Katie Catchell, I'm your federal lobbyist.

Maria Eucatel, Senator Solomon's office.

Kara Hollett's with Senator Murkowski's office.

Representative Representative Sarah Hannon, House District Three, which is about half of Juneau.

And would you introduce Excuse me, House District Four?

And Ms.

Hann.

Sorry, Representative Hannah, would you uh introduce your staff in the room if you have and uh I have two of my staff members here, Hunter Meachum and Tim Clark.

They've both been with me for a number of years, so should look familiar.

Thank you.

Good morning.

There we go.

Uh good morning.

Uh Andy's story.

I represent District Three.

Uh which is Haynes Gegway Clackwang Stavis in the North Juno.

And very pleased this morning.

Uh Tammy Smith is uh back with me this year.

Uh she's tackling education with me, longtime educator, and then Kaylee Holm, who started off in Rep Hannon's office last year and now is with me.

Very pleased to have both of them.

So you poached her.

Good to know.

Senator Keel.

Good morning.

Thanks for having us.

I'm Jesse Keel.

Uh in the Senate, we do letters.

I'm District B.

Um, and uh I uh represent all the communities that two of them represent.

The two House districts make up a Senate district.

I am at present joined by one member of my uh three member plus an intern all-star staff.

Uh, and that would be Ms.

Adson, who does a fine job.

Uh my name is Nano Brooks, newly elected assembly member, uh, starting my first year.

Morning, Christine Wall.

I am on the assembly and I am in my sixth year.

Um, I did want to say that I had a kind of urgent work thing show up on my calendar um yesterday, so I will be out of here at eight.

So I apologize in advance for taking off.

Uh good morning, Greg Smith.

Um, just elected to my third term on the assembly and honored to uh uh serve in the deputy mayor role.

Thank you.

Uh thank you.

And since uh our legislative delegation and staff uh deal with other folks in the city, we're gonna go around them too.

Ashley Heimbigner, would you start perfect timing?

Yeah, you can't interrupt me.

Bill Lawhorn, community development director.

Oh, so sorry.

Robert Bark, LBD City Manager.

Katie guest your city manager.

Is there anybody in the room that got missed?

Breck and where are they?

Frecken Hendricks, municipal clerk.

All right, okay.

Madam Mayor, as long as uh Assembly Member Wool mentioned it, um Representative Story and I will need to leave at 8 15.

There's uh as opposed to the Senate, the House takes a little longer to get itself together before a joint session.

Yep, that's why I gavel this in because I knew people had to leave.

So all right, with that, uh, we will uh uh move on to our agenda with no changes.

Um we're gonna start today with our update from our DC lobbyist, Katie Kipchell.

Here on.

We just spent a lot of quality time with uh Katie in Washington, DC.

So she'll report on our doings.

Uh good morning, everyone.

It's great to be here bringing news of how we're managing and advancing Juneau's issues, issues and challenges in Washington, DC.

As you know, Juno's top challenge is a devastating glacial lake outburst flooding or glov and the annual threat.

Our top mission in DC is raising awareness and willingness to problem solve at the national level and among those in the lower 48.

Uh specifically getting federal help and engagement to respond, mitigate, and protect Juno against the annual glov.

We're making good traction on that front, thanks to the help of the congressional delegation, Senator Sullivan and Markowski, Congressman Begage have all rolled up their sleeves to help.

In the first week of January, Juno leadership and Klingant Heide leadership traveled to DC, uh, met with the delegation, House and Senate Committee staff, and six different federal agencies.

So worldwind, um including the U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers at the highest leadership in the Pentagon.

Um, the federal agency folks around the table at these meetings, all of the federal agency folks included assistant secretaries, um, lifelong career staff and political appointees.

So these are the major players at each of these tables at the federal agency meetings.

These are not the folks who push paper, but those who have the standing to push action.

And with that, I'm here to discuss the DC follow-up on this trip.

Army Corps of Engineers.

On the flood fighting front, we heard the Corps is full steam ahead on the phase two HESCO barriers extending to more of the unprotected areas.

I'll be in communication with the city on how that's going and here to push the Army Corps in DC on that if needed.

On the emerging solution front, our task is to submit legislative language that the Alaska congressional delegation can push in the next biannual Army Corps authorization bill called the Water Resources Development Act or WERDA.

You might hear that acronym thrown around WERDA.

The language we submit, we seek to will seek to expedite the Army Corps' selected emerging solution to the GLOF, which has been determined as a lake tap after the December charette.

Related to the emerging solution, we'll also seek congressionally directed spending for the Army Corps to do the geotechnical work plus more design and planning funding.

Although we're hopeful that the Corps might have some money in their 2026 work plan to do some of this work.

If so, we'll just adjust our CDS request.

And we'll know about the work plan pretty soon.

The Worda bill is just an authorization bill authorizing core projects.

It is not a funding bill.

On a parallel track, we are laying the groundwork for construction funding.

We are targeting the next disaster supplemental appropriations bill for that whenever that may come.

The timing of that bill depends on other natural uh national disasters happening that year.

The key to getting in a disaster appropriations bill is being ready with language that checks all the boxes and fits in all the boxes and has many justification documents as possible at the time.

We'll be ready.

We'll be ready to arm our congressional delegation with this information so they can push it when the time comes.

Our FEMA meeting.

We met with the full team at FEMA, including the assistant administrator and the regional branch chief by phone.

They were in problem-solving mode at this meeting.

They promised to help Juno seek relief from that part of the NFIP standards with respect to permitting bank armoring to support the HESCO barriers and keep properties under the protection of the NFIP.

Our follow-up to FEMA is submitting our justification for seeking relief.

It sounds simple, but up until when we traveled to DC, we hadn't been hearing from FEMA on that issue, but we have their full attention now, and they're ready and willing to help.

With HUD, Housing and Urban Urban Development, our mission was to thank them for the CDBGIT grant, community development block grant, emerging imminent threat grant awarded to Klingant Haida for the HESCO barriers and to seek another if there is another round of that funding was available.

That answer is TBD.

Congress is on the cusp of pressing FYA of 26 appropriations bills.

And once we take a look at those, we'll have more clarity on that program and whether it's going to be funded.

At HUD, our mission was to get clarity on the CDBGDR, community development block grant disaster recovery funds that were allocated to the state.

And that, and we wanted to see clarity on whether those could be used on the HESCO and the pumps.

HUD seemed to agree with Juno that this would be one of the best uses of that HUD funding.

And HUD recommended making this case in the comments to the state action plan and copying HUD.

At the Forest Service, our mission was to ensure that the Forest Service would not hold up the NEPA process for the lake tap.

Well, this mission was largely accomplished.

The Forest Service said they'll be helpful and not stand the way of NEPA.

The follow-up to that is having the Army Corps headquarters folks reach out to the Forest Service, get together and discuss the NEPA strategy.

They have both have a shared goal of streamlining and expediting in when it comes to NEPA.

Those are some of the highlights of the most pressing issues and agency meetings.

Happy to answer any questions.

And that's it.

Yes, acronyms are crazy in Washington, DC.

And I have to admit, once you leave there, you forget them all.

Anyway, would you talk briefly about the WordA and why we're in such a rush to try and get some things done and have the right paper called the right name?

Right.

Well, the uh WordAs biannual and it's up now.

Um and Congress will be um, well, they're accepting Worda submissions right now.

And um Senator Sullivan has pushed the Army Corps to have documentation for the GLOF by May 2026.

And that's when they project Worta might be marked up in a Senate committee.

Um there's many bites at the apple throughout a Worta life cycle, um legislative lifecycle when it's introduced, when it's marked up, amendments are um made, but um we're gonna have to be a little fluid on the word of language because there's rules about um authorizing project construction without the proper documents and the term of art is chief's report.

And um, if you ask a committee staffer to authorize a project without a uh chiefs report, they will just close the door on you.

So um, and they also do not do contingent project authorizations.

