Tag: Governor mike dunleavy

Categories
Alaska News Featured Juneau News juneau Juneau Local Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

After governor’s veto threat, Alaska House votes down tax break for proposed natural gas pipeline

By: James Brooks and Corinne Smith, Alaska Beacon

The Alaska House of Representatives on Thursday voted down a multibillion-dollar tax break for the proposed trans-Alaska natural gas pipeline project. Glenfarne LLC, the project’s lead developer, has said the tax break is necessary for it to obtain financing from banks and equity investors. 

The Alaska Senate voted 11-8 to approve a compromise version of House Bill 381, which contains the tax break. But after that vote and as the House gaveled in, Dunleavy announced he would veto the bill if it were to pass.

In a statement on social media, the governor said a provision that applies a corporate income tax to certain kinds of privately owned oil and gas companies “raises serious concerns.”

Legislators are meeting in a second 30-day special session devoted to HB 381, and Dunleavy said he will call the Legislature into a third session starting July 27.

After the governor’s message was read on the House floor, only 19 members of the House voted in favor of the bill. Twenty-one votes were needed to approve it. 

Many of those who voted against the bill spoke against the provision identified by the governor, with Rep. Dan Saddler, R-Eagle River, calling it a “parasite” within a bill intended to benefit the gas pipeline.

The provision came at the insistence of state senators who said it was necessary for the bill to earn their votes.

“If you want a gas line, everybody’s got to compromise, and I think that’s ultimately what you saw today,” said Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage and one of the most vocal advocates of the provision questioned by the governor.

After the governor’s announcement, Senate President Gary Stevens, R-Kodiak, said he was unsure how the Senate would proceed in the next special session.

The bill could be referred back to the Senate Resources Committee, chaired by Sen. Cathy Giessel, R-Anchorage and a leading project critic. The Senate Finance Committee could consider the issue further. 

Senators could simply take no action and wait for the current Legislature to end and Dunleavy to leave office in December.

“I sort of feel you need to go to the next Legislature,” Stevens said. 

First gas expected before 2030, developer says

As currently planned, the Alaska LNG project would include three separate subprojects, built in two stages. Altogether, the project is expected to cost as much as $54.5 billion, making it one of the largest natural gas projects in the world. 

Gas would be pumped from North Slope wells to a processing plant on the North Slope, then down a pipeline to an export facility on the Kenai Peninsula. 

Developers expect to reach a final investment decision on the project’s first phase this year. It would include the pipeline, part of the North Slope processing plant and part of the export facility.

Initially, the export facility would function in reverse, as a place for Alaska to import natural gas for local use while the pipeline is under construction.

Southcentral Alaska is running short of domestic gas for heating and electricity during the winter months. 

Adam Prestidge, president of Glenfarne Alaska, told state senators on June 3 that after the final investment decision, it should take about three years for construction and commissioning before gas begins flowing through the pipeline to in-state residents. 

The second, export phase of the project would take several more years to complete.

Switching from a property tax to a gas tax

The main intent of the bill is to replace Alaska’s 2% petroleum property tax with a lower tax on gas shipped through the pipeline.

The pipeline is exempt from the tax during construction, but the state would start collecting taxes when gas begins flowing. Glenfarne has said that’s a problem because it won’t begin making money until exports begin several years later.

Glenfarne executives have said they cannot get financing to build the pipeline unless the tax is changed.

That led Gov. Mike Dunleavy to propose the tax change in March. Legislators were unable to pass the bill by the time the regular legislative session ended in May, and Dunleavy has now called lawmakers into special session twice to get it done. 

Through 2063, according to estimates from the Alaska Department of Revenue, the tax change would reduce state revenue by $5.3 billion when compared to current law. 

Because petroleum property taxes mostly go to municipalities, the amount received by cities and boroughs during that period would drop by another $5.3 billion.

Proponents of the change have focused on the benefits, rather than the lost revenue. Without the reduction, the pipeline cannot be built, they say. If the pipeline isn’t built, the state and municipalities get nothing. 

“We want Alaskan gas for the Alaskan people, instead of Canadian gas for Alaskan people, instead of imports,” said Rep. Kevin McCabe, R-Big Lake, on the House floor. “It means the world to our people…lowered heating bills, a stronger economy.”

While proponents of the tax break have run a “Build the Line” ad campaign insinuating that the tax reduction would guarantee a pipeline, some state legislators say there is a low chance of a pipeline, even if the tax break becomes law.

Members of the conference committee tasked with negotiating a final compromise AKLNG tax bill from House and Senate versions, debate the bill on July 16, 2026, before moving it to a vote before the full House and Senate. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)
Members of the conference committee tasked with negotiating a final compromise AKLNG tax bill from House and Senate versions, debate the bill on July 16, 2026, before moving it to a vote before the full House and Senate. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)

“This has been billed as the bill that either makes a pipeline be built or does not make a pipeline be built, and that just really is not true,” said Rep. Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna. 

No ‘better shot’ at compromise, drafter says

The House and Senate passed different versions of HB 381 in June, sending the bill to a six-member multipartisan conference committee tasked with negotiating a compromise. 

For weeks, the key point of contention has been whether or not the bill will also include the erasure of a tax exemption for “pass-through corporations,” generally large companies that are owned privately and not traded on public markets.

In Alaska, erasing that exemption would affect the oil and gas company Hilcorp, which operates the vast Prudhoe Bay oil field, among other work in the state. 

It also would raise taxes on the proposed gas pipeline. 

On Thursday morning, the conference committee adopted a new version of HB 381 that specifically exempts “income of an Alaska liquefied natural gas project” from the revised tax. 

That would include all three segments of the pipeline project. But it was unclear whether it would cover gas shipments between the wellhead and the North Slope processing plant.

“It will be up to the Department of Revenue to determine the scope of that exemption,” said legislative attorney Emily Nauman, answering a question from Ruffridge.

The revised bill also delays the start of the tax until 2029. Affected companies would be required to submit an “informational tax return” the year before the tax starts. 

That would give the state better information about how much money the tax will raise and whether the proposed tax rate needs to be changed.

Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage, chaired the conference committee.

Rep. Calvin Schrage speaks on the House floor in support of the compromise AKLNG gas line tax bill in July 19, 2026. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)
Rep. Calvin Schrage speaks on the House floor in support of the compromise AKLNG gas line tax bill in July 19, 2026. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)

“I don’t think, frankly, that we’re going to get a better shot at this,” he said before the House vote.

“I don’t think you’re going to get closer alignment between the different factions on this issue than you are going to get today.”

While the conference committee consulted with Glenfarne, the Dunleavy administration and the Alaska Gasline Development Corp., it didn’t discuss the bill at length with members of the House’s 19-person, all-Republican minority caucus.

Ruffridge, the minority caucus representative on the conference committee, said he received the final copy of the bill only 30 minutes before the meeting that adopted it. 

On the House floor, members of the House minority lambasted the final version. 

“In my opinion, this process was neither transparent nor collaborative,” said Rep. Frank Tomaszewski, R-Fairbanks and a member of the minority.

One member of the Democratic-independent-Republican coalition majority in the House also voted against the bill.

House Majority Leader Chuck Kopp, R-Anchorage, alluded to the way the pass-through tax would impact Hilcorp. Changing its taxes, he said, would deter future drilling because it would create uncertainty about what additional changes might be made in the future.

“From my perspective, that’s what’s killed this iteration of the bill,” Gov. Dunleavy said about the pass-through tax. 

