Legislature(2025 - 2026)ADAMS 519
02/12/2025 08:00 AM House FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview: Fy26 Department of Natural Resources Budget | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 53 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 55 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE FINANCE COMMITTEE
February 12, 2025
8:05 a.m.
8:05:55 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Josephson called the House Finance Committee
meeting to order at 8:05 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Neal Foster, Co-Chair
Representative Andy Josephson, Co-Chair
Representative Calvin Schrage, Co-Chair(via teleconference)
Representative Jamie Allard
Representative Jeremy Bynum
Representative Alyse Galvin
Representative Sara Hannan
Representative Nellie Unangiq Jimmie
Representative DeLena Johnson
Representative Will Stapp
Representative Frank Tomaszewski
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
John Boyle, Commissioner, Department of Natural Resources;
Brent Goodrum, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Natural
Resources; John Crowther, Deputy Commissioner, Department
of Natural Resources.
SUMMARY
HB 53 APPROP: OPERATING BUDGET; CAP; SUPP
HB 53 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HB 55 APPROP: MENTAL HEALTH BUDGET
HB 55 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
OVERVIEW: FY26 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES BUDGET
Co-Chair Josephson reviewed the meeting agenda.
HOUSE BILL NO. 53
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
loan program expenses of state government and for
certain programs; capitalizing funds; amending
appropriations; making supplemental appropriations;
making reappropriations; making appropriations under
art. IX, sec. 17(c), Constitution of the State of
Alaska, from the constitutional budget reserve fund;
and providing for an effective date."
HOUSE BILL NO. 55
"An Act making appropriations for the operating and
capital expenses of the state's integrated
comprehensive mental health program; and providing for
an effective date."
^OVERVIEW: FY26 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES BUDGET
8:07:15 AM
JOHN BOYLE, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES,
introduced himself and stated that serving as the
Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources (DNR)
was an honor. He relayed that it was a humbling experience
that came with significant responsibility. He noted that
DNR had a strong culture that was built around the people
of Alaska. In his view, DNR employed the smartest, most
ambitious, and most dedicated individuals in state
government. He believed many within the department
understood the mission clearly and recognized that by
working for DNR, they had more ability to shape Alaska's
future than they might in any other agency. The impact was
due to the department's stewardship over state lands and
natural resources, and the wide-reaching influence it held
through authorizations and permits.
Mr. Boyle introduced the PowerPoint presentation
"Department of Natural Resources Overview" dated February
12, 2025 (copy on file). He continued to slide 2 and
detailed the organizational overview of the department. He
explained that Deputy Commissioner Brent Goodrum oversaw
several divisions including the Division of Agriculture
(DA), led by Bryan Scoresby; the Division of Forestry and
Fire Protection (DFFP), led by State Forester Jeremy Douse;
the Division of Support Services (DSS), led by Shannon
Miller; the Division of Mining, Land, and Water (DMLW), led
by Director Christy Colles; and the Division of Parks and
Outdoor Recreation (DPOR), led by Ricky Gease.
Mr. Boyle remarked that DMLW held an especially important
role within DNR and that Director Colles performed
outstanding work. He also emphasized the significance of
DPOR and remarked that state parks were among his favorite
elements of DNR. He emphasized the value of having public
spaces and noted that many Alaskans lived near parks.
Mr. Boyle continued to speak about Deputy Commissioner
Crowther, who oversaw the Division of Geological and
Geophysical Surveys (DGGS), which he described as a vital
and sometimes unsung division within DNR. He praised the
division for identifying and characterizing the state's
resource potential. He noted that DGGS frequently played a
crucial role in responding to natural disasters, such as
landslides, coastal flooding, and volcanic activity. As an
example, the division was conducting monitoring work in the
wake of Typhoon Merbok. He noted that DGGS was currently
keeping watch on Mount Spurr, which had recently shown
signs of activity.
Mr. Boyle noted that the position of state geologist was
currently vacant. The role had most recently been filled by
Melanie Werdon, who had spent several decades with the
department but had recently retired. He relayed that
recruitment for her replacement would begin shortly.
Mr. Boyle continued to the Division of Oil and Gas (DOG),
which was led by Director Derek Nottingham. The division
was important to the state's economy and resource
management. The next division within the department were
the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority's (AMHTA) Trust
Land Office (TLO), led by Jusdi Warner, which was
responsible for land and resource management services. The
final division was the Office of Project Management and
Permitting (OPMP), led by Director Ashlee Adoko, which
served a critical coordination role for the state. He
explained that OPMP provided assurance to potential
investors that major infrastructure or resource projects
would receive coordinated permitting support across state
and federal agencies. He noted that OPMP functioned as a
quarterback" for such efforts.