So the strategy will be to um put in some placeholder language that says please expedite uh the Lake Tap project that the Army Corps of Engineers is already underway.

And then as the Army Corps uh studies and builds up the documentation throughout the life cycle of Warta, maybe by May 2026, they have a technical report that might satisfy the committees is gonna be key is gonna be convincing them that the technical cut technical report short of a chiefs report would be something that gives the committees comfort that this project has been studied and gives comfort to Congress to go ahead and authorize project construction.

But um, I'm thinking that May 2026, if word is stretches out to November, and by November, we have even more studies and documentation that can justify project construction, then we would be pumping that to the committee and hopefully we can get um project authorization in this round of WERTA.

Any questions from any of the members?

Adam Mayor.

Oh, sorry.

Oh, go ahead.

I was just gonna I do have a couple, but I also know our representatives are in a tighter time frame.

Can I pause?

Can I hold them till after we've heard from them?

Is that all right?

Okay, okay.

Thanks.

I'll just do that because I would like to hear from our state delegation.

Thank you.

Ms.

Wall, you want to ask your question because you have to leave?

Okay.

I got time.

Thank you, my mayor.

Um, you know our goals, both in terms of the enduring solution and and making it to that that point.

What do you see as kind of the biggest barriers right now, or will be the biggest barriers kind of down the road for us achieving those?

I think getting Warta legislation that the committee and members will accept will be one of the biggest challenges.

Um getting the language that we want now and not waiting for another Worta bill.

That's one of them.

Um I mean, I getting construction funding is it's not a guarantee.

Um, but in a disaster supplemental bill, I mean, what's built one billion when nationwide we're spending multiple billions?

Um, but you know, the there's no sense of when that next one might come.

Anything further?

Go ahead, Marshall Hannah.

Madam Mayor, uh, since it is your number one legislative capital priority to us, I guess I have a question, which is I'm more familiar with federal money of the state having to have a certain percentage of match in the word or process and authorization.

Is there a formula of match that needs to come from the state or local, or in this kind of project, could we get 100% funding?

I think well, our first position in negotiation is 100% federal.

Uh that's the position we're going in with.

And then second position would be 9010.

Um, but you know, the the default, I think is like 60 one of those.

So the default is not what we'll be seeking.

Any further questions?

And the reason, just so everybody knows that we flip-flopped this year is because we knew you guys were leaving early, but we knew that uh you probably want an update from our trip because that's pretty much our life right now as the Gloff.

So any further questions beside Mr.

Smith who's gonna wait on his question.

Since we're in the federal world, um, and Senator Sullivan got mentioned, we'll start with you, Ms.

Yukatel, if you want to add, and then we'll go to Gare.

Thank you.

Um and good morning.

I do have an update of the senators in 2020 priorities.

And uh following in on Ms.

Catchell's um report, he is um the Juneau flooding is uh definitely top of his list.

Um, continue leading the efforts towards a permanent solution to the glacial flooding and working on that uh language for the for the water bill that's coming up uh really soon.

So very focused on that.

Um also you know, working to authorize and secure the construction funding and continue engagement through meetings and hearings until a dura a durable solution is in place.

And he is very involved in um with the agencies in in this matter.

So Juno is definitely been top of his list.

Um following up on Juno issues is Coast Guard priorities.

Um he's supporting the deployment of the 300 million dollars secured for Juno shoreside infrastructure to home port uh Coast Guard Cutter stores.

Um, he's continuing to advocate for additional home porting of new icebreakers funding under the working families tax cuts act.

That's that's a long one.

Um, historic 25 billion dollar Coast Guard investment.

He um firmly states anywhere that um icebreakers should be where the ice is, and and that's Alaska.

So he is going also supporting the implementation of 4.4 billion dollars to repair docks, hangars, and shoreside facilities and replace aging infrastructures, and those funds are going to help address the Coast Guard's nationwide infrastructure backlog as found in many Alaska's coastal communities like like Juno.

Continuing on, he's got eight act priorities, and that is continue efforts to reopen ADAC Naval Base as a strategic Arctic asset and supporting the implementation of 115 million funded through the working families tax cuts act that provided for Arctic infrastructure exploration and redevelopment.

He's got um port of known priorities, and and this is something that the uh his office was very successful in securing a 9010 cost share in the warda.

So that is um gives me hope for the Juno project for the GLOF project.

He has Alaska Island G priorities, and um he is continuing with the um incredible progress of the administration with the day one executive order and the CRA is opening up Anwar Cook Inlet and NPRA.

Initial investment in missile defense, support multi-year procurement of interceptors and missile systems, encourage continued investment in Alaska radar intercepts and testing sites, and reinforce Alaska's role as the backbone of US missile defense.

Rural health support rollout of Alaska's 1.4 billion allocation from the rural health transformation fund.

And that'll be significant for us here in Juneau with Bartlett and um search.

Prioritize rural access clinic and hospital and modernization, telehealth expansion, and work for development and work with the state partners to reduce Medicaid application backlogs.

And lastly, um tourism visit USA.

So a few years ago, Congress passed his bill, the Visit America Act, which is intended to strengthen domestic tourism by creating a new role in the Department of Commerce, the Assistant Secretary of Travel and Tourism.

And uh this bill sets visitation goals, requires requires whole government strategies to ensure the visitation goals are met and interagency coordination to support tourism in the United States.

Thank you.

And um, if you have any questions, I can try to answer them.

Umswell.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um thank you for being here.

You know, it's not lost on us that the reason we've had so much success moving forward on a GLOF solution is because of the support of our delegation.

It are there things that we in Juneau can do to help Senator Sullivan continue to be such a champion for action.

The partnership between the city and uh the delegation's office is incredible, is very strong.

And uh that's what we continue to hope to see that working together, you know, developing the language that's necessary to move forward this project.

So let's continue doing what we're doing.

Thank you.

Anything further?

Okay, Ms.

Hall.

Hollitz.

Sorry, can't say your name right.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Uh, like Senator Sullivan, Senator Markowski uh certainly has uh solutions to the Gloff for Juno as a priority and home porting of the stores icebreaker in Juneau as a priority.

Additional priorities include uh passing appropriation bills to avoid a partial government shutdown.

As many of you probably are aware, the federal government is only funded through January 30th, and the Senate still needs to pass six of the 12 regular appropriations bills for fiscal year 2026 to avoid a partial shutdown starting on that date.

The good news is there is genuine progress on that front.

Appropriation bills are actually moving.

Last week, Senator Markowski secured a wide range of Alaska priorities and policy wins in the Interior Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Bill, which she wrote.

This included 1.5 million and new funding for USGS to support the development of engineering solutions to enhance glacial outburst monitoring and flood risk mitigation within the National Forest.

The Commerce Justice and Science Bill passed and the Energy and Water Development Bill, which included 200,000 for Ok Bay navigation improvements.

We expect this latest appropriations mini boss, HR6938, to be signed into law very soon, and for the Senate to take up additional appropriation bills after returning from this week's recess.

As a senior appropriator, Senator Markowski is very involved in shaping and passing all of these bills and will be turning her attention to the FY 2027 process soon.

Another priority is finding a path forward on health care.

Senator Murkowski negotiated substantial funding for for Alaska under the Rural Health Fund, which you've likely read about and Maria spoke about.

She held out on budget reconciliation until that fund was doubled, and Alaska was assured more than almost anyone else.

But that's hardly the only issue in healthcare right now, as many of you probably aware.

For over a year, Senator Markowski has been trying to avert a healthcare crisis for millions of Americans and thousands of Alaska's Alaskans through a short-term extension of the so-called enhanced premium tax credits for those who purchase their coverage through the Affordable Care Act.

Right now, many of our friends and neighbors are facing staggering increases in their health care costs, and enrollment has already dropped by more than 3,000 in our state.

This has been a tough debate, and the window is closing.

But Senator Murkowski hasn't given up hope that Congress can reach a bipartisan compromise.

