Latest news with #CalvinSchrage
Yahoo
21-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
At adjournment, Alaska Legislature leaves elections overhaul, campaign finance bills undone
Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage, speaks to the Alaska House of Representatives on Friday, April 25, 2025. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon) The Alaska Legislature adjourned its regular session on Tuesday without finishing work on a major elections bill or a bill reimposing limits on cash donations to election candidates. House Bill 16, the campaign finance bill, and Senate Bill 64, the elections reform legislation, are expected to return when the Legislature resumes work in January, and they could be part of a wave of major legislation that advances through the Capitol early next year. 'We got really close with the election bill, and I think the prospects for passing next year are good,' said Speaker of the House Bryce Edgmon, I-Dillingham. 'I expect that we may have a legitimate shot at passing that bill early next session,' he said. Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, said that both bills could have gotten legislative approval, but they would have been vetoed by Gov. Mike Dunleavy. 'We were told flat out, the governor would veto it, by someone in the governor's office,' Wielechowski said. The governor's communications office did not respond to an email asking whether Wielechowski's statement was accurate. If enacted, HB 16 would, among other things, limit Alaskans to $2,000 in donations per candidate in each two-year election cycle. Alaska currently has no limit on the amount of money a person can donate to a candidate. A ballot measure is slated for the 2026 election, but the restrictions could come into place earlier, if the Legislature approves. SB 64, as currently written, is a broad election reform bill that includes significant changes to the way the state deals with absentee voting. 'I think we are poised and in a position where there will be a number of pieces of significant legislation passed next year, probably early on in the session, and we will be dealing with a number of veto overrides during the session,' Wielechowski said. Wielechowski said the possibilities include an elections bill, a campaign finance bill, the long-awaited pension restoration bill and a bill taxing businesses whose owners are taxed separately from the businesses, known as C-corporations. To avoid a veto, Wielechowski and others said they intend to work with Republicans in the House and Senate minorities to try to garner support for a compromise that could win a veto-proof majority of votes in the Legislature. It takes 40 votes to override a policy veto; the coalition majorities in the House and Senate have a combined 35 members, meaning that additional Republican support would be needed. House Minority Leader Mia Costello, R-Anchorage, said she thinks changes to Senate Bill 64 are needed for any compromise. 'I was really proud of our finance team for helping stop that version of the bill, because it really had some things in there that were not productive and were not representative of our values and what we think should be in an elections bill,' she said. 'I do think there is room to make it better. I just think we weren't a part of that discussion (on advancing the bill), but I think they realized that we have to be, moving forward.' On the campaign finance bill, getting a veto-proof majority is 'possible,' said Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage and the bill's sponsor. 'I've personally spoken to a number of minority members who recognize the need for limits. They were disappointed as well that the bill wasn't taken up. We do have a very high veto threshold, so it'll be a challenge,' Schrage said. 'But as I remind legislators all the time around here, this is going to happen one way or another when this goes to the ballot, so I think we have an opportunity to save the time and expense and put this in place ourselves. If we don't, Alaskans will take action.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Alaska utility execs to lawmakers: Let's revive Susitna hydroelectric megaproject
A rendering of the proposed Susitna hydroelectric development. (Alaska Energy Authority image) With urban Alaska facing a shortfall in the natural gas long used to generate the vast majority of its power, renewable energy advocates have been pressuring the region's utilities to advance large-scale wind and solar development to meet future power demands. But no such projects have been built in the past few years, even with generous tax credits available from the federal government. And now, the utilities are pitching the idea of cutting their dependence on gas by resurrecting a dormant but divisive megaproject: a huge hydroelectric dam along the Susitna River estimated, a decade ago, to cost $5.6 billion. The pitch, sent to three key budget-writing members of the state House, came earlier in May in a formal letter from the heads of Anchorage-based Chugach Electric Association, Kenai Peninsula-based Homer Electric Association, Fairbanks-based Golden Valley Electric Association, Matanuska Electric Association and Seward's municipally run electric utility. [Read the letter] 'In an era when Alaska is facing production declines and difficulty securing natural gas, pursuing energy projects with proven technology, like hydro, provides the utilities with additional generation options while preserving existing natural gas resources,' the executives wrote. They added: 'We need multiple options to solve the biggest issue impacting Alaska utilities today: fuel availability.' The Susitna hydroelectric project has been contemplated, off and