8:14:22 AM
BRENT GOODRUM, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL
RESOURCES, continued on slide 3. The table at the top left
represented the department's FY 24 actuals and provided a
comparison of the FY 25 management plan to the governor's
proposed FY 26 budget. The FY 24 actuals included
approximately $77.9 million in unrestricted general fund
(UGF) fire supplementals. He noted the most significant
changes occurred in the "other" fund category, which showed
an increase of approximately $11.2 million, followed by an
increase of about $3 million in the UGF category.
Mr. Goodrum added that over half of the UGF increase could
be attributed to a provision passed by the legislature the
previous year that added an interagency receipt
appropriation to state facilities maintenance and
operations. The provision enabled the department to track,
manage, and report facilities, utilities, repairs, and
related costs. He stated that he would elaborate on future
slides.
Mr. Goodrum noted that there was an increase of nine
positions from the FY 25 management plan to the governor's
FY 26 budget across all position types, as shown at the top
right of the slide. He indicated that the reasons for the
position increases would be explained in subsequent slides.
He explained that the three pie charts on the slide
represented a high-level comparison of DNR's four fund
categories by percentage of the total operating budget:
UGF, designated general fund (DGF), other, and federal. He
pointed out that there were only minor changes between the
FY 25 management plan and the governor's proposed FY 26
budget. The significant changes would be discussed on later
slides.
Mr. Goodrum continued to slide 4 and explained that the
governor's FY 26 budget included 20 different funding
sources. According to the green comment box on the right
side of the slide, the general fund budget totaled
approximately $120 million, accounting for 63 percent of
DNR's total operating budget. Most of the DGF revenue came
from park fees, right-of-way leases, material sales, mining
leases, and recording fees. The majority of "other" revenue
consisted of interagency receipts, statutory designated
program receipts, Permanent Fund receipts, capital funds,
and AMHTA funds. He directed attention to the comment box
on the bottom right of the slide, which stated that the
department generated $21 in revenue for every dollar
appropriated to DNR on a 10-year revenue average. He
emphasized that the department was proud of the return on
investment.
8:18:00 AM
Representative Hannan asked for more information about the
Exxon Valdez Oil Spill settlement listed under the other
category on slide 4. She assumed that the department still
received an annualized payout from the settlement and asked
whether it was a stagnant number year-over-year or if it
was declining.
Mr. Goodrum responded that he would need to follow up with
more information. He explained that most of the numbers
were based on formulas and were somewhat dynamic, but the
numbers did not fluctuate significantly.
Representative Hannan asked if the department could also
provide information on how many more years it expected to
receive claims from the settlement.
Mr. Goodrum confirmed that he would follow up with the
information.
8:18:54 AM
Mr. Goodrum continued on slide 5 which included an overview
of the governor's proposed FY 26 budget changes. He stated
that OPMP on line 1 planned to add receipt capacity for
anticipated projects, totaling $140,000 in interagency
receipts. The office anticipated new projects in mining,
energy, and broadband. Additional interagency receipt
authority was needed to ensure that there would be no delay
in construction and operations that could advance the
state's economy.
Mr. Goodrum explained that line 2 pertained to state
facilities, maintenance, and operations within DSS, which
included $7.881 million in interagency receipts. The
interagency receipt appropriation would be added to track,
manage, and report facilities, utilities, repairs, and
related costs across the department.
Mr. Goodrum continued to line 3, which related to AMHTA's
TLO and included $5.5 million in authorized receipts to
maintain the office's administrative budget. He noted the
office was supported through AMHTA funding, which followed
a zero-based budgeting process each fiscal year. The funds
covered operating costs such as personal services, staff
travel expenses, professional services, advertising,
postage, and general office supplies.
Mr. Goodrum explained that line 4 related to DMLW and was a
request for $342,000 in UGF and the addition of two
permanent full-time positions to implement the big game
guide concession area program authorized by SB 189,
effective FY 25. The division would be responsible for
drafting and adopting regulations, developing selection
criteria and guiding qualifications, evaluating
applications, and issuing permits.
Mr. Goodrum discussed line 5, which sought to expand
broadband access for vital community services in FY 26 and
FY 27 with a request for $306,000 in UGF and two permanent
full-time positions. He relayed that the effort was tied to
federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)
funding intended to bring broadband to communities in need.
Due to the complexity of utility projects on state land,
the department needed additional staff to process easement
applications and support large-scale broadband and highway
projects. He noted that it was a two-year increment.
Mr. Goodrum moved on to line 6 which detailed DFFP and its
forest management and development efforts. He relayed that
the request was for $858,000 in UGF and for three permanent
full-time positions. The goal was to expand access to state
forests and increase the availability of timber sales to
boost economic development. The funding would stabilize
positions for three heavy equipment operators, five
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) analysts, and four
foresters who currently relied on expiring capital and
federal funds. The request also included funding for a new
forester in Haines, an engineer architect in Anchorage, and
an Accounting Technician III to strengthen the team.