She has put a good proposal on the table, and even the House passed a bipartisan bill.

So she will keep doing everything she can to make sure Alaskans aren't harmed by federal inaction.

Permitting reform is another major priority for Senator Murkowski.

There are several bipartisan bills in the works, including on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee that she serves on.

And it's crucial to her to push these across the finish line.

She wants to get past the administration's war on wind and solar energy, which is now holding permitting reform back.

She's introduced legislation to expedite the permitting of hydropower projects and recognizes how important reforms are for Alaska.

She's also focused on a robust agenda at the Indian Affairs Committee, which she chairs, hazard bills related to earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, and landslides, affordability from housing to groceries to energy and health care, sanctions on Russia over its war in Ukraine as opposed to tariffs on our partners in Europe, collaboration and respect for Greenland, which is, as she says, an ally, not an asset.

This is not an exhaustive list if you know my best.

That is very true.

But it will give you a sense of some of the things she'll be working on this year.

As a side note, Senator Murkowski won't be giving her annual address to the Alaska State Legislature in February.

That will be a little later this year.

So stay tuned for a specific date.

Thank you.

Any questions for Ms.

Hollitz.

Seeing none, I'm going to come back to you, Ms.

Ketchell.

Because Senator Sullivan, of course, has been the strong this the one that's making it happen to have the store as home port in Juneau, and we met with the Coast Guard.

Do you want to give a brief rundown on that visit?

Sure.

We met with many folks from the Coast Guard involved with many different aspects of the home porting, looking at the redevelopment of the wharf, uh the vessel itself, power and housing.

Um they are going forward with a request for information to understand the housing in Juneau and to seek developers who might participate in helping create housing for Coast Guard members that would be brought in with the stores.

Um we uh will continue to work with Senator Sullivan's office to follow up on them with that and just make sure they're not being too bureaucratic and too slow moving.

Um, because we we sense the urgency.

We want them to feel the sense of urgency.

Housing is a requirement of home porting.

Um, and we need to make sure that they're using the resources that they've been given to um to accomplish that.

All right, anything further for our federal side.

I just want to do a quick shout out for Ms.

Ketchell.

People were shocked that we had the level of meetings that we had.

In fact, when we went to HUD, we met with the assistant secretary, and he was getting introduced to the staff in the room because they hadn't met him.

But little old General Alaska got to meet with them.

So he was very helpful too.

And uh, of course, we you know that we brought members of the tribe, including President Peterson and in HUD, uh Jackie Peta is royalty.

So she was very good to lead with that name.

So with that, we'll go to our state delegation.

Uh Senator Keel, we usually start with you, but I'm not today because the ladies have to leave.

So they can choose which one goes first.

Rock, paper, scissors.

Um, I'm drawing the short straw because I sit on finance and we are short of money in this state, um, short of money to meet our needs.

Um it is a dire fiscal situation.

You know, for a long time we've used the term of will we reaching a fiscal cliff.

And I'm gonna um Senator Giesel has been using the phrase, we are falling down the fiscal cliff, and the anvil is about to hit the road.

So um that is the dilemma before us.

The proposed budget from the governor is you know, one and a half billion dollars from savings or such for the last several budget cycles.

Of course, we've been able to not draw from savings by reducing a PFD to Alaskans to a thousand.

And our initial overview from the legislative finance says even if you did that, you still can't balance the books.

And that's with no increases anywhere.

Um, and as most communities know, communities continue to have demands that aren't being met.

Um, one of the places in the budget where there's a whole is community assistance.

Um, so right now is the governor's proposed budget, and and you know, there's this waterfall and back, so we don't have the money in the fund to give the allocation that we gave last year, and there's no proposal currently to fill it to give it.

So uh there's also it appears right now, no money for school maintenance, deferred maintenance, uh, let alone new capital projects, which we know there's a lot of.

The other place last year we did fund uh the operating budget was funded in the disaster relief funds at the five-year average, and as a community that has seen the average doesn't meet our needs, and we are not expecting fewer disasters in Alaska in the next five years.

And the cost of responding to disasters is I don't know that exponential is a truly met.

I don't know that it truly is an exponential growth, but it is a substantially steep curve of growth in the cost to respond to disasters.

Um, as this you know community knows from December, the disaster fund was already at zero.

Uh there so we are in a tough financial situation in Alaska.

Um the governor is giving a state of the state address this evening, and the the word on the street is that we'll include a sales tax statewide with a seasonal variation in it.

Um of course, in any community that already has a sales tax.

Uh we know that previously a concern was that drives business away to communities that have lower sales tax or don't have sales tax.

And as you know, as local government, we just had a response from voters on a seasonal sales tax variation.

So I know that this community isn't excited about that.

Um I remain an advocate for an income tax.

Um, I think it captures a lot of money from folks that one can afford it and it's less regressive, and two, a lot of folks whose income is already being taxed in other jurisdictions.

They, you know, most states' tax code say if you're earning wages in another location, are you paying taxes on that?

And when they earn them in Alaska and they're not paying taxes, they're paying it to their home state.

That kind of ties into an issue that this morning we will be having a joint session on a veto override of Senate Bill 113, which is a joining the national tax on apportioning digitized businesses.

So your Netflix subscription as an example.

And again, um Netflix is paying that tax in California because Alaska doesn't pay it for its share of consumers of Netflix in Alaska.

And I voted for that bill.

I'll be voting for the override of that bill because again, I think that's a tax that doesn't, it doesn't change what the consumer in Alaska is paying because the company they're paying a tax to is already paying that tax.

They're just paying it to a different state because Alaska does not participate in that digitized digitized apportionment.

Um I could go into personal legislation, but I'm gonna skip that.

Uh actually, I guess I'm gonna just mention one note.

Um I have introduced House Bill 242.

Many Junewites are fully aware of a sexual assault case that was a prosecuted last summer.

And uh when we modernize some consent statutes around sexual assault in Alaska three years ago, one of the areas that we did not modernize was in medical providers.

And because of that, the word knowing and unknowing, there were some of the charges against the chiropractor in that case had to be dismissed because a victim knew and froze at the time of the assault.

And I think that it's a bill that we should be able to get passed because there's not broad policy dissent about prosecuting medical providers who are committing sexual assault.

And as we've modernized sexual assault consent statutes, the idea that people freeze in fear or is now understood.

So even if you didn't fight back, um it shall should still be prosecutable.

So I am hoping that we will have the support of both prosecutors as well as victims and be able to clear that up.

Um, of course, that won't resolve it.

That practitioner, you can't go back and ex post facto prosecute them, but we want to make sure that now that we know that that's something in law that there's really little dispute that that is an error.

Um, and it's not something that was overtly set out by lawmakers to do.

It's one of those that as laws evolve and you become aware this is not what we mean by that.

We need to modernize it.

Um with that, I'll turn it over to my colleague.

Uh, thank you, Reb Hannon.

Uh, good to be here today.

Uh, in a time of tight budget um in the state, uh we firmly believe we can move forward with some good policy.

Um, I wanted to talk a little bit about that, but I wanted to first say we do want to get an appropriation uh going right away for our state construction projects that was a state supplemental.

I should say uh that was vetoed uh last uh summer.

And as you know, the state pays uh about 70 million, 10%, and then we get nine times that.

And so we really want that to get over the floor soon so we don't lose the summer season across Alaska with our projects.

So that is a priority.

Also on that house supplemental, we are looking to um fund our Alaska performance scholarships.

I wanted to say, you know, we all go to Southeast Conference, and their number one priorities we look at as our priorities too, which is I think this year it was housing, uh keeping up first keeping our young people here, then housing.

I know transportation was there, and I don't know why I'm forgetting the third one.

Um but so uh as far as keeping our young people here.

We modernized the Alaska Performance Scholarship uh last year, and we we had tremendous response of our graduating um high school students who took advantage of that.