on, for decades, before development was suspended by former Gov. Bill Walker in 2016 amid a state budget crisis. The project could generate 50% of urban Alaska's electricity demand, according to the state agency that's led the study process, the Alaska Energy Authority. The letter from the utility executives asks the three co-chairs of the House Finance Committee to revive the state's partially completed efforts to secure a federal license for the project. Officials estimate that finishing the licensing process could cost as much as $100 million, on top of some $200 million that's already been spent. Lawmakers are nearing the end of their annual budget writing process, and amid declining state revenue, they haven't added any cash for the hydro project yet. They're also still considering legislation to require the utilities to generate higher amounts of power from renewable sources by target dates. Reached between meetings Wednesday, Anchorage Rep. Calvin Schrage, one of the letter's recipients, declined to comment. The utilities' request to revive the Susitna project is exasperating advocates for other forms of renewable energy, who say that hydroelectric development is economically and politically unrealistic given its huge cost and potential impacts to the river's yearly runs of hundreds of thousands of salmon. 'It feels like an unfortunate distraction from the urgent work that we need to be doing to secure affordable energy,' said Alex Petkanas, climate and clean energy program manager at the Alaska Center, a conservation group. 'We have the studies and the information we need about wind power in Alaska, wind availability in Alaska, and wind reliability. So, to see them spending time on a controversial project rather than pursuing solutions like wind energy that are within our reach feels like a mistake.' Hydroelectric projects like the Susitna development appeal to utility executives because they provide what's known as 'dispatchable' power — electricity that's available whenever it's needed. The utilities have expressed more skepticism about wind and solar developments because of their variability, though a recent study commissioned by the utilities found that urban Alaska's grid could boost its use of wind power seven-fold without jeopardizing reliability. The next step for the hydroelectric project wouldn't require the full amount of cash to secure the federal license, said Curtis Thayer, the energy authority's executive director. Instead, he said, lawmakers would have to budget 'a few million dollars' to better understand how much work is needed before the license could be issued. 'We need to spend a little bit of money to refresh all those numbers to really decide if this is a viable project to move forward,' Thayer said. He asserted that the billions of dollars that would be required for construction is 'not an issue,' because private investment firms would finance the project in exchange for guaranteed returns. For developments that have received federal licenses, 'there are people that are standing in line to invest,' Thayer said. The Susitna proposal faces intense opposition from conservationists and some residents along the river, who say that the development would harm salmon by dramatically reducing water flow in the summer, when power demand is lower, and artificially boosting it during the winter, when demand is high. The Susitna River Coalition, a nonprofit that's led efforts to block the dam, says its construction would cause the 'eradication' of the river's 'unique ecosystems, the destruction of one of Alaska's most valued salmon spawning and rearing habitats, and the flooding of 40,000 acres teeming with wildlife, while costing the state billions of dollars that are needed elsewhere.' Critics of hydroelectric development point out that elsewhere in the United States, dams are being removed, not built, because of their harmful effects on salmon and other migratory fish species. They also say that construction costs regularly exceed projections. Opponents of the Susitna project also questioned the process that led to the letter being drafted and sent by the executives of the cooperatively owned utilities, which are governed by citizen boards of directors. Those opponents said that not all the utility executives had consulted with board members before the letter was sent — an assertion that two members confirmed to Northern Journal, though they asked to remain anonymous to describe internal conversations. 'Utility staff should not be contacting the Legislature or taking positions without board knowledge or approval,' said Petkanas. A spokesperson for the largest urban utility, Chugach Electric Association, could not be reached for comment Wednesday, while the spokesperson for the next-largest, Matanuska Electric Association, did not respond to a request for comment. But Mark Wiggin, board chair of Chugach Electric Association, said he was informed about the letter in advance. 'There's an overarching interest by all of us to find some way to maintain our energy grid,' Wiggin said. 'However we do that, without having to import all that gas, would be a good thing.' Disclosure: Northern Journal reporter Nat Herz works as a volunteer crew member (paid in fish, not cash) for two weeks each summer at a small commercial fishing business at the mouth of the Susitna River. Nathaniel Herz welcomes tips at natherz@ or (907) 793-0312. This article was originally published in Northern Journal, a newsletter from Herz. Subscribe at this link. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Amid budget struggle, Alaska has little money for new construction or renovation