8:23:27 AM
Mr. Goodrum continued to line 7, which requested an
$800,000 increase in statutory designated program receipts
under forest management and development. He explained that
DFFP anticipated grant opportunities through the Denali
Commission to fund forest management on private lands. The
program would support reforestation, fire mitigation, and
forest health treatments. The goal was to leverage the
funding to prevent disturbances like the Spruce Bark Beetle
outbreak and enhance safety for Alaskans.
Mr. Goodrum continued with line 8 and the request for the
natural disaster emergency response and prevention funding
for DGGS. The request included $648,400 in UGF and two
permanent full-time positions. He explained that Alaska was
experiencing more frequent and severe floods, landslides,
and avalanches, and the division lacked the staffing and
funding to respond adequately to requests from the state
emergency operations center. The request aimed to establish
a dedicated emergency response team to conduct geologic
hazard assessments and proactively manage land to mitigate
geological risks. The funding would support one full-time
Geologist II and one full-time GIS Analyst II.
Representative Hannan asked about line 4 and wondered if SB
189 granted DNR any cost recovery authority for
implementing the big game guide concession area program,
similar to how the Department of Commerce, Community and
Economic Development (DCCED) used cost recovery in its
licensing processes. She asked if there was a mechanism to
recover the implementation costs from the concessionaires
once the program was in place.
Mr. Goodrum responded that he was not certain whether SB
189 included cost recovery provisions. The department
submitted a fiscal note for the bill indicating a need for
new positions to support the program. He relayed that it
was possible that the department could transition the
positions to be funded through program receipts instead of
UGF after the program was up and running and revenues began
to materialize.
Representative Hannan asked if SB 189 was one of the bills
that passed in the previous year without its fiscal note
being adopted.
Mr. Goodrum replied that to his knowledge, the fiscal note
did not travel with the bill when it was passed.
Representative Hannan directed attention to line 7 and the
forester position in Haines. She recalled that a forester
had previously served in Haines and wondered whether the
budget request was to restore the role or to add a second
forester. If the request would add a second forester, she
asked what specific needs in FY 25 would justify the
addition.
Mr. Boyle responded that there was still a long-serving
forester in Haines who managed the Haines State Forest and
did exceptional work. He explained that part of the
rationale for adding another forester was to prepare for
the established Haines forester's eventual succession and
to enable the forester to pass on his extensive knowledge
and experience. Additionally, the department foresaw
increased opportunities in forest management activities in
Haines that would benefit from additional staffing.
8:28:06 AM
Representative Hannan appreciated the value in succession
planning but emphasized that the state was in a tight
fiscal situation. She asked what return on investment the
department expected by funding the new position in the
upcoming fiscal year.
Mr. Boyle responded that the anticipated Baby Brown timber
sale would require significant staff time and oversight. He
mentioned that there would be upcoming revisions to the
Haines State Forest's budget and potential opportunities in
carbon markets. He explained that the single forester in
Haines handled everything from paperwork and planning to
physically maintaining access roads. The workload had grown
too large for a single person, and the new position would
provide much-needed support. He emphasized the importance
of having staff physically present who could lay out timber
sales, walk the forest, and understand the scope and
potential of available resources.
Mr. Goodrum resumed on line 9 which detailed DFFP's fire
suppression preparedness component. He explained that the
request was for $1.5 million in statutory designated
program receipt authority. The receipts were collected from
parties in the Northwest Compact Agreement and federal fire
cooperators. He noted that the revenues collected from the
partners helped maintain the state's aviation resources and
reduced its reliance on contracted and emergency-use
aircrafts. By expanding the statutory receipt authority,
the division could access and use the revenues and minimize
its dependence on UGF.
Mr. Goodrum continued on line 10 and detailed DPOR's
boating safety program. He explained that $302,000 in
boating safety program receipts were being appropriated
from boat registration fees collected under AS 05.25.096
for FY 25. The appropriation supported ongoing education
and enforcement efforts tied to boating safety statewide.
He clarified that similar language was intended to be
included in future operating budgets to ensure continued
funding of the program through registration fees.
8:32:08 AM
JOHN CROWTHER, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL
RESOURCES, continued on slide 7 and detailed DNR's carbon
programs, including the Carbon Capture, Utilization, and
Storage (CCUS) initiative. He explained that the program
was focused on enabling the state's subsurface resources to
be used for the underground injection and permanent storage
of carbon dioxide. The authority for the program was
granted by the legislature in the prior year and the
department had since worked to develop and finalize
implementing regulations, which were expected to go into
effect the following week.