If you do a certain curriculum that you can uh go in state pretty much with your tuition uh paid for, there's three levels, it's based on uh your GPA and your curriculum that you take.

But last year um we did not have a we um used uh 100 million from that higher education investment fund that pays the Alaska Performance Scholarship, and we used 100 million from ADA, the governor vetoed the money from ADA and took it all from uh the higher education investment fund.

So it's a real priority that that's replenished.

And then also that there is money to make sure what we take from the higher education investment fund, the earnings from that re support all the programs.

And we all added in that fund of paying for our doctors that we don't have a medical program.

And so we fund that formula out of the higher education investment fund.

So again, uh we know when kids stay in state, we want we got your back with funding the Alaska Performance Scholarship because if they go out of state, we only get like 40% of them back.

And so that's a priority for us.

Um again, I want to emphasize thanks to all the public um input across the state.

We got a permanent BSA increase last year, 700 million.

And so that has helped uh smooth things for um our uh communities and our school districts.

Um, but I want to say that, you know, that was we did one-time funding of 680, 680 million per student the year before.

So it was a 20 increase, but it was permanent.

So we don't, the school districts don't have to say they don't have it.

But um, we're aware of that fact.

We still know there's big needs.

We are um planning on uh advocating very strongly together for an inflationary adjustment to that.

Um I wanted to say that I have a bill that I wanted to talk about, and that is uh House Bill 261.

And I'll back up another step.

Senator Keel and I have the honor of sitting on a task force that was put together of funding for um education.

And so we have a meeting on Friday.

We're looking at certain reforms, and we will make a recommendation to the whole body next the first day of session next next year.

And uh so we're looking at policy reforms and the topics.

We have a schedule.

I'll make sure you guys are aware of what the schedule is.

And this week we're looking at um chronic absenteeism, we're looking at open enrollment, uh just some some issues, and we're doing a deeper dive, and we'll be taking up deferred maintenance at one date.

We'll be taking up insurance reforms.

Is there some way we can have some efficiencies with insurance pooling?

What does that look like?

So again, here are some, we're in a tight budget situation, but we are not stopping.

We are moving, we are looking at efficiencies and looking at things to do.

Uh, one thing I would really like to see pass as part of the reform is this House Bill 261, which is we will do how we fund schools differently.

Um, and how we will do that.

And this is nothing I invented.

Part of being on the task force, we have to reread a lot of past task force uh recommend or recommendations on funding and augamblick pay list and associates recommended in 2015 that the state of Alaska switch to three year averaging and fund your schools from the prior three years of the student count, the average, or you can take the last prior year, whichever is greater.

So if you're a growing school district, you could take your prior year, or otherwise you take an average.

And most school districts for many, many reasons across the strait are uh declining in enrollment, and this is kind of a smoothing.

And so that um, and there's some other components of that bill, but you guys know the cycle.

You know how every year we start projecting our budget comes to the community, they say what they want to do and cuts and it comes to you, and then we fund, you know, in May or June, and you got to go back and all redo it.

We're not paying attention to school achievement, we're paying attention to redoing budgets.

But the most one of the most important things is we cannot do our staff contracts.

We cannot do them till you know May or whatever.

And we're in a competition nationwide for teachers.

We know effectiveness of our teachers is maintaining them and recruiting them.

And we, if here when they're like, are they gonna be able to fund us?

Are we gonna get a pink slip?

I mean, it's just craziness.

And so we want to smooth that.

We want to know, have parents know you can have confidence that we're you know supporting education in here, and we've got a funding plan that finally works with our cycle.

Uh so um, I wanted to say I have a bill also on housing.

I um the Coast Guard, um, I know we've needed housing, it's the number one thing, and it's with ADA, and it's that they will uh loan developers monies to build workforce housing of five dwelling units or more, and that is in-house rules.

I'm hoping that moves.

I've talked to Senator Dunbar.

He has the companion bill.

He wants me to keep it going and let's keep this going.

So there's there's things that we are really trying to work on.

I did want to say uh public employees, so important.

We had a salary study last year.

We have some adjustments in the budget.

That's one thing we're increasing is for salary studies, but we're we're short.

Um, and so pension reform is big.

That's a part of keeping employees.

But I think uh we really need to um part of pension reform is you have to make you need your pension, but you need to make sure you're paying your employees, so they will stay here.

And the last thing I'll say about that is we have been having high error rates with our supplemental uh nutritional uh policies.

And thanks to Senator Murkowski, we have a couple more years when you have a high rate to get that smooth.

So we're not making those higher rates because then you have to pay more and you lose money, and that's a part of uh staff is working hard, but they have a lot of hard work to do, and we've had a lot of turnovers, so then it's really losing.

So we need to have um policies in place that maintain um and support our staff.

Uh so anyway, I will end it at that.

Thank you, Senator.

Thank you, madam.

Thank you, Madam Mayor and members of the assembly, and uh what a privilege to be here.

Uh one of the great things about having a high functioning delegation uh and working with people smarter than you is that there's not a lot to do when you bat cleanup.

Um that's probably good because I'm uh muffling my words through this mask.

I woke up this morning with a head cold.

I apologize.

Um, let me start uh uh with just a couple of thank yous.

I want to thank um the city and borough of Juneau uh for the work that the city and borough does every year to welcome the legislature.

Part of that comes through the Alaska Committee, part of that comes directly through the work of city agencies and staff on uh the areas that legislatures frequent and making sure that we are a welcoming capital city and people have a positive experience here.

Um of course, another part of that is Gavel.

So uh thanks to all of you because uh it's working.

Uh the other thank you I want to start off with is to our United States Senate delegation and their staff here in the room today.

Um, our U.S.

senators are remarkably responsive, and they have top-tier staff in the Capitol City.

It's you know, I've been through a lot of years working with or alongside them at various times and their predecessors.

God, these two are good.

Um seriously, uh and and political differences on issue by issue aside at federal policy.

Um, both our U.S.

senators have been responsive to Juno's needs, uh, and it makes a big difference in the work that we do at the state level.

Um so then I'll just talk a little bit about the session to come.

Um, and I don't have to do much in the way of details uh because my colleagues covered it.

Generally speaking, I want to talk about tone and prospects.

Um both the House and the Senate are headed up by bipartisan coalitions or multi-partisan coalitions in the House's case once again.

And I I think the general tone I'm detecting going in is that everybody is ready to work.

And the veto overrides at the end of the regular session last year, or rather, excuse me, in the in the uh special session this summer showed the legislature and showed Alaskans that when um enough Alaskans are upset enough about a thing, the legislature does what they want, regardless of ITO.

Um, and and so you have a legislature that um I don't know is feeling its oats, but is feeling functional and ready to work and capable of working.

And that is a political tone that can be highly productive.

Lest I get Pollyanna-ish.

Um we have the same governor, uh, and it is very difficult to negotiate.

The best way to function is to negotiate and find outcomes that work for everybody.

There hasn't been a lot of success with that uh in the last several years.

Um, and and you know, that's a negotiation uh is never the success or failure of any one party, but it hadn't worked great.

And I don't know that there's a lot of hope for that dynamic to change.

Um, we will once again do our very best to get work done to collaborate with the third floor.

Um, but it's a reality check uh on the the willingness and the readiness of the legislature to do the work of governing.

Um that leads to some concerns.

The two representatives laid out the budget issues.

When you include the formula adjustments that are coming and the supplementals that are coming, I mean, we're probably looking at a governor's budget proposal that would take 1.8, maybe 1.9 billion dollars from our savings, which come, I think to just shy of 3.4 billion.

That's not gonna work.

So you can balance that um in recent history with a PFD check of something like 600 bucks, order of magnitude.

That's too low for a lot of legislators.

This is the collision that you see coming toward us at the end of the session.

If we don't have some level of additional revenues to stabilize our government work and programs like the PFD, I don't think anybody is talking about the PFD increasing to historic levels.

