Despite the dominance of oil tax politics, the legislature did manage to pass some good bills and kill some ugly pieces of legislation. In between, they did “the bad” by not going far enough in funding K-12 education. But first the good.
In honor of the 38th Earth Day, I’ll start by applauding the 27th Legislature for extending the Renewable Energy Grant fund until 2018. Representative Bill Thomas, a primary sponsor noted that “by 2013 the Renewable Energy Grant Fund will displace an estimated six million gallons of diesel fuel each year”. In addition to helping villages use less diesel oil, these 200 plus renewable energy projects have been successfully seeding clean energy alternatives all across the state. Renewing this commitment to the grant fund helps establish and maintain Alaska’s leadership on clean energy. This truly merits a salute on Earth Day.
In this same vein, it should be noted that the Legislature passed HB 144, a bill aimed at protecting public access to Alaska’s fishing streams. An important bill that squeaked through in the final moments of the regular session was SB 23, a generous tax credit bill. What started out as a bill to renew the film production tax credit ended up being the vehicle for last minute compromises on tax breaks for particular small businesses and for liquefied natural gas storage. But most importantly, passage of Senate Bill 23 will continue the successful film production tax credit and therein up the attraction for a multi-billion dollar film industry to come to Alaska. Another good bill that is awaiting the Governor’s signature is SB 74 a bill that will require insurance coverage for autism spectrum disorders. Also Representative Cathy Munoz deserves credit for her bill giving municipalities more flexibility in offering tax incentives for needed housing. This is all good as are many items in the capital and operating budgets.
Not so good is the half-hearted attempt to deal with education funding. The Senate started off with a modest $125 increase to the base student allowance (BSA). The House Democrats also saw the need to provide for budgetary stability and supported an increase to the BSA. But this was not enough to overcome Governor Parnell and the House leadership’s objection to any sustained increase. In the end, by providing some inflation proofing funds for transportation and vocation education and by adjusting the required local effort, school districts ended with a $71.8 million increase for overall K-12 school funding.
Although thankful for some increase, many school districts have acknowledged it will not deter serious cuts to successful programs and staff. Rep. Beth Kerttula said it well in her posted remarks, noting, “So we’ve come a long way forward since the governor laid out his budget, but even with this, schools will still have to make cuts this year. And unless we take action early next year, our students will still have to bear the burden of inflation next year in years to come.”
Why is it, when it comes to oil taxes and savings we act like a rich state with billions in reserve but when it comes to funding education, one of the most important factors for attracting global investment and business in our state, we act like a poor state and continue to under invest education? No doubt, this will come back to bite us.
Now onto “the ugly,”HB 168. This bill would have required any Alaskan, community or municipality wanting to challenge a state issued permit to post a bond equal to potential damages suffered by an industrial operation. In most cases the bond amount would exceed $1 million, effectively preventing almost all Alaskans from filing a lawsuit to challenge what may be a fast-tracked, flawed permit. HB 168 was not aimed at stopping frivolous lawsuits but rather lawsuits that would have merit. It was a “mean-spirited” bill aimed at discriminating against local landowners, community groups, native organizations, commercial and sport fishers and other Alaskans seeking to ensure that state agencies are doing their job. Fortunately, this attack on our constitutional rights died in the Senate.
How absurd is it that we can formally recognize a marmot but not the contribution of our Native culture? In case you didn’t know it, Feb. 2 is now officially Marmot Day. Meanwhile the Legislature failed again to add the second verse to the Alaska Flag song. After 20-some years of trying, adding a simple verse calling “For Alaska’s flag that there be no bars” remains unachievable, yet the mighty marmot got its due recognition straight away. As you struggle to comprehend this absurdity, remember that I started out with several notable good accomplishments of the 27th Legislature.
• Troll is a longtime Alaska resident and resides in Douglas.




Comments (9)
Add commentAgree with some of this
But I do have one thing to say, Ms. Troll: the second verse written for the Alaska State Song was not requisitioned nor requested. It was simply done. And if I do say so from an non-expert music or poet background, it looks strange on paper and doesn't sound any better when sung. Granted, I've only heard it sung once, but it was a little awkward.
I think people scream racism when in fact there is a lot of hoopla against it because it just isn't that effective as lyrics to a song.
Why is it that one or none? It was lovely that she wrote it, but that doesn't mean it's the only way to do it.
Let's get a committee together and pay some folks (Native, Filipino, Norwegian, Hispanic, etc.) to write something for the State of Alaska to add to the state song that celebrates Benny Benson and emphasizes that we have respect for all people: those who have lived here for thousands of years as well as those who just got here?
Is that so hard?
It's called compromise.
Under a sky of azure...
Where balmy beezes blow
Kissed by the golden sunshine
Is Nuevo Mexico!...
But skirkz...
Do they have marmots in New Mexico?
Surely...
...the state anthem should include a verse in Español. Choctaw? Ebonics!
Lat...
Even "Natives" are immigrants. Warf rats should get equal billing with marmots.
Benny Benson
the young Alaska Native, born in Chignik and raised in an orphanage designed the Alaska Flag. One can hardly claim there was anything about his cultural or racial background that was used to deny his design of our flag. Yet there are those who seem to believe without a second verse to the Alaska Flag Song we are slighting the native population of Alaska. That is total balderdash for if there was any intention to slight Alaska natives the design for the flag itself would have been rejected.
School funding?
Ms Troll must be spending a lot of her time under the bridge to be so misinformed about school funding.
Juneau School district spent $17,899 per student last year. That is hardly under funding and if you look at the trend line over the last ten years, you can see that the budget shows a steady increase with no sign of "instability"
School funding...
The U.S. has one of the most expensive school systems in the world and yet when it comes to being "well educated" we fall far behind. I don't think throwing more money at it is the answer.
A State Song is Supposed to Unify
The whole purpose of a state flag and song is to unify the state. Alaska has a nice background story to its flag, but that is no reason to push it further to divide the state by race. Why would we want each race to have its own verse in the state song? What race would get to be first? Why are we looking to divide and not unite?