Mr. Crowther noted that applications for licenses could
begin arriving in the weeks or months following the
finalization of the regulations. He indicated that several
companies were already exploring site characterization and
data gathering for potential projects. According to the
statutes and accompanying regulations, the license areas
would generate rental payments and could later convert to
long-term injection sites and generate revenue through per-
ton injection fees.
Co-Chair Josephson asked Mr. Crowther whether he was
personally involved in the development of the regulations
and if he was actively engaged in the details of the
regulation process.
Mr. Crowther replied he had been intimately involved in the
drafting of the regulations. He added that the Department
of Law (DOL) and peer agencies from other states had also
been consulted. He thought that the result was a robust and
well-informed regulatory package that positioned Alaska
well to attract industry interest.
Co-Chair Josephson asked if Mr. Crowther could disclose
more information about the early industry interest. He
asked if projects would be in the Cook Inlet or the North
Slope, or somewhere else.
Mr. Crowther responded that there had already been discreet
efforts underway on the North Slope, with some publicly
announced projects exploring the potential for carbon
storage. The efforts included support from the U.S.
Department of Energy and much of the information had been
made publicly accessible. Additional activity had been
occurring in Cook Inlet and several projects were being
evaluated.
8:35:21 AM
Mr. Crowther continued on slide 7. The carbon offset
initiative had passed two years earlier to enable the
generation of carbon offset credits from state lands. Under
the initiative, the state could manage timber and other
natural resources in ways that would generate marketable
credits for the voluntary carbon market and potentially
create a new source of revenue. He stated that regulations
had been finalized in 2023 and that DNR had retained the
consultant Terra Verde to assess project feasibility. The
department had begun its initial focus on the Tanana Valley
State Forest but was also considering other areas.
Depending on the outcome of the assessments, credit-
generating projects could be initiated within the year and
revenue might be realized within 18 to 24 months of a
project launch.
Representative Stapp recalled that projections had
suggested that there could be up to $90 million per year in
carbon offset income. He noted that no revenue had yet
materialized, despite the state being several years into
the program. He asked when Alaska might begin seeing
financial returns from the initiative.
Mr. Boyle responded that the timeline for potential revenue
was approximately 18 months after the launch of a
sanctioned project. He added that DNR had not committed to
any specific revenue projections, but instead had
communicated that there were reasonable opportunities to
generate new revenue. He affirmed that interest from
developers existed and that some were currently engaged in
feasibility studies. Since the regulations had only been
finalized six months earlier, the program was still in its
early stages. He noted that several parties had expressed
interest and were at various stages of evaluating whether
and how to submit proposals to the state. The voluntary
carbon market itself was evolving and there were ongoing
changes to protocols and verification standards. He
stressed that it was important to have a dedicated carbon
program manager at DNR to stay engaged with market
developments and maximize potential benefits to the state.
He thought it could be beneficial if the state were to
receive credit for its efforts to reduce incidents of
wildfire because it was a significant contributor to carbon
emissions. He anticipated that the program would evolve and
expected that the state would realize revenue at some
point.
8:39:58 AM
Representative Stapp expressed hope that the anticipated
revenue would be realized before the newly planted trees
matured into old growth. He asked how likely it would be
for there to be progress within the following year. He
asked if there was a greater than 50 percent chance that
the state would see financial returns from the project, or
if the likelihood was closer to 10 percent or lower.
Mr. Boyle responded that he did not wish to speculate with
specific odds. He emphasized that there had been
demonstrable interest from credible participants,
particularly those with experience in similar projects in
other jurisdictions. The other projects had successfully
reached completion which increased the probability of
success in Alaska. He was confident that the revenue
generated would surpass the costs presently associated with
administering the project. He remarked that generating
revenue was more likely than not generating revenue.
Representative Hannan noted that the initiative was
frequently referred to as a "tree program," but she had
found that there was the potential for using marine
resources such as kelp for the program as well. She asked
whether the existing regulatory framework would allow for
such development and whether there had been any formal
inquiries. She added that kelp could be harvested within a
single season, unlike trees. She understood that kelp
offered a more immediate opportunity for generating
revenue, assuming there was industry interest.
Mr. Boyle replied that there was interest in mariculture
opportunities. He explained that the carbon offset program
would accommodate and facilitate ventures in the
mariculture environment and there were ongoing efforts to
develop protocols for the projects. There were many
innovative concepts under review, such as projects
proposing the use of aquatic machinery to harvest the upper
layers of kelp. The collected kelp material would then be
sunk into deep ocean locations, where it was expected to
remain for hundreds of years before decomposing and re-
releasing carbon. While the specifics were still being
refined, the foundational concepts were actively under
development. He added that he had personally met with a
company operating a significant mariculture project in
Africa that was exploring opportunities in Southeast
Alaska. He anticipated that interest would continue to
grow.