There is discussion about whether to stabilize it or whether that's the one thing we continue to cut in large scale.

The governor's budget, as the representative alluded to, does not invest in any significant ways in fixing broken things in state government.

There was reference to our very, very high error rates and low processing speeds in some of the uh partially federally funded assistance programs to help people get back on their feet.

Um we are the worst in the nation.

And we don't see any proposals from the executive branch to improve those.

So the legislature will take that up and do what we can because ultimately the plumbing's gotta work.

We have to have a functional executive branch doing stuff that needs doing.

Um so those issues are uh usually deadly boring.

Um we all started out with alphabet soup for breakfast here uh of government acronyms.

Um, and that's always the best way to get the public to just shut off their brains and switch over to social media feeds.

Simple fact is if we don't do it, it doesn't happen and stuff breaks.

So um big challenges.

The the other one I will I will speak to is uh the capital budget.

Uh you heard my colleagues mention that there is no proposal to invest in major maintenance of Alaska schools, no proposal to invest in the huge backlog of deferred maintenance in the university system.

There's no proposal for any maintenance for the court system.

There is a uh an amount for the executive branch buildings um that is minuscule compared to the need, although it's not zero.

So, you know, let's call that a win.

Um there's barely enough there to match the federal transportation money and a couple of other federal programs.

Um frankly, I don't have a lot of hope for that number going up much.

The one prospect I see is the possibility um of a bond package, a general obligation bond that would go to the voters statewide in November.

That is not universally endorsed.

That will be a difficult discussion to have.

I will say I support it.

We have not placed a general obligation bond in front of Alaska voters since 2012.

Alaska voters have not turned one down since statehood.

That does not mean we should use all of our bond capacity at one go, because that's how you get the voters to turn it down.

Um, but a reasonable and responsible use of our debt capacity with a very good credit rating right now, um, can keep the construction industry working, can address some of our major maintenance backlogs and some of our public infrastructure needs.

That's gonna be my pitch.

We'll see how it sells with uh you know the rest of the the House and Senate.

Um, with that, I will stop uh, I think uh talking and we'll get to your questions, leaving uh a little time because I know the representatives have to go before before I do.

All right, with that uh any questions and um also for the delegation, you have our legislative priorities, which uh thank you, Senator Keel.

We're very hopeful we're gonna get them all.

If you guys have questions on any of those, please let us know.

So, questions for the delegation.

Quiet crowd.

Mr.

Smith.

Well, you'll love this because it's not so much of a question.

Um I guess uh the thing I just want I wanted to, well, I mean, I do have a question in there, and you know, that we have needs that are supported by the state budget when it comes to mind, prosecutorial capacity, our police do a good job, catching the person, building the case, then it gets dropped.

But we we heard of the math problem, and I know you're balancing a lot of different priorities.

You're aware of the ones that are important, I mean, to me, and I think to our community, child care, housing, public safety education.

Anyway, you you know those priorities, you work for those.

Um, and it is yeah, uh a math game.

I guess just one thing I would, you know, ask is if there are we do run into some issues with, I mean, there's unfunded mandates, of course, but there's also sometimes mandates that prohibit us from doing things that we would like to do, and I think would make sense.

For instance, I know there's some prohibitions on, I'm gonna call them blighted properties.

That might not be the right term.

Um, but I know in some cases our hands are tied on being able to drive some change at these buildings that are, you know, a black hole of economic activity.

Um, and then we also, of course, have some voluntary tax exemptions that are more required.

But anyway, um just if there are those things, you know, we can let you know if they're if we need help.

But um, just allowing us and keeping our flexibility in mind, we would appreciate.

So um thank you.

Ms.

Hughes Candies.

Let me resorcate thank you, madam mayor.

Um, I can't remember the bill number right now, but Senator Dunbar has a bill that in essence it's designed around anchorage, some blighted properties tax relief, and uh ask you to look at that and see if it meets the needs that you're expressing, or whether we should have some amendments made in the Senate to that bill so that it would.

Um and I know there was also in that, I think it's in the same bill for uh trailer parks are an area that there's some idea of getting some ability to have local governments have control or direct owners to provide certain standards of maintenance, sewage, etc., water access.

Um we're not alone in that.

And if a statutory change is required, let's make sure that what we need for our ordinances to be flexible for us to be responsive to deal with polighted properties and get them into productive usable and therefore taxable, but you know, in many cases, making them economically viable properties for our community that we're crafting a solution that works for us, not just Anchorage, because sometimes, yeah, you know, we're different than Anchorage, but um, they have uh much different zoning and ordinances, but uh let's make sure that bill, if it's viable, has solutions that work for us.

Thank you.

We'll put Mr.

Smith and Ms.

Wright on that.

Ms.

Hughes Candies.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

And thank you to all of you for being here.

Um just wrap it all into one.

Thank you also, um, Representative Hannon for some of your personal legislation.

I was excited by some of that.

Um staying on housing for a second.

I am very excited about that bill.

I think it accomplishes a lot of what we were trying to do in the past.

Happy to follow up with you offline on that.

But um, I would be, I think we can't without speaking for all of us that I'm very supportive of that.

Um, similarly supportive of uh push to ADA for developing housing, uh, and would even bring up the uh AHFC um looking at a portion to housing or even a portion to HAP for those plus up grants.

So um appreciate all of the focus that you keep on housing, which you all already do, but would encourage you on some of those particular things.

Um I guess what I love to hear a comment on.

Um you already mentioned the sales tax, and that's was something that was going around during the welcome uh greeting the other night.

So curious if you feel like there's any viability there.

Uh I know we are not the only community that would be harmed by that as a statewide approach.

Um, so just what your gut sense is at the beginning of I guess how that would be received.

Um, and then the other thing would be the rural health transformation.

Um really big opportunity, but also a really big undertaking.

Um wondering how the legislature can be supportive of that to the Department of Health who are already very busy at work.

Uh, any words of advice to how Juno could make the most of this opportunity, which I know we're already tracking at the staff level.

Thanks.

Who wants to answer those?

Senator Keel.

Ms.

Huscandies uh only asks easy questions ever.

Um so uh today, point blank.

Haven't seen anything in writing yet.

Sales tax doesn't have the votes.

Um can that change over the session?

You bet it can.

Um, how how is it gonna be structured?

How's it proposed to work?

Um, who gets to decide what's exempt in a community?

You know, I I never forget that some communities south of us here in Alaska um tax residential rent.

That's intolerable to me.

And Juno, of course, never has, and I'm pretty sure isn't gonna.

What's the state proposed to do and which one of us is gonna force to change or is it?

I couldn't tell you.

Um, on the other hand, um the state is in dire need of additional revenues.

So something's gonna have to give somewhere.

Uh and and that will be uh probably the great uh one of the great issues of the legislative session, since I don't think we're gonna spend a whole huge amount of time on a gas line.

There'll be talk, but yeah, I'll believe it when I see it.

Um the other question you asked was about the rural health transformation fund, which uh our congressional delegation representatives uh mentioned here.

Uh I'll give you the short answer.

Nobody understands it yet.

Nobody's sure what's in it yet.

And nobody's sure what the rules are yet.

That that's not a crack on anybody at all.

This thing came out of Congress fast, it came out of the administration uh equally fast by federal standards.

There's not that much guidance.

Um there's discussion about whether we're gonna have to change a bunch of other Alaska laws in order to get this money.

And nobody knows if that's uh will you please or thou shalt or else.

Um so we have a huge amount to understand yet about that.

Um, and I think as early as uh Juno and Southeast providers can be involved with the state's Department of Health and talking to our congressional delegation to make sure we all understand it, the better.

Um, it is a huge amount of money, and you can't spend it on programs.

So it's it's more questions than answers right now.

Ms.

Dorian.

Uh, thank you, madam.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Uh, I would just like to add that with uh rural health trans um health care funds, transformation transformation funds.

It's supposed to be for things that are transformative, it cannot be for replacing operations.