Climate protesters and oil advocates opposed the compromise

On Thursday morning, a small group of demonstrators gathered on the steps of the Capitol to protest the gas line and the proposed tax break. Protest signs called for investment in renewable energy instead of fossil fuels to help combat climate change, and called the megaproject a “pipedream” and a “scam.”

Demonstrators gather outside the Capitol on July 16, 2026 to protest the state providing tax cuts for the proposed AKLNG gas line project, and developing fossil fuels, the main driver of climate change. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)
Protesters gather outside the Capitol on July 16, 2026, as lawmakers consider a tax cut for the proposed AKLNG gas line project. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)

“I’m really concerned about the cost to the state and to the communities that would be impacted by the project,” said Sally Schlichting, a Juneau resident. “Especially by these proposed tax breaks. I just think it’s horrendous to forego all that revenue for so long, and I feel like there’s very little guarantee this project will ever happen.”

Schlichting said she’s concerned that Alaska is giving up too much, and the project developer Glenfarne has not disclosed who is investing or how much. 

“I just think this is the most wrong-headed way of approaching resource development,” she said. “We don’t fund our education. We are running out of money, and Alaskans own the resources, and we deserve to receive the revenue from it — and not later, now.”

Another Juneau resident, Emily Kane, called the project a “boondoggle,” and said she also came out to protest the project’s climate change impacts. 

“I am very concerned about the habitability of the planet if we don’t seriously dial down fossil fuels,” she said. “I know young adults who are choosing to not have children, and it just really breaks my heart — this selfishness about not thinking about future generations.”

A group of pro-development organizations, including the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, Alaska Support Industry Alliance, Alaska Chamber of Commerce and Resource Development Council, briefly found themselves on the same side as the protesters.

After the conference committee passed its compromise version of HB 381, they sent a letter to legislators, urging them to vote down the conference committee compromise.

Rebecca Logan, CEO of the Support Industry Alliance, said by phone that the pass-through tax would hit companies that are drilling for gas in Cook Inlet, at a time when the region is running short.

“The gasline is our future, but what we’ve got right now, we can’t hurt,” she said.

Alaska Senate 

Yes votes

Matt Claman, D-Anchorage

Forrest Dunbar, D-Anchorage

Cathy Giessel, R-Anchorage

Elvi Gray-Jackson, D-Anchorage

Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel

Scott Kawasaki, D-Fairbanks

Jesse Kiehl, D-Juneau

Bert Stedman, R-Sitka

Gary Stevens, R-Kodiak

Loki Tobin, D-Anchorage

Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage

No votes

Mike Cronk, R-Tok

James Kaufman, R-Anchorage

Kelly Merrick, R-Eagle River

Robb Myers, R-North Pole

Donny Olson, D-Golovin

George Rauscher, R-Sutton

Cathy Tilton, R-Wasilla

Robert Yundt, R-Wasilla

Excused absent

Jesse Bjorkman, R-Nikiski

Alaska House 

Yes votes

Ashley Carrick, D-Fairbanks

Maxine Dibert, D-Fairbanks

Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham

Ted Eischeid, D-Anchorage

Zack Fields, D-Anchorage

Neal Foster, D-Nome

Alyse Galvin, I-Anchorage

Andrew Gray, D-Anchorage

Carolyn Hall, D-Anchorage

Sara Hannan, D-Juneau

Rebecca Himschoot, I-Sitka

Ky Holland, I-Anchorage

Nellie Unangiq Jimmie, D-Toksook Bay

Andy Josephson, D-Anchorage

Donna Mears, D-Anchorage

Genevive Mina, D-Anchorage

Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage

Andi Story, D-Juneau

Louise Stutes, R-Kodiak

No votes

Jamie Allard, R-Eagle River

Jeremy Bynum, R-Ketchikan

Mia Costello, R-Anchorage

Julie Coulombe, R-Anchorage

Bill Elam, R-Nikiski

DeLena Johnson, R-Palmer

Chuck Kopp, R-Anchorage

Kevin McCabe, R-Big Lake

Elexie Moore, R-Wasilla

Garret Nelson, R-Sutton

Mike Prax, R-North Pole

Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna

Dan Saddler, R-Eagle River

Rebecca Schwanke, R-Glennallen

Steve St. Clair, R-Wasilla

Will Stapp, R-Fairbanks

Frank Tomaszewski, R-Fairbanks

Jubilee Underwood, R-Wasilla

Sarah Vance, R-Homer

Excused absent

Robyn Niayuq Frier, D-Utqiagvik

David Nelson, R-Anchorage

Categories
Alaska News Featured Juneau News juneau Juneau Local Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

After gasline tax bill, pipeline corporation plans to ask Alaskans for a few billion dollars

By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

A bumper sticker on a car parked in Midtown Anchorage on June 29, 2026, expresses support for the Glenfarne-Alaska Gasline Development Corp. plan for natural gas pipeline tax concessions. (Photo by Yereth Rosen/Alaska Beacon)

A few months from now, if developers of the proposed trans-Alaska natural gas pipeline move forward with the project, they will ask Alaskans for something between a few hundred million and a billion and a half dollars.

The request is optional, but if the state doesn’t chip in, Alaska’s 25% ownership of the pipeline will dwindle to a smaller fraction, and any profits will similarly shrink.

Two other requests for cash could come as soon as next year, to first fund a gas treatment plant on the North Slope and then a natural gas export facility on the Kenai Peninsula.

As state lawmakers debate a multibillion-dollar tax break for the pipeline project this week, a confidential memo and legislative testimony show the break won’t be the last financial request from Alaskans.

Keeping the state’s 25% ownership of the Alaska LNG project will cost at least $4 billion, according to estimates from the Alaska Department of Revenue. 

If the state spends that money, and if the project is built and sells gas as planned, the department estimates the state will earn more than $21 billion through 2062, almost five times its initial investment. 

But there’s a risk: if the pipeline project costs more than expected, the state of Alaska will be asked to pay more.

“We have reserved the option for the state of Alaska to elect to invest or not,” Frank Richards, president of the Alaska Gasline Development Corp., told the Senate Finance Committee on June 4. “The project will proceed forward without the state investment, but we wanted to give the state that opportunity should it elect to, eyes wide open.”

A potential investment for the state

Last year, the Gasline Development Corporation, a state-owned company charged with building the gas pipeline project, sold the lead role in the project to Glenfarne, a private multinational developer.

According to a confidential memo analyzing the deal, Glenfarne agreed to pay $10 million and fund the project’s development until the “Final Investment Decision,” the point at which investors start to put down money and contracts go out for construction.

Glenfarne has 75% ownership of 8 Star Alaska, the parent company of the pipeline project. The state — through AGDC — has 25% ownership. AGDC’s ownership share stays the same regardless of how many new investors come into the project.

But ownership of 8 Star Alaska may not mean much.

The Alaska LNG project includes three separate “subprojects” — a gas treatment plant on the North Slope, the pipeline itself and an export terminal on the Kenai Peninsula.

Each of those subprojects is its own subsidiary company, and not all of the subproject profits will go back to 8 Star Alaska.

“The real value is down in the three subsidiaries of 8 Star,” said Sen. Cathy Giessel, R-Anchorage, in a July 2 podcast interview. 

Right now, each subsidiary is subject to the same 75-25 ownership split as 8 Star, but that changes at FID, when other investors put in their money.

At that point, said Matt Kissinger, AGDC’s commercial director, there will be enough money to build each subproject, but the state will have the opportunity to push out other investors and preserve its 25% ownership. 

“​​All the investors will be in; they’ll all be committed, and then we’ll have 180 days for the state to decide to back them out of some of their commitment,” he said.