8:43:44 AM
Representative Johnson asked whether Mr. Boyle was aware of
any upcoming changes from the federal government. She
wanted to get a better sense of the department's goals and
objectives. She asked for more information about the
potential impacts on the carbon offset market and whether
any existing firefighting cooperation agreements with
Canada might be affected.
Mr. Boyle responded that he would be hesitant to attempt to
predict future federal actions. He noted that there was a
possibility that incentives established under IIJA and the
Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) could be reconsidered. He
explained that the 45Q tax credits were used to support
CCUS projects and could influence company interest. He
relayed that Sumitomo, a major industrial conglomerate, had
expressed interest in carbon capture and sequestration in
Alaska. The interest was driven by international
decarbonization goals particularly in Japan and South Korea
and was not dependent on U.S. incentives, programs, or
policies. He thought there was a strong opportunity to
generate value from state resources and there was both
international and domestic interest. The goal was to
monetize every resource and open additional revenue streams
to support state programs.
8:47:44 AM
Representative Galvin asked for more information about the
five-year conversion to lease option under the carbon
capture program. She wondered whether the current rates of
$20 per acre and $250 per ton injected aligned with
international standards. She also asked how the rates were
being determined. She was concerned about the integrity of
the program and asked how the state could ensure that
companies were not reinjecting carbon solely to enhance oil
production. She reiterated her concern about the potential
for abuse of the program.
Mr. Crowther responded that comparing Alaska's program
rates to international standards remained somewhat
premature, as the global market for carbon transport and
storage was still in development. He noted that Alaska was
already being considered as an early destination for such
projects, alongside other Pacific Rim nations like
Australia and Indonesia. The program's terms and statutes
were fully public and prospective partners were reviewing
them closely. He acknowledged that project structures might
evolve alongside the market itself, but updates would be
shared with the legislature as the process unfolded. He
explained that early assessments focused on geology and
infrastructure needs were underway.
Mr. Crowther added that lease applications could be
submitted in the coming months, which would provide further
clarity on how the program was being received. He explained
that enhanced oil recovery had long been practiced by
operators, with direct financial benefits to the state
through increased royalty revenues. He relayed that AOGCC
and DNR had mechanisms to monitor and assess oil field
operations, such as statutes, lease conditions, and
reporting requirements related to well permitting and field
activity. Companies had the option to convert leases and
the department and AOGCC both held authority to direct
conversions when a site shifted to exclusive carbon
storage. He suggested that the state had sufficient
oversight and tools in place to manage the program
effectively and could properly respond if the program was
being abused.
8:52:15 AM
Mr. Goodrum continued the presentation on slide 8. He
stated that DFFP's two core functions were to manage
wildland fire risks to life, property, and infrastructure
across 150 million acres in Alaska, and sustainably manage
the state's forests to supply resources to Alaskans. He
continued to slide 9 and explained that the division
managed 47 million acres of state forests and 2.1 million
acres of legislatively designated forests. The areas
supported commercial timber sales and public use. State
timber sales were the main source of supply for local
sawmills and value-added wood product manufacturers across
much of Alaska. The sales also provided woody biomass for
heat and electricity, particularly in the interior region
of the state.
Mr. Goodrum reported that in the previous year, the
division sold 33.6 million board feet of new timber,
appraised at $2.9 million. He relayed that an additional
25.2 million board feet was harvested from state lands and
generated $1.7 million in timber receipts. He noted that
128 miles of forest roads were maintained by division
personnel, contractors, and loggers. The division continued
to build new roads to access new timber stands and
currently managed a total road network of approximately 670
miles, including roads within and to state forests and
other lands used by Alaskans for subsistence, recreation,
and business. He emphasized that the roads also served as
critical access points during periods of high fire
activity.
Mr. Goodrum explained that the department remained
committed to expanding Alaska's forest economy. He noted
that the timber industry supported approximately 1,200 jobs
and contributed $58 million annually to the state's
economy. The division aimed to increase the available
timber volume and offer longer-term contracts to provide
operators with the stability to invest in additional
equipment and crews. He noted that the division had
expanded reforestation and pre-commercial thinning efforts.
Mr. Goodrum relayed that training sessions for the Alaska
Lumber Grading Program (ALGP) had been held in Sitka,
Klawock, Haines, Soldotna, Palmer, Aniak, and Fairbanks,
and a total of 109 individuals were certified. The division
was also working with the University of North Carolina to
develop a wood drying workshop to be offered later in the
year.