Um, and of course, as that sinks in for people, we have a whole bunch of needs out there for our um deferred maintenance for hospitals and you know, just tremendous amount.

So, and it has to be for things that are transformative, not for operations.

Um, we're very much aware of not having the details lined up.

And I wanted to just mention that Genevieve Mina, who runs the House uh Health and Social Services Committee, they will be looking into that, we'll be following it, and um that's what we really need to do because there is a tremendous, there are opportunities in that, and we want to make sure we're poised to do them.

Uh, things like infant learning program, we'd love to expand that, but it can't be for operations.

But infant learning can uh train staff to know how to bill to do certain billing for federal dollars, and that can help them put things into line.

So it can do some things to help where we want to get to, but it can't be operations.

Representative Hanneman.

Um I've only participated in one uh briefing, but Commissioner Hedberg and Emily Ritchie of the Department of Uh Health and Human Services is you know, at the lead for that.

And one of the examples when we were briefed, um, and we talked about so transformable transforming health like nutrition, food is medicine, and then the example she gave, but we can't buy food, but we could buy seeds.

Now, um, in rural communities, uh, you know, because I and I had asked her a question of things like the Juno Greens, you know, a hydropronic containerized grow in their first rendition before they had a building in a remote community that doesn't have good access to vegetables in the winter, and that's right.

Well, we probably can't buy the container um or the power, but we could perhaps buy the equipment for inside of it, but they're not absolutely sure.

They have a list of exclusions, but not inclusions on it, and they have many questions out.

But what she said was we know we can't buy food, but we could buy seeds.

So um looking at a variety of ways and the rapid deployment also, right?

We are already partly through the year, uh, the first year of it.

So um they'll probably be, you know, uh rapid frequently has fumbles when you move really fast.

So the expectation is we may make some missteps in the first year and learn over the five years that the money will be there.

But uh, we also don't want to create a funding cliff that you do something that can't sustain itself permanently.

All right.

Ms.

Hall.

Thank you, Madam Mayor, and thank you for being here.

Um, all of you.

Uh knowing that child care is a top priority at Southeast Conference and really across the state, is there any pending legislation to alleviate or to help support that as um particularly for paid family leave for the you know the newborn phase, the early early months, um, which is really hard to staff in child care centers.

Uh thank you for that question.

Um, assemblymember Hall.

Uh yes, very much so there we do have um an unemployment insurance reform and paid um parental leave as part of that.

And that Carolyn Hall is carrying that bill, uh, House Bill 193, and it actually has four parts to it.

They're really exciting.

But one of them is just increasing workmen's comp benefits that haven't been increased in a long time for employees when they are not working.

And so that is good.

Um it has more money for our state's training and empowerment program.

Uh, so that goes to getting more workers out there that are trained, and it cuts employer insurance taxes by 20%.

So that is really a win for the employers.

And so that bill I'm hoping gets some really good traction this year.

Um yes, and then I just wanted to mention the good thing last year was um in the Department of Health, they put into uh their child care assistance program into the base, how they increase the amount of money parents could be making to qualify for that.

So that is a really good thing that's happening.

Um it's a priority for uh across the state of Alaska.

So thanks for asking that.

Mr.

Burks.

Thank you.

Uh I know that there's been uh discussions as far as you know, potential funding sources related to the seasonal sales tax or the LNG project, but I was just curious if uh any of you know of um, you know, anyone else that might be uh batting around ideas of ways to bolster existing revenue sources or you know, creating new ones that are kind of outside of those two big talking points right now.

So daquila, you're gonna tackle that one.

Um thank you.

The the biggest uh biggest source of revenue um that we have right now, aside from the sustainable draw on the earnings of the permanent fund are the ways we get money from Alaska's oil.

Um and there are a number of proposals out there that would make adjustments in the state's oil taxes.

Uh they range from uh very, very small to stupidly large.

Uh not that I have opinions about this.

Um and the simple fact is that uh, well, fact my uh my take from my assessment is that there are uh at current very low oil prices a couple hundred million dollars a year, and at higher oil prices several hundred million dollars a year that Alaskans could get from our oil that we're having the producers take without materially changing their economics, without materially changing their investment decisions.

The industry will tell you I am wrong about that, just to be up front.

Um and so as we look at revenue packages, I definitely think that some additional value for Alaska's oil to the Alaska side of the table instead of the producer side of the table, um, is entirely appropriate.

And frankly, the vote counts are as closer, closer on that than they are in a sales tax right now.

Um, so that will be part of the conversation.

I can't tell you what's going to be part of the solution.

Um the additional production that is coming fast from the North Slope um will pay effectively no uh production tax.

No, there'd be royalty from the stuff on state land.

We don't get any royalty off of federal land.

So uh the willow project on federal land.

Man, uh state's gonna make just about nothing from that for a long time, eventually.

The pick a project that's on state land, there'd be royalty from that quick, but no production tax for a long time.

So um additional production of oil with the tax regime we have now doesn't do a heck of a lot for the budget.

Sorry to say it, but that's those are adjustments I think we need to make to our oil taxes.

Um you look at the numbers, additional economic growth in almost any industry is a rounding error to the state budget.

That's a problem, but that's the case.

I'm going to uh remind you I have a very small, I've been sponsoring a small tax bill on vaped nicotine, all four of my terms.

Right now, the Senate vehicle is in because there's a Senate companion bill that's sponsored by Senator Gary Stevens.

It's in the Senate fine or House Finance.

So it's uh close to being passed before.

It's not a huge revenue generator, but tobacco and nicotine has huge costs to our state.

And the fact that the newest and fastest growing area of nicotine consumption is not taxed by the state.

We need the remedy.

It's not gonna fix our overall revenues.

Um there aren't many silver bullets.

Even a change in oil tax won't solve all our problems.

So I look and think we still need to modernize many of our smaller taxes, or in this case, implement a tax that doesn't exist on a product that has huge uh social costs, health costs to the state.

Um, so I'd urge your support of even small taxes make a difference in the long run.

Thank you for that.

And um, before the ladies have to leave, I just wanted to thank all of you for all your hard work.

And we truly appreciate the teamwork that we have between your offices and the city together.

We do well for Jenno.

So as you ladies have to sneak off, we understand.

And so we'll continue to grill, Senator Keel.

Uh any more questions before excuse me, madam mayor.

I really wanted to thank all of you, federal level here.

It's the um in our own city.

You guys have gotten above and beyond for the citizens here.

And we are very grateful in our offices that we know the team here is just so strong.

And uh thank you because it's been a really you know vulnerable time and a scary time economically and with your home values and just so much.

So thank you for conveying the message so well.

And um, we're very grateful.

Thank you, Representative Storm.

So all right.

Um seeing no brave souls.

Um, we'll go to uh our lobbyist, Kevin Jardell.

He thought I forgot it, but I didn't never think you forget me.

Uh thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um, assembly members, our delegation.

Um let me say first thank you.

I've had a long relationship with the city.

I appreciate it.

It's uh enjoyable to represent my own committee or my own community.

Um the delegation uh since I've represented you and even before that have always worked well together.

Um, they discuss everything, they coordinate, they coordinate with the city, they reach out to us and ask for our input.

And so we have a great relationship with them.

They do a great job for our community.

And so I appreciate the work they do.

My Senator Keel uh mentioned it's easy to be cleanup, it's even easier to be the post-game commentator.

Um, you know, they've they've really hit on most of the topics, uh helping set the expectation.

Uh, one of the things is the priorities, you know.

You you've made your list, I've gone through them.

The X, you know, setting expectations is important.

There is no money.

And so while that's true, it's still very important to plan and to be prepared.

Uh things change.

Geopolitics changes.

Um, we've been through these tough times uh on several occasions in the past 27 years.

I worked around the building.

Uh sometimes geopolitics saves the state with a hundred dollar oil.

So you don't know what opportunities can come about in the future.