According to a draft analysis of last year’s Glenfarne-AGDC deal, AGDC has “the right to invest in up to 25%, but not less than 5%, of each sub-project at FID.”

The 5% minimum — if AGDC takes any share at all — was negotiated with Glenfarne, Kissinger said, because if the state is going to push out another investor, it needs to do so for a meaningful amount.GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.SUBSCRIBE

Part or all of the 25% buy-in could be taken by AGDC. The state could buy in directly, or another state-owned corporation like the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, Alaska Railroad or the Alaska Permanent Fund Corp. could do so.

If the state and public corporations don’t reach the 25% maximum, then Alaska residents, Alaska Native corporations and other in-state companies would have a chance to take some or all of the remainder. 

On June 25, the AGDC board voted unanimously to approve the creation of a subsidiary that will allow individual Alaskans to invest in the project through AGDC.

“No more funds are required by the State of Alaska to invest for this project to proceed forward, it’s just that we have the option to, and if Alaskans want the opportunity to invest, that’s the structure that we’re going to set up for them,” Richards told the board.

AGDC and Glenfarne expect the pipeline subproject to reach FID this year. The gas treatment plant and the export facility FIDs are expected no sooner than 2027.

Department of Revenue estimates a $4.4 billion cost

Keeping the state’s share of the project at 25% is likely to be expensive. Glenfarne estimated last month that building the pipeline alone will cost as much as $16.9 billion. 

In an example scenario AGDC presented to legislators last month, the company suggested developers could take out loans for 70% of that cost. 

The Alaska Department of Revenue is independently using that percentage for its baseline predictions, too.

The developers could cover the remaining 30% by selling part of the pipeline subsidiary. 

If the state wants to keep 25% ownership of the whole project, that would mean buying 25% of that 30%.

Using some assumptions, “that would result in $4.4 billion in nominal terms that would be required to invest in the project,” said Dan Stickel, the Department of Revenue’s chief economist, on May 21.

The profits could be huge, the department estimates. A 25% equity share could be worth $21.3 billion through 2063. 

That’s on top of the tens of billions of dollars in production taxes, property taxes, royalties and fees that the state would receive regardless of whether or not it takes an additional ownership share.

What happens if Alaska doesn’t buy in? 

“That (25% ownership) will definitely be diluted. That’s the mechanism that was designed,” Kissinger told state lawmakers. 

AGDC’s scenario, presented to legislators on June 4, suggested 8 Star Alaska would keep 35% of the pipeline subsidiary. AGDC would have a quarter of that 35%, or 8.75% of any profits after debts are paid.

If 8 Star Alaska keeps less than that 35%, then the state’s quarter would shrink correspondingly.

While investing in the project increases the potential profits, there’s also a risk, said Sen. Bert Stedman, R-Sitka, on June 16. If the project costs more than expected, the state and other investors would have to pay more money to keep their share of the project.

“If the state wishes to take that risk, and if the state wishes to be a paying member of the project … you would be paying 25% of any of the investment dollars coming in to maintain that,” Kissinger said on June 3.

Where would Alaska get the money?

Current state law allows AGDC to borrow money without legislative approval. 

“Right now, under the current statutes, AGDC has extremely broad bonding authority. We can raise revenue bonds — provided there is no recourse back to the state — without any further approvals,” Kissinger said on June 26.

What’s a revenue bond?

The Alaska Constitution severely limits the kinds of government borrowing that the state is responsible for and must repay through taxes. Corporations like AGDC can instead issue revenue bonds, which are repaid by the corporation’s profits. There’s no obligation for the state to bail out a corporation that can’t pay its bond holders.

The current version of the gasline tax break being considered by state lawmakers would limit AGDC’s borrowing power.

Legislators would have to meet within 90 days — possibly in special session — to approve any bonds. 

The Alaska Department of Revenue would be required to analyze the investment and make a recommendation to legislators.

Another funding possibility is that the state could offer things instead of money in order to pay for its share of the project.

Earlier this year, the state of Alaska changed its regulations, allowing the state to give away gravel to public-backed construction projects.

“What we’re hoping to do is to utilize state materials, state assets, to be able to provide to the project in lieu of cash,” Richards told the House Finance Committee on May 27. “The gravel that will be used for access road and pipe bedding and pipe backfill and pipe storage yards and camp facilities represents about 20 million cubic yards of material, so that has a value of roughly $60 million and if we are able to then utilize that value and gain equity, then that would be a non-cash option that we would like to exercise for the state.”

In an interview on Tuesday, Richards said the state could also offer the land that the pipeline will use. Instead of paying something like $9 million per year in rent to the Department of Natural Resources, the state could simply deed the land to the pipeline operator and receive a share of the pipeline subsidiary in return.

Lawmakers could also appropriate money directly from the state treasury to AGDC in order to fund the project. 

Rep. Andy Josephson, D-Anchorage, said on May 21 that in order to come up with the money for the 25% investment, the state’s independent financial adviser recommended overdrawing the earnings reserve of the Alaska Permanent Fund. 

“I know that’s sacrilege to talk about, and it’ll be left for the next Legislature … but $4 billion is something this state could probably borrow or find, I guess,” he said.

“This is such a significant decision for what I call the re-electeds,” said Josephson, who is retiring and not running for re-election. “If they don’t do it, they could be chastised for decades and remembered for not doing it, but if the project has significant cost overruns, they could be chastised for that.”

“I would agree, it’s a very significant decision,” Stickel said.

Speaking June 19 on the floor of the state Senate, Sen. Jesse Kiehl, D-Juneau, said he is terrified of what might happen if the state invests and there is a cost overrun that requires more money to complete the project.

“Does it go bankrupt, and we just leave it? Nobody in this room is that naive. There’s one deep pocket around this project. There’s one entity that’s had a 50 year dream of building the pipe. There’s one place you can go for billions and billions of dollars,” he said.

Left unsaid was the name of the Alaska Permanent Fund.

Categories
Alaska News Featured Juneau News juneau Juneau Local Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

To vote in Alaska’s primary elections, residents must register by July 19 — here’s how

An early voting site is seen on Monday, Aug. 1, 2022 at the State Office Building in Juneau, Alaska. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)

By: Corinne Smith, Alaska Beacon

An early voting site is seen on Monday, Aug. 1, 2022 at the State Office Building in Juneau, Alaska. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)

Alaska’s primary election just over a month away, and the deadline to register to vote in that election is Sunday July 19.

Alaska’s primary election is Tuesday August 18, when voters will mark their ballots to choose among candidates for governor, legislators in the Alaska House and Senate, and representatives in the U.S. House and U.S. Senate. A sample of the primary ballot can be found on the Alaska Division of Elections website.

The top four vote-getters in the primary will advance to the general election on November 3. 

Residents can check their voter registration at myvoterportal.alaska.gov.

To register to vote in the primary election, eligible voters must be at least 18 years old within 90 days of registering, a U.S. citizen and an Alaska resident. They may not be registered to vote in another state. Voters must be a resident in Alaska and the district in which they seek to vote for at least 30 days before the election.

Language assistance is available with voting information and ballots available in Tagalog, Inupiat, Cup’ik and Yup’ik variations. Language assistance is available at every stage of the voting process, and can be requested from the division. 

Naturalized U.S. citizens are eligible to vote, but U.S. nationals and non-citizens are not allowed to vote.