Rep. Jeremy Bynum, R-Ketchikan, speaks to Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage, during a vote on amendments to the state's capital budget on Monday, May 12, 2025. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon) The Alaska House of Representatives, following in the path of the state Senate, has approved a small construction and renovation budget for the fiscal year that starts July 1. The vote on Senate Bill 57, the annual infrastructure bill — formally known as the capital budget — was 21-19, along caucus lines. When oil prices and production are high, the Alaska Legislature pours hundreds of millions of dollars into new construction and maintenance projects. This spring, with the Legislature anticipating low oil prices and reduced federal funding, the House version of the capital budget proposes to spend just $167.9 million in general-purpose dollars. In comparison, the capital budget two years ago spent more than three-quarters of a billion dollars. The newly approved capital budget isn't the smallest in recent history — in 2016, legislators approved just $107 million — but spending is very limited by historical standards, noted Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage, who oversaw the budget on the House Finance Committee. 'This was not a fun or easy year to be the capital budget co-chair,' Schrage said, 'due to our state's dire fiscal picture. We had to say no — or at least not now — to a lot of good projects that would have benefited Alaskans. That said, we were still able to make some meaningful investments.' A significant amount of the capital budget is being set aside for matching funds needed to unlock federal grants. For example, it allocates $57.2 million in general-purpose money to the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, which gives the state access to over $2 billion in transportation funding once federal money is considered. It isn't yet clear how federal budget cuts will affect that figure. The budget is set based on what is known as of today. With general-purpose revenue limited, the House and Senate finance committees were mostly limited to assigning money to deferred maintenance projects at state facilities spread across Alaska. For example, the Senate added $19 million to the major maintenance list at public schools. The House added another $19 million on top of that, enough to cover the top nine projects on the list.. 'We basically had an agreement going in; we got half, they got half,' said Sen. Bert Stedman, R-Sitka and Senate Finance Committee co-chair. When it came to discretionary funding, requests from individual legislators for things like playgrounds or streetlights, the House and Senate were again treated equally. 'Everybody got nothing,' Stedman said. Budget documents show few exceptions to Stedman's comment. One of the few budget additions made by the House was $500,000 for a Blood Bank of Alaska testing lab. Gov. Mike Dunleavy requested the money, the Senate rejected it, but the House added it back in. In many places, the budget attempted to use other sources of money instead of general-purpose dollars that primarily come from Permanent Fund earnings, oil taxes and royalties. For example, Dunleavy requested $7 million for a time and attendance system to be used by state employees. The Senate cut that request to $4 million, and instead of using general-purpose dollars, lawmakers took additional money from the accounts of the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority. The House approved that change. Of the budget overall, Schrage said lawmakers tried to deny projects equally, without regard to party or district. 'I know that this won't make everyone happy, but we've done the best that we can,' he said. The budget will return to the Senate for a concurrence vote, then advance to Dunleavy, who has line-item veto power and may eliminate individual budget items but cannot add new ones. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
02-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Alaska House votes to eliminate restriction that bars paramedics from helping police and search dogs
Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage, speaks to the Alaska House of Representatives on Friday, April 25, 2025. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon) In a disaster, service dogs are assigned to search for victims and comfort them. A new bill passed Monday by the Alaska House of Representatives intends to assist those dogs when it's their turn to need help. If approved by the Senate and Gov. Mike Dunleavy, House Bill 70 would allow ambulance crews to aid injured these dogs in a crisis and while they're being transported to a veterinarian. The aid would be limited to dogs used by law enforcement and those working search and rescue cases. In cases where both people and dogs are injured, the bill requires people to be helped first. The bill's sponsor, Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage, explained on the House floor that under current law, paramedics and emergency medical technicians are legally forbidden from helping animals while on the job because doing so would be considered veterinary care, which is regulated by law. An ordinary Alaskan could legally help an injured dog, Schrage explained, but not a trained medical professional. 'These are working dogs that go through serious risk to their safety in order to serve us, to help us be more safe, to be rescued in an emergency, and to be able to provide emergency care on scene, I think, would be an incredible thing,' Schrage said. The bill was inspired by the death of Alaska State Trooper canine Rico, who was shot and killed during a 2017 police chase in Wasilla. The House approved HB 70 on a 32-8 vote, with opposition coming from some legislators who cited concerns from veterinarians. Rep. Rebecca Schwanke, R-Glennallen, said her vote against the bill was for that reason. 