Freeman, Alaska director of the Center for Biological DIversity, said by email. “I’m especially worried about fisheries like the massive pollock trawl fleet that has been harvesting millions of tons annually at the expense of the larger ecosystem.”
“The first challenge with this shutdown is the instant level of uncertainty it creates. Normal processes face delays that can easily impact or inhibit active fisheries. Potential staff losses will exacerbate that,” Michelle Stratton, executive director of the Alaska Marine Conservation Council, said by email.
“But beyond the concern for continuing day to day services, are those major efforts — like stock assessments and (total allowable catch) setting — that rely on substantial NMFS staff input, data processing and expert analysis. If this continues to the point where we are unable to set catch limits for the start of the 2026 seasons, we’ll be in seriously uncharted territory, and could well see massive economic impacts to our fishing communities and fleets,” she said.
The shutdown forced the council to rearrange its October meeting because federal representatives were unavailable to present information.
One major agenda item was postponed: review of a work plan for assessing essential fish habitat. Other items on the agenda were abbreviated.
The shutdown has already affected fishery management operations to some degree, said council member Jon Kurland. As Alaska regional director for NMFS, Kurland is one of a small group of agency employees remaining at work during the shutdown.
Kurland, in comments last week at the start of the meeting, said some services have been unavailable during the shutdown, such as the processing of harvest quota transfers.
NMFS is still doing basic management of ongoing fisheries, monitoring and closing them as needed, and is supported by contractors, he said. But that level of work has its limits, he said.
“If there are significant unforeseen problems, we will have limited ability to address those. Fingers crossed,” he said then.
Election materials are seen at the Alaska Division of Elections headquarters in Juneau. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
NOTN- Juneau Mayor Beth Weldon says city officials are already preparing for possible spending cuts following Tuesday’s municipal election, where early results show voters favoring two tax-limiting propositions that could significantly reduce city revenue and potentially the cost of living for residents.
“If you’re looking at our website to see the election results, just hit the tab the button that says election, and then you’ll see preliminary results.” Said Weldon, “Up at the top it says 21% Well, that’s 21% of our registered voters. So typically we end up with somewhere between 9 to 10%, this is a little bit of a bigger ballot, so we might get as much as 12,000 votes. So it’s not 21% of the vote. I would say it’s somewhere between 40 to 50%.”
Speaking Wednesday morning, Weldon said due to high voter turnout, preliminary numbers for Ballot propositions 1 through 3 won’t likely change.
“Ballot Proposition 2, taking the sales tax off food, that’s not going to change. The seasonal sales tax is not going to change. Proposition 1 has a possibility of changing, but is likely going to stay that way.” Weldon Said.
She noted that while full election results won’t be certified until mid-October, most races appear decided. Only the tight Assembly District 2 race between incumbent Wade Bryson and challenger Nathaniel “Nano” Brooks, separated by three votes in preliminary results on Wednesday remains too close to call.
Weldon said the city had anticipated either outcome and began planning for both scenarios before the election. “We’ll just evaluate and figure out where we can fill the hole with cutting services a bit and other things, the biggest hit to the budget was taking sales tax off food without filling that hole. So that’s, you know, somewhere around $8 million.” Weldon said, “It’s easy to cut $8 million one time, but it’s a little more difficult to cut it year after year after year. But we’ll just go back to work and our finance means will be pretty interesting.”She said.
The City and Borough of Juneau’s next update on unofficial election results is expected Friday. Certification is scheduled later this month.