Individuals who have been convicted of a felony involving moral turpitude are ineligible to vote in all elections until the date they are unconditionally discharged. That means they have completed their sentence and are no longer in Alaska Department of Corrections’ custody or supervision, which includes halfway houses, sentenced electronic monitoring, probation or parole. Once an individual is unconditionally discharged, they can re-register to vote if they otherwise meet eligibility requirements.

Residents are automatically registered to vote or their voter registration information is updated when they apply for the Alaska Permanent Fund dividend. Residents have 30 days to opt out if they do not wish to register. 

Individuals are considered Alaska residents if they reside in the state and intend to remain a resident or if they leave the state and have an intention to return. Active duty military members and family are exempt from the intent to return requirement and can register and vote by absentee ballot. 

Residents can register to vote online, by mail or in-person at regional Division of Elections Offices, Division of Motor offices, Division of Vocational Rehabilitation offices, participating Tribal government offices, Legislative Information Offices, United States Armed Forces Voter Assistance Offices, Division of Public Assistance agencies, city or borough clerk’s offices, participating public libraries, or voter registrars. 

Residents need a current Alaska driver’s license or state ID to register or update voter registration. After registration, eligible voters will be issued an Alaska Voter ID card within four to six weeks. 

Residents can apply to vote by absentee mail-in ballot by August 8 for the primary, and by October 24 for the general election. Eligible voters can apply by email, fax or in-person. Ballots must be postmarked by election day. 

Regional elections offices will open for absentee and early voting in the primary election on Sunday August 16. 

Categories
Alaska News Featured Juneau News juneau Juneau Local Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy sets state record for most vetoes in a single Legislature

Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy talks to reporters during a news conference on Monday, May 19, 2025. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)

By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy talks to reporters during a news conference on Monday, May 19, 2025. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)

Amid a series of disagreements with lawmakers in the state House and Senate, Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy has set a record for the most vetoes by an Alaska governor during a single two-year Legislature.

Through Friday morning, Dunleavy had vetoed 29 of the 115 bills passed by the 34th Alaska Legislature.

The previous record, 25 vetoes, was held by Gov. Tony Knowles in the 19th Alaska State Legislature, which ran from 1995 through 1996. 

Dunleavy’s record is particularly notable because the number of bills passed by the Legislature has dropped precipitously in recent years. 

During the 19th Legislature, Knowles’ vetoes accounted for 8.9% of all bills passed by lawmakers. Dunleavy’s vetoes cover more than 25% — one in four — of all bills passed by the 34th Legislature. 

Dunleavy is a Republican. During his first six years in office — the 31st, 32nd and 33rd Legislatures — either the state House or Senate was controlled by a solidly Republican majority. During the 34th, both the House and the Senate have been controlled by coalition majorities where Democrats and independents hold some leadership roles.

The Beacon asked the governor’s office why the governor has vetoed so many bills during the 34th Legislature and whether there is a fundamental disagreement between the Legislature and governor.

“The fact that Governor Dunleavy has vetoed a few more bills in a legislative session than previous governors does not necessarily indicate a fundamental disagreement between the executive and legislative branches,” said Jeff Turner, the governor’s communications director, by email. “Governor Dunleavy has always evaluated legislation on a bill-by-bill basis.”

Senate President Gary Stevens, R-Kodiak, and Speaker of the House Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, declined to speak at length about the vetoes issue because legislators are currently negotiating with the governor on perhaps the biggest bill of the 34th Legislature: A multibillion-dollar property tax break benefiting the developer of the proposed trans-Alaska natural gas pipeline.

Legislators may vote next week on whether to send a revised version of the tax break to the governor for approval. 

Dunleavy has said he opposes the current version being discussed by a legislative conference committee. Asked this week whether he would veto the bill, he told Alaska’s News Source that it would be “tough” for him to accept it in its current form.

Eight other bills are awaiting the governor’s consideration. Those include House Bill 14, a comprehensive insurance bill; and House Bill 249, which changes the procedure for turning a car over to an insurance company after a wreck.

The governor has until Monday to act on HB 14 and until July 20 to act on HB 249.

The Legislature has not yet sent six other bills to the governor for action. Under the Alaska Constitution, that means the clock for final action has not begun.

While Dunleavy has the record for the most vetoes in a two-year Legislature, he does not hold the career record. 

Gov. Jay Hammond, who served as governor from 1974 through 1982, issued 74 vetoes, the most of any governor during their career. Knowles vetoed 69 bills during his eight years in office. Gov. Bill Egan, who served 12 years in office, vetoed 56 bills. Dunleavy, who will leave office in December, has thus far vetoed 44. 

Those figures do not include line-item vetoes in budget bills.

Categories
Alaska News Featured Juneau News juneau Juneau Local Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Under new agreement, federal government limits obstacles to oil leasing in Alaska’s Arctic refuge

By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

A single caribou stands in 2019 amid cottongrass and other tundra plants near the Hulahula River in the Arctic National WIldlife Refuge. (Photo by Alexis Bonogofsky/U.S. Fish and WIldlife Service)

The federal government has agreed to permanently loosen rules for oil and gas lease sales in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, according to a draft settlement agreement filed this week in the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska.

Adam Gustafson, an attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice, said in a statement that the agreement “means more oil leasing, more domestic energy, and more independence from foreign sources of energy.”

The document filed this week would settle lawsuits filed by the state of Alaska and its investment bank over the 2025 Arctic National Wildlife Refuge oil lease sale that drew no bids. 

That sale, mandated by a 2017 law, took place after the Biden administration restricted the available acreage. The Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority and the state of Alaska sued over the Biden-era limits.

This week’s agreement states in part that the federal government will not limit oil and gas leasing in ANWR until oil and gas equipment covers at least 2,000 acres in the refuge’s coastal plain. 

“The 2017 Tax Act does not authorize (the Bureau of Land Management) to deny or unreasonably limit development of production and support facilities to the Coastal Plain until 2,000 surface acres are covered by production and support facilities,” it states in part.

That’s a small fraction of the size of the leases being put up for sale but could represent a significant length of pipeline and a large number of drilling pads.

AIDEA and the state remain in court against the federal government over the result of a 2021 ANWR lease sale. AIDEA won leases during that sale, but the Biden administration canceled those leases, then attempted to re-sell the affected land during the 2025 sale. 

The ANWR leasing program overall has been challenged by a coalition of environmental groups, and that case also remains in court.

By email on Tuesday, an AIDEA spokesperson said it would be accurate to call the new agreement a victory for AIDEA and Alaska because it “includes a clear admission that the … Lease Sale ‘violated the 2017 Tax Act by preventing meaningful leasing, exploration, and development of oil and gas on the Coastal Plain, as Congress mandated.’”

Through a spokesman, acting Alaska attorney general Cori Mills noted that while Alaska’s attention has recently focused on a successful lease sale in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska to the west of the Prudhoe Bay oil field, the state continues to be interested in ANWR, which is to the east.

The new settlement agreement increases the odds that ANWR will stay open to drilling even when a new president comes after Trump.

“While the State is ecstatic about the progress in the NPR-A, we cannot lose sight of the potential in ANWR. The problem is not a lack of potential or even lack of infrastructure; it is the lack of a stable investment climate without burdensome and unnecessary strings attached,” Mills said by email.

“The last administration did everything they could to shut down development in ANWR that our congressional delegation and numerous state administrations had fought long and hard for. But that doesn’t have to be the future. We are grateful that the federal government recognizes the unlawful actions taken previously and was willing to enter into the settlement and essentially admit the error,” she said. “There is still hope that ANWR can provide economic prosperity and crucial resources for local communities, the state, and the nation.”

