Latest news with #AlaskaIndustrialDevelopmentandExportAuthority
Yahoo
13-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Amid bleak state revenue forecast, Alaska Gov. Dunleavy vetoes millions in education funding
Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy talks to reporters during a news conference on Monday, May 19, 2025. (Photo by James Brooks/Alaska Beacon) Gov. Mike Dunleavy vetoed more than $122 million from Alaska's annual budget plan before signing it into law Thursday. The governor's vetoes fell heaviest on education, as Dunleavy eliminated more than $50 million from the state's per-student education funding formula and tens of millions intended for school maintenance. It's the first time in state history that a governor has failed to fully fund the education formula, a precedent-breaking act akin to former Gov. Bill Walker's decision in 2016 to veto part of the Permanent Fund dividend, which until then had been decided by a previously sacrosanct formula. Dunleavy also vetoed budget language designed to prevent excess spending from the state's Higher Education Investment Fund, which is ordinarily intended to pay for high school students' scholarships. The governor chose to take money from the fund rather than the reserves of the state's investment bank, the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority. The governor announced his vetoes without a news conference or lengthy statement, instead releasing a prerecorded video earlier on Thursday stating that the vetoes, which cover both the state's annual operating budget bill and the capital budget bill, were required by the state's fiscal situation. Oil prices have fallen significantly over the past year, leading to dwindling state revenue. The governor's vetoes relied on a new state revenue forecast unavailable to lawmakers when they drafted the budget. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
30-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion - Stop gambling taxpayer dollars on Arctic drilling delusions
Congress is once again floating the idea of using projected oil and gas revenues from leasing in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to offset rising deficits. But new lease sales in the Refuge aren't just a bad fiscal bet — they also threaten one of Alaska's most dependable economic engines: outdoor recreation. Last month, seven oil and gas leases covering more than 365,000 acres in the Arctic Refuge were reinstated to the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, a corporation that is state-owned and publicly funded but operates with incredibly limited legislative and public oversight — not an oil and gas company. Despite the political fanfare, this isn't a win for the industry or taxpayers; it's a clear reminder that private energy companies have higher priorities than the Arctic Refuge. The Arctic Refuge lease sale in 2021 drew just three bidders, with the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority accounting for 84 percent of leased acreage, all sold at the minimum price. The other two bidders eventually relinquished their leases. The most recent lease sale in January 2025 attracted zero bids, delivering precisely zero dollars to taxpayers. Banks such as JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs, along with leading insurers, refuse to support Arctic drilling. When the world's biggest financial players won't touch these projects, it's clear that Arctic drilling is a losing investment. But the risk isn't just financial — it's ecological and economic as well. The Arctic Refuge's coastal plain is not just a remote stretch of wilderness; it's a vital ecosystem owned by all Americans that sustains Alaskan livelihoods through hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation. Hunters and anglers rely on the Arctic Refuge's habitat, home to migrating caribou, nesting waterfowl, and fish species like Arctic char and Dolly Varden trout. This isn't empty land — it's an economic anchor for the region. Outdoor recreation provides stable jobs and reliable revenue for Alaskan communities. The most recent data highlights that outdoor recreation accounts for nearly 5 percent of Alaska's economy — it added more than $3 billion to the state economy in 2023 and supports 6 percent of Alaska's jobs. By pushing speculative oil leases, lawmakers are jeopardizing the reliable revenue that outdoor recreation generates for local communities and the country. Sacrificing one sector's proven economic gains for uncertain drilling prospects is fiscally irresponsible and shortsighted. Some in Congress, however, insist on using projected revenues from drilling in the Arctic Refuge to offset extending major provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which is set to expire soon. This effort perpetuates the fiction that new leasing in this critical fish and wildlife habitat can meaningfully reduce deficits. But the numbers don't lie. According to our detailed analysis of lease sales in Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve and North Slope region, federal revenues from future Arctic Refuge lease sales would likely amount to just $3 million to $30 million, even if all available acres are offered for sale. That's a pittance compared to the trillion-dollar deficit impact of extending the 2017 tax cuts. Taxpayers have seen this movie before — and it doesn't end well. We raised this alarm in 2017, warning that the promised $1.8 billion in Arctic Refuge auction revenues was wildly exaggerated. And we were right. The first lease sale brought in just $16.5 million — nearly all from the state-backed company at minimum bids. The second sale, in January 2025, generated nothing at all. Doubling down on these leases as a source of meaningful revenue isn't optimism — it's budgetary wishful thinking. Lawmakers must face reality: Revenue from lease sales in the Arctic Refuge aren't even a rounding error in budget reconciliation. Continuing to gamble taxpayer resources on speculative leases ignores economic facts and undermines proven, sustainable industries — like outdoor recreation — that create high-paying