So your planning on your priorities is really important, communicating those to the delegation so that they can look for those unforeseen opportunities that may arise between now and May, um, where we can get something, second crossing money, whatever it is, we can look for those opportunities when we have that list.

So it's really important to still be prepared, uh, even though we need to set expectations of realistic expectations.

Um that said, a couple of items.

Uh I do think the defined benefit plan will pass the legislature.

That's my personal view of of where the votes are.

Um, I will not predict what the governor will do on it.

Uh I don't think if he does veto it, there's votes to override the veto.

Um, and if the veto comes up next year, there'll be a new set of legislators.

So uh hard to predict what that's what's going to happen there, but I do think do expect it to pass the legislature.

So that's a pretty significant policy change uh that that will happen this year.

Uh touching on the rural transformation uh project, I was kind of excited that no nobody had talked about it because I was gonna say, hey, there is a bright spot uh that there's 270 million dollars coming in over the next five years uh to really transform our health care.

Uh the commissioner and deputy commissioner have had several conversations with them.

They had a workshop last week.

I think 800 plus people were on the workshop.

Lots of vendors looking for how do they come into the state and get a piece of that 270 million?

Uh but also, but also a lot of people that want to put forward ideas uh on how to do health better in Alaska.

Uh one of the elements of that is workforce development.

Um you could see UAS, other things uh coming up with some ideas on how we can improve workforce development for our healthcare system.

Uh it's always difficult for finding jobs, uh, getting enough nurses, uh, really just across the board providers uh in rural areas.

So that's a bright spot.

Um it is a rushed process.

It's on a federal fiscal year, which means they have to spend this current federal fiscal year, I think by September.

And it you have to spend all your money in each fiscal year, you can't carry it over.

So the department is really looking for the provider groups, communities, hospitals to come forward with ideas.

They are not going to be able to generate those ideas themselves.

So they are really counting on Alaskans to come forward and say, here's a proposal, here's what we think it'll do, and here's how much you know funding we need.

Uh the other aspect I'll just mention is it's a five-year program.

Whatever you create needs to be sustainable without the federal funds, because in five years, it is very unlikely there's state funds to back up whatever you do.

So it needs to transform processes, transform how you do things, uh, make things uh better for patients or just in general health.

But uh don't expect though those funds to be backfilled.

On the budget, it is very difficult.

Um probably can get through.

There's a big supplemental this year, which will have to come from the constitutional budget reserve, which will it's about three billion.

So that decreases that next year's budget uh with a thousand RPFD is uh, you know, projections, which are always dangerous, uh forecasts.

Um it's it's the sky's not falling next year, but if the forecasts come in worse than what they're forecasting now, it can get really bad really fast.

And you can run through your savings very quickly.

So the the concerns are real and you know, another little bright spot.

If you look at the forecasts, it's really about a five-year major problem.

And then there's some possible light at the end of that tunnel where some new revenues are coming in and prices are up and things may get better.

But over the next five years, uh, it's gonna be a very challenging time for the state.

Um I don't see any excitement for the sales tax right now, but I do think that uh the discussion if if if the governor does introduce it, uh it will be a very healthy and needed discussion over is a sales tax right, that will lead to discussions over if not what is.

And you know, whether they get there this year or not, uh, I think it's gonna be a real foundational discussion on what is the state gonna do to address its fiscal issues.

And so in that vein, I think it's gonna be very healthy for the state.

Um, I think it's be very hard to get a sales tax passed.

Uh, I expect the governor's bill to have virtually no exemptions.

Uh so everybody pays it, no caps.

And you know, that that has very challenging uh uh issues with that.

Um, but again, the problems are real.

And you know, if if the governor puts forward a plan, it's good that he put forward a plan.

And that that discussion will happen and we'll see where it goes.

But you should you should be expecting some really lean years.

And with that, Madam Mayor, thank you, Mr.

Jaredell.

Uh, any questions?

I have a quick question, um, which we just haven't touched on.

I think I know the answer to this, but um, and neither one of you can answer it.

Um, the sales tax we don't think is uh possible that it's gonna go forward, but I'm assuming the same thing would be for an income tax.

Just can't find support.

Always defer to the senator.

Yeah, just can't find enough support for either one of them.

As of today, I don't think either one has the votes and from different people.

Yeah, right.

And and yet at some point the math's gonna have to work.

Here's here's the fascinating trick.

We could we talk about the savings and what the draw rate on the savings would be, but that's in the constitutional budget reserve.

To get in there, you need a three quarter vote separately in the House and in the Senate.

It's not like a veto override, put us all in a room and count.

It's 15 or more in the Senate, 30 or more in the House.

Uh that's that's tough.

So um if you can't get into the savings, you're stuck sooner and you're stuck harder.

Um probably it's not this year or next year.

Um probably, as long as we can get into the savings.

Or we just zero the PFD.

Again, bad outcome.

Maybe easier outcome.

And probably shouldn't do this on anything that's ever going to be put on YouTube, but what the heck?

That takes the governor.

If the governor negotiates and works with and has his out tells his allies, we've worked out a budget, you should draw on savings for this.

Uh that can.

I'm not gonna guarantee it, but that can happen.

And if not, then a governor who campaigned twice on very large PFDs will be the one who kills it.

Um that's just math.

So we're gonna have to come to revenue for too long.

Um, like Representative Hannon, I think uh an income tax is the better choice for Alaskans.

Um will nobody's got the votes yet, and something's gonna give.

Uh Monsieur Scandis.

Thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um representative story mentioned already the there's a lot of work last year on education and BSA increase.

I'm just curious, and I don't know enough about it to really know this if this is a good question, appropriate question, or not.

But um, seeing uh lawsuit filed over adequacy, I'm wondering how that affects what people will be working on if it's um puts the spotlight back on education, or if you have anything to say about that.

Um sure.

Um let me start out.

I think um there was uh a verbal equivalent of a typo and uh representative talked about 700 million dollars or 700 ahead, right?

Costs about 180, 190 million dollars.

Um adequacy lawsuits take years.

The legislature uh is seldom moved to lurch into uh dramatic action by just the filing of one.

Um I I think we're probably have hit that point where the courts should start to give us some interpretations of what does the constitution require when it requires us to establish and maintain a system of public schools open to all students.

Um what what's good enough to satisfy that?

Are we there or have we slid below that?

But that's years out.

Um the fact is that as representative story said, we stopped school districts from yo-yo budgeting.

Um that's good, but the increase over the prior year um was really 0.3 percent.

Here's an oddity that few folks realize partly demographics, partly shifts in family choices.

Um, there are fewer kids in bricks and mortar schools, and so the total price tag um was about 26, maybe it was 23 million dollars less than the prior year.

Actual spend.

Um, a shrinking population of kids is not great for a state's demographic or long-term or economic future.

Um, that's not all kids leaving the state.

Some of them are leaving bricks and mortar.

Um, so uh it's complex.

I agree with my two colleagues that we ought to take care of inflation's effect on the buying power of a dollar, finding the dollars this year will be very difficult.

And just to add to that, I my experience is the same that unless the litigation and their advisors tell them you're going to lose.

But a lot of the policy discussions also have a price tag.

So it's just it's going to be tough.

Thank you for that.

And your staff at the table is giving you a hook to get out of here.

Thank you, Better Mayor.

My other staff on the telephone is saying the same thing.

I'm due on the floor in 16 minutes.

Okay.

Good luck.

So much we feel better.

Sorry, Mr.

Brooks.

Uh asked and ask your question.

Perhaps Mr.

Jardell can answer it.

Uh you know, it's related to the PFD.

I mean, and it definitely be a better, better question for Jesse, but he can he can hear it later.

Yeah.

Uh, but you know, my thought is as far as like preserving, you know, the financial abilities of the state with the PFD.

Do you think that discussions of um making an uh optional for residents to go for a land voucher to exclude themselves from it in the future?