Categories
Alaska News Featured Juneau News juneau Juneau Local Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Alaska lawmaker violated ethics law using official letterhead to condemn news story

Corinne Smith, Alaska Beacon

Rep. Sarah Vance, R-Homer, speaks on the House floor on Feb. 27, 2026. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)

A legislative ethics committee found that Homer Republican Rep. Sarah Vance violated Alaska ethics law when she used official legislative letterhead to publicly condemn a Homer News story last September. The story was about a local vigil she helped organize for Charlie Kirk, a right-wing political activist who was assassinated last year. 

The House Subcommittee on the Select Committee on Legislative Ethics launched a probe into Vance’s conduct after receiving 18 ethics complaints from September to December last year. On June 26, the seven-member ethics committee, by a majority vote, found probable cause that Vance violated the Legislative Ethics Act “by using Alaska State Legislature letterhead for a nonlegislative purpose, for involvement in or support of or opposition to partisan political activity.”

The committee determined that Vance’s use of official legislative letterhead violated Alaska statute that states that legislators may not use “public funds, facilities, equipment, services, or another government asset or resource for a nonlegislative purpose, for involvement in or support of or opposition to partisan political activity.”

The committee determined no corrective reaction is warranted, other than adhering to the authorized use of official legislative letterhead in the future. 

Vance opposed the ethics committee’s decision, saying in an interview on Wednesday her letter was not partisan activity and it was within her free speech rights to communicate with constituents. “I respectfully disagree,” she said. “The letterhead is mine, and my free speech should not be limited on how I can speak on behalf of my constituency.”

At issue in the probe is how Vance responded to a Homer News story published on September 17, 2025 that covered a local vigil for Charlie Kirk. Kirk was shot and killed at a public event on a college campus in Utah the week before. One suspect was arrested and is currently standing trial. Kirk was a vocal ally of President Donald Trump focused on mobilizing conservative students on college campuses, and many conservative supporters staged vigils and events around the country to memorialize him.

Vance wrote to the newspaper’s publisher, Sound Publishing, Inc. owned by Carpenter Media Group, an international chain, on her official legislative letterhead condemning the coverage of the Homer vigil. She also posted the letter to her official legislative Facebook page. The story described Kirk as a “far-right activist and Christian-Nationalist icon,” and described his views as “often racist” and “controversial,” characterizations to which Vance objected. 

“In the letter Representative Vance expressed her displeasure with portions of the content of the article and her perception that the Homer News is biased, engages in partisan rhetoric and political talking points,” the committee wrote in their decision. 

The committee identified several key phrases in her letter that violated Alaska statute, including that Vance noted a “growing movement to boycott” the Homer News that she said would result in potential financial repercussions. “If the paper continues to treat community events as opportunities for partisan spin, the consequence will be financial as well as reputational,” Vance wrote.

The committee members invited Vance to answer questions and appear before them, but she filed a request to dismiss the ethics investigation and declined to appear. On June 26, the committee held a public hearing with public comment, then moved to a nearly four hour executive session before announcing the majority vote finding probable cause that Vance violated ethics law. 

Rep. Kevin McCabe, R-Big Lake, one of two House members on the committee, penned a dissenting opinion, which the committee issued with the decision. He questioned whether the authority of ethics law extends to official letterhead and defended Vance’s First Amendment right to free speech.  

The committee dismissed three other statutory violations cited in complaints, related to political fundraising and campaigning, legislative employee political parties and campaigning, and donations. The 18 complaints are confidential, and were not made public with the decision. 

In an interview, Vance said she believes the complaints were politically partisan and should have been dismissed. She said she is aware of the ethics rules barring the use of letterhead for campaigning for a specific candidate or fundraising. She rejected the finding that her letter was politically partisan.

“I called out the media for being biased and engaging in partisan activity, that doesn’t make me partisan, that’s just providing accountability,” she said. “Just like when I write letters to the Board of Fish for not following the public process, and I call them to account and say ‘you need to take a look at this and redo your actions.’ It’s the same advocacy on behalf of my constituents.”

Vance said she was expressing her free speech right and communicating with constituents with her letter and on her social media page. She said that includes noting the potential boycott and financial repercussions for the Homer News. 

“I wanted them to know the seriousness of what was happening with their paper that had been for a long time, and it wasn’t a threat, it was just saying ‘you need to know what’s going on.’ I meant it more informational, but people perceived it differently,” she said. 

Vance said she is still deciding whether to appeal or take further action on the issue. 

Nationwide, Kirk’s killing prompted a pressure campaign by Republicans and conservatives to clamp down on language deemed critical of Kirk. A Reuters investigation found more than 600 people were fired, suspended or investigated for comments about Kirk’s death within the first two months of his killing. Some have successfully sued for First Amendment retaliation and have received large settlements or monetary damages. 

The fallout from Vance’s letter was significant, though it was not mentioned in the ethics committee’s decision.

In response to Vance’s letter, the management of Sound Publishing, Inc. and parent-company Carpenter Media Group changed the story, removing some of the language Vance objected to without consulting the reporter or editor at the Homer News, who later resigned over the decision. 

In a joint letter, four reporters and editors with the Homer News and the Peninsula Clarion — also owned by Carpenter Media Group —  said they did not have a problem with Vance’s criticisms, but voiced strong objections to the management changing a story “at the behest of a local official.” They called the decision a betrayal of the journalists on staff and the company’s integrity. 

“We believe this destroys the credibility the public has placed in us as reporters and editors,” they wrote. The group said they could not continue doing their job knowing the possibility of future pressure from an elected official could result in stories being changed without their consultation.

Vance said she was surprised that the publisher responded and changed the article, and learned later that reporters and editors were not consulted.

“It was never my intent for anyone to lose their job or to create a disagreement within the inner workings of the paper, but what it did do that was highlighted by those articles is it revealed there were long term issues that had been going on for quite some time,” she said. 

“People say that I bullied and intimidated the media, I don’t believe that for one minute,” Vance said. “Sound Publishing is a pretty big corporation, and it was never my intent to bully, but just to say ‘no, this is wrong. You need to be aware of what’s going on in this community.’ And I’m going to speak up on behalf of my constituents, because their voice has been drowned out down here.”

Jake Dye, one of the reporters that quit the Peninsula Clarion, said by email on Wednesday that voters will decide whether they approve of Vance’s actions in the November election where she is running for re-election in House District 6. He said Vance’s comments implying financial repercussions crossed a line and “represents a problematic effort to explicitly intimidate the press.”

He said he doesn’t blame Vance for what happened and said Sound Publishing and Carpenter Media management are responsible for their response. 

“There are three fewer journalists on the Kenai Peninsula today than there were a year ago,” Dye wrote. “That’s not because Vance wrote a letter, but because our corporate overlords chose to fold under her pressure and let down the talented people they employed to do reporting in the state.”

Categories
Alaska News Featured Juneau News juneau Juneau Local Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Many gas pipeline construction jobs will go to non-Alaskans, 2020 study indicates

By: James Brooks, Alaska Beacon

Fireweed blooms on either side of the trans-Alaska pipeline near mile post 86, Dalton Highway in 2006, two years after the 2004 Dall City fire. (Photo by Craig McCaa/BLM Alaska)

If built as proposed, the trans-Alaska natural gas pipeline is expected to create thousands of jobs. Many, if not most, will go to people who don’t live in Alaska.

A six-year-old study, commissioned by the Alaska Gasline Development Corp. as part of the project’s environmental statement, says “an estimated 22 to 68 percent of the construction jobs would likely be filled by non-residents, depending on the construction year.”