jobs for Alaskans. Leasing in the Arctic Refuge will not generate sizable revenue for taxpayers but will risk irreplaceable wildlife habitats that support an abundance of hunting and angling opportunities. Domestic oil and gas development and responsible stewardship of public lands don't have to be mutually exclusive. We can tap America's vast natural resources and generate meaningful returns for taxpayers while at the same time protecting public lands, wildlife habitats, and valuable outdoor recreation opportunities for generations to come. But banking on Arctic Refuge lease sale revenues to help pay for more tax cuts is as misguided now as it was in 2017. Back then, just eight years ago, the national debt stood at roughly $20 trillion. Today, it exceeds $36 trillion. Congress needs real budget solutions, not more fiscal delusions that threaten our public lands legacy. Steve Ellis is president of Taxpayers for Common Sense. Patrick Berry is president and CEO of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
The Hill
30-04-2025
- Business
- The Hill
Stop gambling taxpayer dollars on Arctic drilling delusions
Congress is once again floating the idea of using projected oil and gas revenues from leasing in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to offset rising deficits. But new lease sales in the Refuge aren't just a bad fiscal bet — they also threaten one of Alaska's most dependable economic engines: outdoor recreation. Last month, seven oil and gas leases covering more than 365,000 acres in the Arctic Refuge were reinstated to the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, a corporation that is state-owned and publicly funded but operates with incredibly limited legislative and public oversight — not an oil and gas company. Despite the political fanfare, this isn't a win for the industry or taxpayers; it's a clear reminder that private energy companies have higher priorities than the Arctic Refuge. The Arctic Refuge lease sale in 2021 drew just three bidders, with the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority accounting for 84 percent of leased acreage, all sold at the minimum price. The other two bidders eventually relinquished their leases. The most recent lease sale in January 2025 attracted zero bids, delivering precisely zero dollars to taxpayers. Banks such as JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs, along with leading insurers, refuse to support Arctic drilling. When the world's biggest financial players won't touch these projects, it's clear that Arctic drilling is a losing investment. But the risk isn't just financial — it's ecological and economic as well. The Arctic Refuge's coastal plain is not just a remote stretch of wilderness; it's a vital ecosystem owned by all Americans that sustains Alaskan livelihoods through hunting, fishing and outdoor recreation. Hunters and anglers rely on the Arctic Refuge's habitat, home to migrating caribou, nesting waterfowl, and fish species like Arctic char and Dolly Varden trout. This isn't empty land — it's an economic anchor for the region. Outdoor recreation provides stable jobs and reliable revenue for Alaskan communities. The most recent data highlights that outdoor recreation accounts for nearly 5 percent of Alaska's economy — it added more than $3 billion to the state economy in 2023 and supports 6 percent of Alaska's jobs. By pushing speculative oil leases, lawmakers are jeopardizing the reliable revenue that outdoor recreation generates for local communities and the country. Sacrificing one sector's proven economic gains for uncertain drilling prospects is fiscally irresponsible and shortsighted. Some in Congress, however, insist on using projected revenues from drilling in the Arctic Refuge to offset extending major provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which is set to expire soon. This effort perpetuates the fiction that new leasing in this critical fish and wildlife habitat can meaningfully reduce deficits. But the numbers don't lie. According to our detailed analysis of lease sales in Alaska's National Petroleum Reserve and North Slope region, federal revenues from future Arctic Refuge lease sales would likely amount to just $3 million to $30 million, even if all available acres are offered for sale. That's a pittance compared to the trillion-dollar deficit impact of extending the 2017 tax cuts. Taxpayers have seen this movie before — and it doesn't end well. We raised this alarm in 2017, warning that the promised $1.8 billion in Arctic Refuge auction revenues was wildly exaggerated. And we were right. The first lease sale brought in just $16.5 million — nearly all from the state-backed company at minimum bids. The second sale, in January 2025, generated nothing at all. Doubling down on these leases as a source of meaningful revenue isn't optimism — it's budgetary wishful thinking. Lawmakers must face reality: Revenue from lease sales in the Arctic Refuge aren't even a rounding error in budget reconciliation. Continuing to gamble taxpayer resources on speculative leases ignores economic facts and undermines proven, sustainable industries — like outdoor recreation — that create high-paying jobs for Alaskans. Leasing in the Arctic Refuge will not generate sizable revenue for taxpayers but will risk irreplaceable wildlife habitats that support an abundance of hunting and angling opportunities. Domestic oil and gas development and responsible stewardship of public lands don't have to be mutually exclusive. We can tap America's vast natural resources and generate meaningful returns for taxpayers while at the same time protecting public lands, wildlife habitats, and valuable outdoor recreation opportunities for generations to come. But banking on Arctic Refuge lease sale revenues to help pay for more tax cuts is as misguided now as it was in 2017. Back then, just eight years ago, the national debt stood at roughly $20 trillion. Today, it exceeds $36 trillion. Congress needs real budget solutions, not more fiscal delusions that threaten our public lands legacy. . Patrick Berry is president and CEO of Backcountry Hunters & Anglers.