'We heard tremendous opposition to this bill by veterinary professionals across our state, largely because it does offer EMS personnel the opportunity to practice emergency veterinary care without proper training,' she said. House Majority Leader Chuck Kopp, R-Anchorage, referred to his decades of experience as a police officer and said he supported the bill. 'You want the person who is closest to the scene and best able to help save that animal — if the animal is shot or otherwise critically injured — to have a fighting chance,' he said. 'These dogs have over $50,000 invested in just the purchase and training of the animal, and hundreds of thousands of dollars to continue to train with the canine officers. They are worth it.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
With lawmakers' help, Alaska political donation limits could come before 2026 election
Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage, speaks to the Alaska House of Representatives on Friday, April 25, 2025. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon) Four years after a federal appeals court eliminated Alaska's limits on political campaign contributions, the Alaska House of Representatives has taken a step toward reimposing them. On Monday, the House voted 22-18 to approve House Bill 16, which mirrors the language of a ballot measure slated to go before voters in 2026. Alaskans are expected to approve the upcoming measure by a wide margin, based on historical trends, but that approval would bring new limits into effect for the 2028 elections at the earliest. If the Legislature approves a substantially similar bill, it would allow limits for the 2026 election and remove the upcoming initiative from the ballot. 'This is something that Alaskans very clearly want,' said Rep. Calvin Schrage, I-Anchorage and the sponsor of HB 16. Schrage is also a co-sponsor of the ballot measure. HB 16 proposes to limit Alaskans to $2,000 in donations per candidate in each election cycle. For the governor's race, where a lieutenant governor candidate and governor candidate run together on a single ticket, the limit would be $4,000. The limit for donations from one person to a political party or group would be $5,000. If a group wants to donate to a candidate, the limit is $4,000, or $8,000 for the governor's race. Those limits would be adjusted for inflation every 10 years. Alaska's politicians have been able to collect unlimited amounts of campaign contributions since a 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that found the state's prior limits were unconstitutional. In 2021, a three-judge panel of the court ruled that a $500 annual limit — amounting to $1,000 over a two-year cycle — was too low. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that a $1,075 limit set by Missouri in 1998 for a two-year cycle was constitutional; adjusted for inflation, that would be roughly $2,100 today. Gov. Mike Dunleavy's administration declined to appeal the 2021 decision, and the Alaska Public Offices Commission implemented it starting with the 2022 election. 'This bill would allow us to reinstate those limits and again provide that protection to Alaskans — and frankly to us as elected officials — in helping to ensure that there is some faith and confidence among Alaskans in their elected officials, acting with integrity and not having undue influence on them by outsized donations,' Schrage said. Each time ballot measures have proposed new limits for political donations, Alaskans have approved them by large margins. Public polling has shown continued large support for new restrictions. Rep. Andy Josephson, D-Anchorage, has been elected to the House four times and spoke in support of the bill. 'I can tell you that, to me, putting these contribution limits in place will help us do what we should be doing, and that is spending more time discussing and hearing from our constituents, learning about the needs and concerns of the voters that we will hopefully represent, and not thinking about the biggest check writers,' he said. Voting against the bill were 18 members of the House's Republican minority caucus. The only member of the caucus to vote in favor of it was Rep. Justin Ruffridge, R-Soldotna. Rep. Sarah Vance, R-Homer, spoke against the bill and urged lawmakers to reject it. 'I believe in Alaskans' right to free speech, and the courts have ruled that political contributions are free speech,' she said. 'We've gone through an entire election cycle without any limits, and I have not once heard on record any specific Alaskan contributions that have given the appearance or showed proof of corruption,' Vance said. That matters because the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that limits on campaign donations are legal only if they are needed to avoid quid-pro-quo corruption or the appearance of corruption. Schrage responded to Vance's point by observing that the Alaska Department of Law has already reviewed the similar campaign-limits ballot measure for constitutionality and found no problems. 'It does not get certified unless the limits herein are viewed by our own administration as being constitutional,' he said. Schrage said that it's clear by state history and opinion polling that Alaskans want to restrict campaign contributions, and that legislators should advance HB 16 to the governor's desk. 'I would just encourage my colleagues here to vote yes on the bill,' he said, 'and listen to their constituents who want to see us do something concrete to improve the trust in their elected officials and in their government.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