The high end of that estimate is significantly higher than the state’s norm — last year, 23.4% of all construction jobs in Alaska were held by people who don’t live in the state. 

The difference is likely because specialty jobs needed during construction — pipeline welders, for example — aren’t common in Alaska. Last year, more than 42% of all welding jobs in the state were held by nonresidents, according to figures published by the Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Development. 

Joelle Hall, president of the Alaska AFL-CIO, said that while new hires might not all be Alaskans, they will have the opportunity to become Alaskans, just as the builders of the trans-Alaska oil pipeline system did.

“There will be, just as it was on TAPS — most of those were not Alaskans, they became Alaskans. That’s one of the opportunities to look at here,” she said.

As the Alaska Legislature debates a multibillion-dollar tax break for the pipeline project, legislators are considering whether to tie that tax break to labor requirements that could require pipeline developers to hire more Alaskans.

Last month, the Alaska Senate voted 16-4 to mandate a certain level of apprentice hiring, something that could increase the number of jobs available to new Alaskans or those starting to learn a trade.

The latest version of the tax-break bill, released last week by legislative negotiators, eliminates that mandate but requires project-labor agreements that maximize opportunities for Alaskans who already have needed qualifications, said Sen. Jesse Kiehl, D-Juneau and author of the apprentice hiring proposal.

Hall said she hopes the apprenticeship mandate returns, but even if it doesn’t, the project would offer young Alaskans a chance to be trained as electricians, plumbers and in other construction-related trades.

They would be able to keep those skills and replace retiring construction workers.

“We are going to have such an opportunity to get these jobs … and then they can go on to full careers,” Hall said. “The graying of the construction workforce is such a big problem, and this is an opportunity to change that graying.” 

Current estimates suggest the project would create a large number of temporary and permanent jobs but significantly fewer than were created by the trans-Alaska oil pipeline in the 1970s.

“I’ve read that during the development stage, there’ll be something like 12,000 jobs attached to this project,” said Speaker of the House Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, in a June 27 hearing.

Adam Prestidge, president of Glenfarne Alaska, jumped in.

“Just to clarify, when we talk about jobs created, it’s approximately 7,000 for the construction of the pipeline, an additional 5,000 for the construction of the LNG facility. When it goes into full operation, you’re looking at a much lower number, around 1,000 permanent, 1,500 permanent operational jobs,” he said.

Tim Fitzpatrick, a spokesman for Glenfarne Alaska, confirmed the figures by email and added: “These are direct jobs and these numbers do not include additional indirect jobs. Glenfarne has not provided an update to the in-state/out-of-state estimates.” 

In 1978, the Alaska Department of Labor concluded that more than 23,000 people were simultaneously employed at the peak of oil pipeline construction.

As currently planned, the gas pipeline project would be built in two phases, with the pipeline first and supporting infrastructure second. That means the 12,000 jobs expected by the project won’t come all at once, and peak employment will be well below what happened during the oil pipeline boom.

In addition, Alaska’s population is much larger than it was during the 1970s, further diluting the impact of construction employment. Last year, the state had 321,500 workers in January and 360,000 in July — the boom created by pipeline employment will be smaller than the one that already occurs each summer with tourism and fishing jobs.

What would be different is the value of each job — lawmakers are planning to mandate agreements that would require workers be paid high wages. 

“There’s going to be a level of rearranging of the workforce that’s going to be pretty dramatic. If you’re a guy working at the Jiffy Lube, you could probably go … and be dispatched to do the same job on the pipeline and make vastly more money,” Hall said.

A successful project would create permanent, high-paid jobs.

“Project operation would require about 980 permanent personnel per year,” AGDC estimated in 2020, predicting that most jobs would be based in Anchorage and would go to in-state residents.

For the moment, those benefits remain hypothetical, and the state’s 1978 study provides an inadvertent cautionary note.

“Construction of the proposed gas pipeline project is planned to begin in 1981 – less than three years from now,” it said. “Alaska citizens and lawmakers are now meeting to lay out guidelines in preparation for pipeline construction in an attempt to maximize stable growth and to minimize the disruption which will result from such a large scale construction project.”

Categories
Alaska News Featured Juneau News juneau Juneau Local Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Wrongfully convicted Alaskans can now apply for withheld PFDs under new law

By: Corinne Smith, Alaska Beacon

Spring Creek Correctional Center is seen in an undated photo. (Photo courtesy of Alaska Department of Corrections)

Alaskans who have been wrongfully convicted can now apply to claim Alaska Permanent Fund dividends that were withheld while they were incarcerated, under a new law. 

The Alaska Legislature passed Senate Bill 167 by a combined vote of 58 to 2, and Gov. Mike Dunleavy allowed the bill to pass into law without his signature last month. 

Under current Alaska law, those who are incarcerated or sentenced as a result of a felony or certain combination of misdemeanor convictions are ineligible for the Permanent Fund dividend. The amount equivalent to those dividends is deposited into a restorative justice fund each year. 

Under the new law, past dividends will be granted to people whose convictions were vacated or reversed, or those who had charges against them dismissed. People who were found not guilty after their case was retried are also eligible. Individuals whose charges were dropped as part of a plea agreement in another criminal case would not be eligible. 

Exonerees have two years after a dismissal or not guilty finding — or two years after the bill’s effective date — to apply for the past dividends through the Permanent Fund dividend office with the Alaska Department of Revenue. The bill is set to take effect on September 16.

Sen. Scott Kawasaki, D-Fairbanks, speaks Friday, Feb. 7, 2025, on the floor of the Alaska Senate. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)
Sen. Scott Kawasaki, D-Fairbanks, speaks Friday, Feb. 7, 2025, on the floor of the Alaska Senate. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon)

Sen. Scott Kawasaki, D-Fairbanks, sponsored the bill and told lawmakers at a May hearing that the state has a responsibility to those the justice system has failed.  

“When an Alaskan has been wrongfully convicted, and then later has had their judgment vacated or reversed, then the state must go beyond merely unlocking the cell,” he said. “We have a duty to make amends for those who have endured an injustice under our laws.”

Prior to the law’s passage, Alaska was one of 12 states that did not provide compensation for wrongful convictions, according to a sponsor statement prepared by Kawasaki’s office. Many states provide financial compensation, or college tuition or job training assistance for exonerees.

Kawasaki said it’s a small step to restore dividend payments. “These funds represent a loss of personal property during that period of time,” he said. “(The bill) is about restoration and not compensation, because really the amount of time that a person has been behind bars can just never be repaid.”

The bill was supported by the Tanana Chiefs Conference and non-profit advocacy groups, including the Alaska Innocence Project and After Innocence, a national advocacy non-profit that provides post-release assistance for those wrongfully convicted. 

Jon Eldan, the executive director of After Innocence, said in an interview Monday that the  restored PFD money is helpful.

“Because people who have been incarcerated for crimes they didn’t commit typically face a wide range of barriers to rebuilding their lives after that horrible experience, and money helps,” he said. “And so not only is it good because it’s something that is due to them, but also because every dollar matters when you are trying to come back from having your liberty taken away.”

The number of Alaskans who have been wrongfully convicted, or who may be innocent and are in the process of fighting their prior conviction to be overturned is unknown. 

The National Registry of Exonerations is a national database of false convictions compiled by Michigan State College of Law, University of Michigan Law and University of California Irvine Newkirk Center for Science and Society. The registry lists over 4,300 wrongful convictions since 1989 nationwide, including nine known cases in Alaska. Those nine cases represent a total of 76 years of incarceration.  