8:55:54 AM
Mr. Goodrum advanced to slide 10. He reiterated that the
division was responsible for managing fire risks across 150
million acres of land. He stated that recruitment and
retention of wildland firefighters and dispatchers remained
a top priority. He credited the governor's mission-critical
and hazard incentive pay with improving workforce
stability. There had been a twelvefold increase in
applicants for the Pioneer Peak, Gannett Glacier, and White
Mountain crews from 2024 to 2025. There was also a 5.2
percent decrease in vacancies from January 2024 to January
2025.
Mr. Goodrum explained that the fire program's strategic
plan aimed to ensure staffing levels capable of supporting
Preparedness Level 3 of the five-level national fire danger
scale, which reduced reliance on delayed and costly
resources from outside Alaska. In the previous year, the
division trained 224 new firefighters through five wildland
fire academies, including specialized training in
prevention, initial attack, basic and intermediate
firefighting, and agency crew operations. He added that 158
emergency firefighters took part in hazard fuel reduction
projects near communities and areas of state interest. The
division received $10.2 million in federal funds to support
training, technology upgrades, and assistance for volunteer
fire departments. The division awarded three wildfire
defense grant applicants a combined $3.1 million to improve
community-level fire preparedness.
Mr. Goodrum stated that the division focused on reducing
the number of human-caused fires, which were often the most
destructive due to their proximity to populated areas. The
prevention efforts centered on public education, outreach,
and awareness campaigns. Last year, the division
participated in 104 outreach events and delivered over
1,500 public announcements.
9:00:32 AM
Mr. Goodrum continued to slide 11 and reported that the
division had implemented 12 hazardous fuel mitigation
projects using private contractors, Alaska fire crews, and
local government partnerships, which contributed to
building a landscape of fire-resilient areas around
Alaska's communities. The funding for wildfire and forest
management efforts came from a combination of state capital
improvement projects (CIPs), federal grants, and U.S.
Forest Service (USFS) pass-through funds. He noted that
investing in fire-adapted communities reduced long-term
fire suppression costs. He reported that the 2024 fire
season in Alaska was average, with 379 fires burning just
under 700,000 acres. He relayed that division aircraft flew
over 1,400 hours and dropped 250,000 gallons of retardant.
Protected assets included the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System,
mining infrastructure, and major highway corridors.
Mr. Goodrum stated that suppression efforts in the
Matanuska-Susitna Borough (MSB), Fairbanks North Star
Borough (FNSB), and the Kenai Peninsula Borough (KPB)
protected more than 500 primary residences and over 100
remote cabins. In 2024, personnel supported the winter
storm response in Fairbanks and 22 firefighters cleared
roads of fallen trees to enable access for the Department
of Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT). He added
that division crews assisted in Kotzebue during fall
flooding caused by winter sea storms and a 12-person team
helped pump out flooded basements and crawlspaces.
Firefighters also supported the Federal Emergency
Management Agency's (FEMA) responses during Hurricane
Helene, deploying to North Carolina and Florida to clear
roads, manage distribution centers, and assist in temporary
housing efforts. Additionally, 25 personnel were deployed
to Southern California to support fire suppression in
communities impacted by major fires.
Mr. Goodrum continued to slide 12 and provided an overview
of staffing and training efforts. He reported that the
division employed 220 wildland fire and resource
technicians and consisted of 132 permanent seasonal
employees and 88 long-term non-permanent seasonal
employees. He reiterated that five fire academies had been
taught in 2024 and division personnel also participated in
interagency training with the Alaska Fire Service. He
stated that a wide range of training courses had been held
across the state, including entry-level and refresher
courses. He reported that twelve of the sessions took place
in Southwest Alaska, where efforts were underway to rebuild
local firefighting crews.
Mr. Goodrum advanced to slide 13 and spoke about fire
prioritization. He explained that all protection agencies
followed the Alaska Interagency Wildland Fire Management
Plan (AIWFMP). The plan ensured a coordinated and cost-
effective approach to wildfire management and was developed
by the state through collaboration with USFS, the
Department of the Interior, and Alaska Native
organizations. He stated that the plan established
priorities during times of limited resources, with life and
safety as the highest concern. Fires threatening human
lives, homes, or critical infrastructure received immediate
attention. He referenced a map on the slide that
categorized areas by priority level: red for critical,
orange for full protection, yellow for modified protection,
and green for limited protection.
9:04:23 AM
Mr. Goodrum advanced to slide 14 and relayed that he often
received questions about firefighting assistance agreements
and reimbursement procedures. He explained that Alaska
utilized three primary agreements when importing or
exporting firefighting resources, which outlined billing
procedures, operational protocols, and mutual expectations.