CBC
26-03-2025
- Business
- CBC
Biden administration lacked authority to cancel oil and gas leases in Alaska refuge, judge rules
A federal judge in Alaska on Tuesday ruled the Biden administration lacked the authority to cancel seven oil and gas leases that had been issued for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Gleason said terms of a 2017 tax law that set the stage for the first-ever lease sale in the refuge's coastal plain in early 2021 suggested that leases could only be cancelled by a court order. She sent the matter back to the Department of Interior for further action. President Donald Trump upon his return to office in January signed an Alaska-specific executive order that among other things had sought to rescind the lease cancellation. The tax law called for two lease sale offerings by late 2024 in the refuge's coastal plain, a roughly six-million-hectare swath of the vast refuge that borders the Beaufort Sea and is home to such wildlife as polar bears, caribou and birds. The Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, a state corporation, was the major bidder in the first sale, which was held in the waning days of the first Trump administration. Small companies won two other leases but gave them up. Gleason in 2021 had rejected calls by drilling opponents to halt that first lease sale until underlying lawsuits were resolved. The second sale, held shortly before Biden left office, drew no bids. It was criticized by Alaska political leaders as too restrictive to attract interest, but environmental groups pointed to a lack of interest from oil companies as a reason to put the long-running debate over whether to allow drilling to rest. Tuesday's decision, in a case brought by the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority against the Interior Department and federal officials, is the latest twist in the decades-long fight. Gwich'in leaders have opposed drilling on the coastal plain, which they consider sacred, citing its importance to caribou they rely upon. Leaders of the Inupiaq community of Kaktovik, which is within the refuge, have expressed support for drilling, as have Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy and the state's congressional delegation. Dunleavy in a statement lauded the decision: "Now the leasing program can move forward and could result in more safe, secure energy production right here in Alaska." Gwich'in leaders and environmental groups vowed to keep fighting. "While we are deeply disappointed by today's ruling, we want to be clear that this decision does not diminish our determination to protect these sacred lands," Raeann Garnett, First Chief of the Native Village of Venetie Tribal Government, said in a statement.
Reuters
26-03-2025
- Politics
- Reuters
Biden administration wrongly nixed oil, gas leases in Alaska refuge, US judge rules
March 26 (Reuters) - A federal judge in Alaska ruled that former President Joe Biden's administration lacked the authority to cancel oil and gas leases that had been issued for development within the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Gleason in Anchorage on Tuesday sided with, opens new tab a state-owned economic development public corporation in Alaska in finding that the U.S. Department of the Interior needed a court order in order to cancel its leases. The decision could bolster Republican President Donald Trump's administration efforts to reopen the 1.56-million-acre Coastal Plain of the refuge for oil and gas leasing. Trump on his first day back in office on January 20 signed an executive order that sought to rescind the Biden-era lease cancellations. In the final days of Trump's first term and a week before Biden, a Democrat, took office, the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority had secured leases with initial terms of 10 years for seven tracts of land in ANWR covering 365,775 acres. Biden had vowed to protect the refuge from drilling, and his administration in September 2023 canceled the authority's leases for oil and gas development in ANWR, a 19-million-acre sanctuary for species including polar bears and Porcupine caribou. The authority in a lawsuit filed in October 2023 argued that the Biden administration's decision violated a clear Congressional mandate in the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act enacted in Trump's first term that opened the Arctic up to drilling. Gleason, an appointee of Democratic President Barack Obama, agreed, saying the Interior Department "canceled AIDEA's leases without following the congressionally-mandated procedure for doing so." The judge sent the matter back to the Interior Department, now under Trump, for further action. "The Department of the Interior is moving quickly to reinstate the wrongfully terminated leases, consistent with President Trump's order to unleash Alaska's energy resources and further ensure American energy dominance," a department spokesperson said in a statement. The authority's counsel did not respond to a request for comment. Its case had been supported by the Republican-led state's government. Cori Mills, Alaska's deputy attorney general, in a statement hailed the ruling as "definitely a victory." "The state looks forward to working with the current federal administration on fully realizing the vast potential of ANWR to grow Alaska's economy and help America's energy independence," Mills said. U.S. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum last week announced steps to reopen the Coastal Plain of the refuge for oil and gas leasing. A January 8 lease auction that had been mandated by Congress held under the Biden administration's Interior Department received no bids from energy companies. The case is Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority v. U.S. Department of the Interior, No. 3:24-cv-00051.