“How many more people in Alaska who are incarcerated are factually innocent? And the difficult part is we don’t know,” Eldan said. “Except when these cases resolve in a systemic finding that their conviction needs to be overturned, and have the charges dismissed, etc. and so we don’t know what we don’t know.” 

The most infamous cases of wrongful conviction in Alaska are known as the Fairbanks Four — when Marvin Roberts, Eugene Vent, George Frese and Kevin Pease were wrongfully convicted for the killing of a teenager, John Hartman, in 1997. The four Alaska Native men served 18 years in prison each, and were exonerated in 2015 when another man confessed to the killing. 

Researchers with the National Registry of Exonerations point to a variety of factors that contribute to wrongful convictions, including police and prosecutorial misconduct, like concealing evidence and witness tampering, false or misleading forensic science, eyewitness testimony or confessions, or inadequate legal defense.GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.SUBSCRIBE

Black and Indigenous people are disproportionately arrested and incarcerated nationwide. Researchers with the National Registry of Exonerations estimate Black Americans are seven times more likely than white Americans to be falsely convicted of crimes.  

In Alaska, while Alaska Native people make up less than 20% of the state’s population, they made up 40% of the prison population last year.

“We see an over-representation in our prisons of people of color and minority groups,” Eldan said. “So I wouldn’t be surprised at all — although the numbers are quite small in Alaska, so far, in terms of identified wrongful conviction or innocence cases — to find an over-representation of minority groups, including Alaska Natives.”

Categories
Alaska News Featured Juneau News juneau Juneau Local Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Data center critics flood Alaska land managers with opposition to North Slope project

Nathaniel Herz, Northern Journal

 A selection of comments filed with state land managers on a proposed lease of Alaska public lands for a data center project on the North Slope. (Image from Nathaniel Herz/Anchorage Press)

Opposition is pouring in against a large data center and power plant proposed for Alaska’s North Slope, as Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s administration considers whether to approve a 50-year lease of state land to the project’s developer.

More than 500 public comments were received before a preliminary deadline set by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, according to copies of the messages released by the agency.

Fewer than a dozen comments endorsed the project. The vast majority were opposed, often in harsh or strident terms — with subject lines like “HELL NO! To ANY DATA CENTERS” and “NO AI”. One commenter noted explicitly that their message had been written “with my own brain and fingers typing,” rather than generated by artificial intelligence.

“Please incorporate some AI (Alaskan intelligence) into making this decision,” wrote one commenter, who described data centers as “the abandonment of both nature and humanity.”

Comments were initially due to the department’s Division of Oil and Gas in mid-June; the agency has since extended the deadline an extra month, to July 17, due to “the volume of comments received, public interest and requests for extension,” spokesperson Sean Clifton wrote in an email.

Once the deadline passes, the agency will assess the comments before it makes a final decision on the proposed land lease, Clifton said.

An official with Stak Energy, the Anchorage-based company that applied for the lease, said in an emailed statement that the business “is committed to being a responsible steward of the land entrusted to us” and has proposed the lease in an area “far removed from any local communities.”

“Our initial assessment is that the vast majority of the comments are form letters lacking substance other than reflecting an individual’s point of view,” said the official, John Boyle, Stak’s chief strategy officer, who previously served as commissioner of Alaska’s natural resources department from 2023 to 2025. Boyle added: “Some of the comments are more substantive and will be addressed in due course.”

The natural resources department released copies of the comments to the Anchorage Press/Northern Journal after it also released them to Stak, though the agency redacted names and other identifying information.

The company is planning a major development that would use abundant natural gas from nearby North Slope oil fields to run power plants that could support artificial intelligence and cloud computing, according to documents it submitted to the state.

https://alaskabeacon.com/2026/05/14/a-huge-data-center-could-rise-on-alaskas-north-slope/embed/#?secret=dNtEkGzMly#?secret=eJOKjrAnIA

The project, which Boyle said would cost more than $10 billion, would occupy roughly one square mile just off the Dalton Highway, some 25 miles south of the North Slope oil hub of Deadhorse. Its generators could produce a gigawatt or more of power, which is some 30% more than the peak demand of urban Alaska’s entire grid.

Boyle, in his message, stressed that Stak would be focused on generating power and selling it to large-scale computing companies known as “hyperscalers” — and would not operate data centers itself.

“And while we anticipate hyperscalers providing the commercial foundation for our power plant build, Stak will be able to provide power to any entity interested in purchasing it,” he said.

Stak’s project, if built, would be the first large data center development in Alaska. In its lease-related documents, the company said its plans were drafted to avoid the backlash against the industry that’s erupted in other states — where advocates have increasingly protested projects’ land use, pollution and water consumption.

Average annual temperatures at the proposed project site, according to Stak, are 12 F, meaning that the development is expected to need 10% or less of the amount of water that typical data centers use for cooling. There are also no cities or villages within 50 miles of the proposed development except for Deadhorse — an industrial center populated by oil industry employees who live in work camps during multi-day shifts, then fly home.

Stak Energy is proposing to lease an area near this stretch of tundra, on Alaska’s North Slope near the Dalton Highway, to operate natural gas generators that would power a large data center. (Nathaniel Herz/Anchorage Press)

The few positive comments made some of those points. “The location pretty well leaves NIMBY out of the equation,” one commenter said. “I’m all for this application and this project.”

Other comments against the development used identical language and appeared to stem from templates distributed by opponents. Formal opposition or messages of concern also came in from groups including the Northern Alaska Environmental Center, the Alaska Public Interest Research Group and the Alaska chapter of a sportsman’s group called Backcountry Hunters and Anglers.

But many other messages objecting to the project were unique and written by individuals from across the state — from Kodiak and Kotzebue to Seward, Valdez and the North Slope village of Nuiqsut. Those critics were not sold on Stak’s pitch, and expressed themselves in terms ranging from reasoned and factual to strident and misinformed.

Some commenters, for example, argued that Stak’s project and natural gas consumption would have the effect of raising electricity prices for other Alaskans — many of whom also get their power from natural gas plants.

But the North Slope oil fields are hundreds of miles from urban Alaska and disconnected from the state’s power grid, meaning that sales of fuel to Stak would have no direct impact on city-dwellers’ electricity prices.

Others, meanwhile, made factually supported assertions — among them that data centers running on fossil fuels would accelerate climate change, and that the pad that Stak plans to build on the tundra would require huge quantities of gravel, a scarce resource on the North Slope that’s also used by villages and oil developers.

Still others kept their objections short and succinct — and sometimes cheeky.

“No,” was one commenter’s full message, though they added a postscript: “You may build one in Canada though.”

Nathaniel Herz welcomes tips at natherz@gmail.com or (907) 793-0312. This article was originally published in Northern Journal, a newsletter from Herz. Subscribe at this link.

Categories
Alaska News Featured Juneau News juneau Juneau Local Juneau Local Ketchikan Local News Feeds Sitka Local

Alaska lawmakers roll out draft compromise tax cut bill for the proposed AKLNG gas line

By: Corinne Smith, Alaska Beacon

Conference committee members include House Speaker Rep. Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, Reps. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage, Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna, and Sens. Bert Stedman, R-Sitka, Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel, and Mike Cronk, R-Tok, who unveiled a draft compromise bill for the proposed AKLNG gas line project on July 2, 2026. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)

House and Senate conference committee members unveiled a draft compromise bill on Thursday for the proposed Alaska LNG gas line project, pledging that debate, input and revisions will continue on the state tax break legislation up until a floor vote scheduled for July 16. 