The most efficient arrangements were state-to-state
agreements and participation in the Northwest Compact,
where direct billing between parties typically enabled
reimbursement within six months. He noted that Alaska was
known for its reliable participation in the agreements and
the Alaska Master Cooperative Wildland Fire Management
Agreement functioned as the national system for resource
ordering. He explained that USFS acted as the billing
agency under the agreement, but reimbursement often
required several years due to the complexity of cross-
billing.
Mr. Goodrum continued to slide 15 which illustrated recent
trends in fire and prepositioning costs. The state
allocated $5.24 million in UGF for fire activity in FY 19.
The allocation amount increased by $8.4 million in FY 20,
totaling $13.64 million. He explained that $34.34 million
had been allocated in the current fiscal year. The
governor's proposed FY 26 budget allocated $25.8 million,
which was 75 percent of the current year's funding, double
the amount allocated in FY 24, and five times more than in
FY 19.
9:06:30 AM
Representative Johnson asked for an update on a lumber
grading bill passed the previous year. She asked for
information about the implementation progress and whether
there had been any commercial benefits.
Mr. Goodrum responded that the program was fully
implemented and operational. He reiterated that training
had been conducted in nine locations, certifying 109
individuals. He noted that Representative George Rauscher
had participated in the training course. He added that the
program was already driving increased demand for timber
resources in local communities and showed promising early
success.
Representative Johnson asked for confirmation that the
regulations were finalized and that the program was active.
Mr. Goodrum replied in the affirmative.
Representative Johnson noted that there was an absence of
carbon credit sales or market development objectives in the
department's stated goals. She asked whether any progress
had been made.
Mr. Boyle asked for clarification on which specific goals
she was referring to.
Representative Johnson replied that she was referring to
the department's goals listed in the front of DNR's budget
book. She noted that carbon credit sales were not
mentioned. She asked for more information on creating a
carbon market and selling credits.
Mr. Boyle responded that the intent was to sell credits
within the voluntary carbon market. He explained that
various protocol institutions existed to help entities
market credits to specific sectors. He emphasized that the
most significant development thus far had been the
establishment of the program itself. The regulatory
framework was in place and DNR had hired a designated
carbon manager responsible for engaging with relevant
institutions and ensuring that Alaska's interests were
represented as the protocols continued to evolve. Part of
the ongoing work involved evaluating which types of forest
management would qualify for credits as well as identifying
other opportunities for carbon sequestration, including in
mariculture. He noted that there were numerous ways to use
public lands and techniques to capture or store carbon. The
department was working to identify areas where Alaska was
particularly well-positioned to participate, and it was
keeping channels open for interested entities to pursue
specific projects based on Alaska's natural resources. The
carbon market remained highly dynamic. The primary goal at
the current stage was to navigate the complexity of the
field while identifying viable opportunities for the state.
9:12:34 AM
Representative Johnson remarked that considerable time had
been spent developing carbon legislation and she wanted to
ensure the program remained active and did not lose
momentum. She noted that DNR's goals for firefighting
seemed similar to goals from previous years. She asked
whether there were any new or particularly important
priorities beyond the standard targets. She understood that
one of the goals was to mitigate smoke concerns, but she
was unsure how the objective would be approached.
Mr. Boyle replied that one of the most significant
developments in the past year was the legislature's support
for increased emergency firefighter pay. The funding had
been critical for maintaining a qualified and reliable
workforce. He noted that a year ago, state firefighters
were walking off the job, getting hired as federal
firefighters, and receiving an immediate 47 percent jump in
pay and benefits. He explained that losing high numbers of
crew members and needing to undertake the cost of
recruitment and retraining was a significant cost driver.
He added that instability also meant that there was an
added risk in terms of having less experienced personnel.
He stressed that recruitment and retention markedly
improved after pay was increased.
Mr. Boyle continued that recent efforts, such as increased
funding for firefighter compensation, represented an
important step toward preparedness and cost containment. He
explained that DNR was working to build capacity to reach
fire preparedness level three. One of the most significant
cost drivers was Alaska's reliance on external support from
other states or provinces. Transporting crews and equipment
from locations such as Washington, Oregon, Montana, or
Saskatchewan, Canada, involved substantial logistical
expenses.
Mr. Boyle remarked that investing more money up front into
recruitment, retention, and local readiness could
ultimately lead to long-term savings by reducing the need
for outside assistance. He stressed the importance of
forestry-related infrastructure. He relayed that roads were
typically built and maintained by logging operations in
areas with active timber activity, but DNR was working to
expand its budget in order to maintain more roads. He noted
that improving road access would lower costs for future
timber operators, increase the viability of local
harvesting projects, and allow firefighter crews to reach
wildfires by ground. He noted that ground transportation
for crews was significantly less expensive than relying on
aircrafts. He thought it was important to manage forests
more effectively, promote economic opportunity through
timber, and reduce wildfire risks by investing in access
and reforestation projects.