Do you think that that would have any benefit to prolonging the life of the PFD or the financial abilities of the state, or how hard would it be to get support or implement something like that?

Mr.

Jardel.

Yeah, uh, thanks for the question.

Um just start with, you know, a thousand dollar PFD is roughly 700 million dollars.

And so, you know, you have a spending program that is fairly significant that does have some buffer room and that is if it's required, you can reduce it, you know, to 500 and you get 350 million.

Um, the voucher trying to change the system on how it's delivered to to residents is very difficult.

Uh people are very passionate about it.

Uh, I think it'd be very difficult to move a policy like that forward.

You would need the administration behind it, because to develop a policy like that for land, you would need the expertise of the department to really step in and help develop that to so it'd work.

I don't it'd be very difficult for a legislator to develop a policy that would actually work on a land voucher type system.

So, not commenting on whether it's a good idea or a bad idea.

Just I think it'd be very difficult without the executive branch really supporting the idea and helping develop it so it would actually work.

Mr.

Kelly.

Thank you.

And I think this question is probably best suited for Mr.

Jardell.

Um a lot of the um there's a lot of mental health needs in in Juneau, um, in the state, and they seem to fall um a lot of the burden on uh on working on those uh seems to fall on local governments, nonprofits, or perhaps a city-run hospital.

Um I am kind of uh so the mental health trust is funded funded in in a slightly different way.

Um I'm wondering um what sort of mechanisms are are in place to maybe see more uh more of the needs that are met by um by our community.

Um is there any way to address that uh with the um with the mental health trust or what what mechanisms are are available?

Yeah, so uh good question.

Uh the state over the last five years or so has put in uh a lot of money for behavioral health.

It's been one of their big topics.

Uh it comes up as a priority for the department in the rural health transformation project.

And so they are looking uh very hard at behavioral health and how to change the delivery, try to make it better, uh, more efficient, more effective.

But uh, and then uh let me just jump on the mental health trust.

Middle health trust is uh their own animal, they're very independent, they're they're independent, make their own decisions.

Um they chose to create a policy that they have pretty much stuck to that they don't want to create a program and maintain funding forever.

They want to fund things to start a program and then hand over the funding to the state.

And the current budget situation we have, that's very difficult.

Starting new programs and putting in new new money with the hope the state's going to backfill you in the later is extremely risky because there's just not much money there.

So the mental health trust could change their policies and fund things long term.

But they have traditionally not wanted to do that to preserve uh their own capital and their own funding.

So, you know, Medicaid puts a lot of money into uh mental uh behavioral health.

But uh outside of the entitlement programs, I don't see the state having the ability to really put more money out there.

I think people are going to be looking to the rural health transformation federal funding uh to try to see if we can't solve some of those issues.

Yeah.

Uh Ms.

Hall, and then we'll go to Mr.

Smith for his question for Ms.

Ketchell.

Uh thank you, Madam Mayor.

Um, and I I don't know if this is necessarily a qu well, it is a question.

Um, with the rural transformation funds, um prevention, you know, as a nurse, I know that prevention is way cheaper than than treating the disease down the road.

Is there any uh opportunity or thought that funds can be used for um, you know, that zero to three age group um home visiting programs, for instance, or um, you know, such as parents as teachers or nurse family partnership.

Yeah, I I can't answer that.

And part of it goes back to what Senator Kill mentioned.

Uh a lot of the rules are unknown.

So the federal program comes out, you get your funding notice, the state put in its application for the funds, it knows what it's going to receive.

But a lot of the rulemaking on, you know, what really are the sideboards of what you can't do and what you can do are yet to be known.

So it's a the speed of the program is making it very difficult to give people firm answers on.

Yes, that works or no, that doesn't.

There's certainly some things you can just look at and say, yeah, that's gonna fit, right?

We know workforce development.

If you're increasing providers or healthcare workers, that'll fit.

Uh if you're taking on behavioral health, that's gonna fit.

If you're taking on primary care, that's gonna fit.

But when you get outside of those obvious ones, it gets really difficult to give a firm answer until those rules come out from the federal agencies.

Thank you.

Mr.

Smith, thank you for being so patient.

Thank you, Madame Mayor.

I actually did have one from Mr.

Jardell.

Um, just knowing that you're, you know, interfacing with staff and legislators and members of the administration.

Um, I guess general sense on like how content they are with, you know, Juno is a welcoming capital city.

And then I guess if there are specifics that you're aware of that could make us more welcoming or, you know, improve the quality or enjoyment of their time in Juno.

Um, thanks.

Um it's something that the mayor uh spends a lot of time on and tasks me with keeping track of that.

So we we do walk arounds through the building and talk to people.

We'll be doing that soon.

Um, it's certainly nice that session started when it did and didn't start a month earlier.

I think everybody's happier.

Um, but the the general belief after a couple of days is that people are pretty satisfied right now.

Um, you know, there's always nits and gnats of complaints, but I think people people have been able to get housing.

The uh assembly building has been a huge help on the housing level.

Uh nothing but uh praise and appreciation, a lot of skepticism that it was gonna be a dorm type place and people were hesitant to go in there.

And after the first year, uh people were were signing up on the list wanting to get in there because of the positive experiences with it.

So that's been a huge improvement.

Uh I serve on the Alaska committee.

Uh we we constantly monitor this, we do polling, uh, we do things to try and gauge where do we need to go.

Uh several years ago, the local or the downtown uh crime problems were really raising to a crescendo.

Uh that's decreased significantly and through the help of the city's efforts.

So I'd say right now we're in good shape.

Um, but we try to stay on top of that and monitor it.

Go ahead.

If I may, yeah, I'll I'll I'll swing to maybe a more federal focused question.

Um Ketchell, thank you for all the work that you're doing on, you know, uh I mean a preeminent priority, which is the GLOF.

Um and then of course, you know, a lot of interesting things happening at the federal level.

I guess um, I I mean, knowing that you are interfacing with staff on all different types of federal issues.

Um, I guess anything you'd want us to be aware of in terms of things you're seeing on the horizon about, you know, like secure rural school funding, or you know, we had heard at one point of a possible change um for eligibility for you know low-income families for child care.

I guess anything on, you know, and all the other stuff that you'd want to flag for us to kind of be aware of.

Sure.

Um, I believe the the PILT program payment in lieu of taxes was funded in my appropriations bills.

I'm looking to um secure rural schools, I have to track that down.

Um, but you know, like our reps from the Senate offices said, the appropriations bills appear to be moving, um, which is a good thing for um getting the government operational and funding the programs.

Um one bill that I look a lot at in particular is the transportation and housing bill.

And um it was released at like five o'clock in the morning on Tuesday, and I don't even know what day or time zone I'm in right now, but um in a uh glancing at that bill, um the transportation programs were not really cut that much at all.

Um, so uh it's trending in a positive direction, and I'll be doing a deeper dive in the housing programs and reporting back.

Thank you.

Anything further?

Um, this is probably for our delegation and uh Ms.

Ketchell, it's really not a question, it's more of a statement or uh wondering.

Um Mr.

Um Pierre from Goldbelt spoke at Rotary yesterday, and he said there's quite a fight right now.

Um, as the federal administration is starting to look very harshly at Native Corporation um government contracts.

I'm just making sure that's on your radar because as we know, the uh native corporations are pretty helpful for Jinno.

So just making sure that we're they're both nodding at me, so they're must be on their radar.

All right, anything further for anybody?

And they'll certainly be here for a few minutes if you want to ask questions offline.

So with that, thank you all for coming in again.

Thank you for our delegation.

And we're sorry we have no one here from Representative Bega's office because he's also been very uh instrumental in helping us get things done.

So we didn't want to leave his office out, but they just didn't have anybody in town today.

So anyway, thank you, ladies and gentlemen, and thank you all for being here at 7 a.m.

We oh wait, do I have anything else?

Nope.

Staff, do I have anything else?

Okay, we're adjourned.