“We know we have more work to do,” said House Speaker Rep. Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, following the committee hearing. “It’s a complex topic, and our goal today was to first get through the working draft that had, we thought, a lot of areas of compromise between, you know, sort of all the partners involved in crafting the bill.”

The six member conference committee is tasked with negotiating a compromise bill from the versions of House Bill 381, which was passed by the House and Senate in a special session in June. 

Amid high political pressure, lawmakers are now in a second special session called by Gov. Mike Dunleavy to hammer out a state tax proposal that is workable for both the state and the project developer, Glenfarne, which owns 75% of the project. Glenfarne executives say the multibillion dollar tax break is essential to the project’s economics — and that it must come before the company determines a final investment decision with investors.GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.SUBSCRIBE

Dunleavy and members of the House and Senate have taken decidedly different approaches to the size and scope of the state tax break for the proposed project. The project would be built in two phases — first, an 807-mile gas line from the North Slope to Cook Inlet, then  gas treatment facilities on the North Slope and on the Kenai Peninsula to export gas internationally.

One of the most fiercely debated provisions in the draft compromise is a proposal to apply the state’s corporate income tax to privately-owned oil and gas companies that currently do not pay them. The provision is favored by some lawmakers and was included in the version of the bill passed by the Senate. But Dunleavy has called the tax a “poison pill” and pledged to veto any bill that includes it. Legislative leaders say they will revisit the topic and expect to make changes to the draft.

Edmon called the corporate tax provision the “elephant in the room” and said further negotiation will continue after the holiday weekend. “I’m really looking forward to after this period of what I would call percolation that we come back and make further changes to the bill,” he said. 

Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage, who chairs the conference committee, said its members will continue hearing input on the draft bill from relevant groups, and many provisions will be further debated and revised.

“We’re going to continue that work, see how far apart the goal posts are, and do what it takes to try and bring those together,” he said. “And again, ultimately arrive with a bill on the floor that we think can be successful, and give this project a chance.”

House Speaker Rep. Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham speaks during conference committee discussions on a new draft compromise bill for the proposed AKLNG gas line on July 2, 2026. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)
House Speaker Rep. Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham, speaks during conference committee discussions on a new draft compromise bill for the proposed AKLNG gas line on July 2, 2026. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)

A spokesperson for Dunleavy said his office is reviewing the new draft bill, called a committee substitute, or CS, and repeated the governor’s objections to the corporate income tax provision, known as the S corporation tax, which was included in the draft bill on Thursday.

“Our initial take on the CS is that while it appears to address several of the harmful provisions for the gasline, it still contains the S corp tax that the governor and the developer have said will hurt the project’s ability to secure financing,” said Jeff Turner, Dunleavy’s communications director in an email. 

In the draft compromise bill unveiled Thursday, legislators are offering a significant tax break that would replace the state’s property tax with a volumetric tax on the gas flowing through the gas line after five years, or when the gas flow reaches 500 million cubic feet per day, whichever comes first. The plan includes gradual tax increases over time as gas flows from the North Slope. 

Lawmakers have proposed extending a deadline for construction to be completed on the gas line and phase one from 2032 to December 31, 2034. The provision allows the Commissioner of Revenue to review the tax deal if there are unforeseen delays outside of the developer’s control like severe weather or litigation.

The draft bill requires the gas price cap for Alaskans to rise with inflation at the national inflation rate, rather than Alaskan inflation rate, and the increase may not exceed 3% annually. It requires a variety of reporting requirements for labor agreements, filings with federal oversight agencies and construction updates on a public dashboard. 

Another provision requires Glenfarne and developers to disclose their investment agreements with foreign companies investing in the project. It requires notice of any “significant changes” in the project’s ownership structure, defined as changes in entities holding more than 5% ownership interest of the gas line or 10% of the gas treatment plants. 

“We’d like transparency and forthright information on who’s involved in this project and who owns a piece of that pipeline that’s dividing our state down the middle,” Schrage said. 

The draft also contains a provision that prohibits the project developer from seeking payment from the state if the project is abandoned, and requires the developer to return all shares and assets to the state within six months in such a case. The issue was spotlighted by reporting on a confidential draft agreement between Glenfarne and the Alaska Gasline Development Corp. that under some conditions, the state could be ordered to pay in order to take the project back.  

“It’s very important that if the state is going to offer tax concessions, that those concessions not then be leveraged against the state for a payout to the project developer,” Schrage said. “In the event that this project goes awry and the developer tries to exit, we don’t want to pay them for our concessions.”

Rep. Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna raises concerns about the local contribution provision for municipalities and required payments for school districts during discussions on the draft tax bill for the proposed AKLNG gas line project on July 2, 2026. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)
Rep. Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna, raises concerns about the local contribution provision for municipalities and required payments for school districts during discussions on the draft tax bill for the proposed AKLNG gas line project on July 2, 2026. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)

Rep. Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna, raised questions and objections to a provision around how much municipalities’ gas line tax revenue would apply to their school funding formula, known as the local contribution. According to a legislative memo, the Kenai Peninsula would be required to contribute millions more to its school district beginning in 2034.

Ruffridge, a member of the all-Republican House minority caucus, said it was one of several provisions he objects to and cautioned the committee against “putting additional barriers” up for the project.

“We’re seeking maximum government take. I think in here we’ve asked the question, ‘How much can we extract from this project?’ And I think we’ve missed the fact that we are asking potentially to put on the line jobs, cheap energy and potentially a boon to Alaska’s economy in the form of revenue,” he said. 

He said the proposal needs more work.

Several members of the House Republican minority flew down to Juneau this week to raise objections to the conference committee process and urge swift action on the bill. A full vote on a compromise bill was tentatively scheduled for Wednesday, but postponed. Technical House floor sessions were canceled on Wednesday and Thursday, to avoid what House Speaker Edgmon called “political hijinks or theatrics.”

House Minority Leader Rep. DeLena Johnson, R-Palmer, and Reps. Dan Saddler, R-Eagle River, and Garrett Nelson R-Sutton were among the Republican minority members that traveled to Juneau to encourage urgency on the bill, and attended the conference committee hearing on July 2, 2026. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)
House Minority Leader Rep. DeLena Johnson, R-Palmer, and Reps. Dan Saddler, R-Eagle River, and Garrett Nelson, R-Sutton, were among the Republican minority members that traveled to Juneau to encourage urgency on the bill, and attended the conference committee hearing on July 2, 2026. (Photo by Corinne Smith/Alaska Beacon)

“There’s no time for games, and as the presiding officer, I’m not going to play games like this,” he said.

Edgmon said the committee has been deliberating with legislative attorneys, finance officials, various related departments and project developers in a process that would normally take years. 

Rep. Donna Mears, D-Anchorage and a member of the House Resources Committee, also attended the conference committee hearing on Thursday and said rushing the process is not in the best interest of the Legislature or Alaskans. She said hammering out a compromise bill that will be approved by a majority of legislators and by the governor is an enormous task. 

“Trying to rush through is not feasible. We’re making a lot of big changes, and the details matter,” she said. “And the process today wasn’t obstructionist, it was moving along and making progress, and even without big huge policy decisions, there’s a lot of little things that need to get ironed out.”

Lawmakers said they are tentatively planning for the compromise bill to go before the House and Senate for a full vote on Thursday, July 16. The special session is scheduled to end on July 19. 

News of the North
Flood Watch
Weather
Salmon Derby
Podcasts
Stations
Cruise Schedule
Best of  Juneau
Contests

Opinion & Request

Capital Chat
Problem Corner
Community Matters
Artist Submissions