9:18:06 AM
Representative Bynum asked whether there had been any cost
implications related to the roadless rule. He asked if
changes to the roadless rule that might affect the state
were anticipated.
Mr. Boyle responded that the roadless rule and other
policies and practices of USFS had made forest management
more difficult in some situations. He explained that access
challenges had occasionally arisen when trying to reach
state lands or inholdings located within or adjacent to the
Tongass National Forest, but fortunately, wildfire risk in
the Tongass was generally low due to its wet climate. He
noted that coordination with USFS had not always been
straightforward.
Representative Bynum would follow up offline.
9:20:24 AM
Mr. Goodrum continued on slide 16 which highlighted
priorities for DA, such as expanding land for production,
improving access to loans, supporting infrastructure, and
growing market access. He reported that the Agriculture
Revolving Loan Fund (ARLF) held $21.5 million in equity and
supported over 60 loans. He relayed that 23 new loans were
approved in FY 24, totaling $6.1 million. The loans were
aimed at supporting equipment, livestock, product
processing, and farm development. The division was also
managing over $10 million in federal grants, including
programs aimed at food security and local food purchasing.
Over $100 million in agricultural products were inspected
annually to meet domestic and international standards. He
explained that the Future Farmers of America (FFA) program
had expanded to 17 schools and served over 450 students.
International trade activities had also been supported
through partnerships with the Western United States
Agricultural Trade Association (WUSATA), among other
entities.
Representative Hannan asked if loan demand exceeded the
available ARLF funds.
Mr. Goodrum responded that demand was putting pressure on
the fund and that the Board of Agriculture had raised
concerns about capacity.
Representative Hannan asked for more information about the
status of Phyto inspections for exports. She understood
that the state had cut back on its flower exports.
Mr. Goodrum responded that the division had worked to train
additional staff and was meeting the industry's needs to
ensure that exports were occurring.
Representative Jimmie asked who was receiving the grants.
She wanted to make sure that the local farm in her district
was on the grant list.
Mr. Goodrum responded that he would make the information
available.
9:24:44 AM
Mr. Goodrum continued on slide 17 and reported that the
Feed Grain Reserve Program (FGRP) was initiated in late
2023 in partnership with the Delta Farmers Cooperative. The
program aimed to serve as a sustainable solution for future
grain shortages by mitigating risk and strengthening food
security for the livestock industry and Alaskans. Four
producers were under contract to help expand in-state feed
grain production. He stated that the Plant Material Center
(PLC) cleaned approximately 50,000 pounds of native seed
and over 96,000 pounds of cereal grain for commercial
growers, which had increased significantly from the prior
year. He added that PLC also maintained disease-free seed
potatoes and provided over 40 varieties of foundational
seed to commercial potato producers across the state. The
division continued to administer $2.2 million from the
Regional Food Systems Infrastructure Grant, which sought to
build resilience in Alaska's middle food supply chain. In
conjunction with DMLW, DA encouraged the transition of
additional lands into agricultural production. He relayed
that a significant overhaul and capacity upgrade of the
division's seed cleaning facility was also underway and was
anticipated to be completed in time to assist with
processing the next fall harvest.
Mr. Crowther continued to slide 18 and provided an overview
of DGGS. He explained that the division collected data on
Alaska's natural resources and geologic hazards in order to
protect life and safety, which supported all regions of the
state. He relayed that the core of the division was the
Minerals Resources Section, which conducted advanced data
collection and developed geological maps to identify where
mineral resources existed and what types were present. Much
of the recent work was focused on the interior region of
the state where significant mineral activity already
existed. The goal was to enhance knowledge of additional
potential development sites.
9:27:53 AM
Mr. Crowther continued on slide 19 which detailed the
Energy Resources Section, which collected geologic and
geophysical data related to oil, gas, coal, and geothermal
resources. He stated that the legislature had approved new
funding in the previous year to expand the DGGS geothermal
program. The division was in the process of hiring staff
and planning new geothermal activities. He relayed that the
division's energy data supported oil exploration projects
such as Pikka and Willow. The division worked in
cooperation with the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) on core
sampling, outcrop assessment, and reporting.
Mr. Crowther advanced to slide 20 and described the
Geologic Hazards Program. He noted that hazards occurred
statewide and that a new budget item supported the creation
of a dedicated hazard response team. The team would improve
the state's ability to respond to geological threats
effectively and in a timely manner. He noted that hazards
had become a yearly occurrence in the state. Many staff
were focused on specific programs, research initiatives, or
grant-funded projects and were not resourced or equipped to
act in an emergency response capacity. He added that DDGS's
Hydrology and Surficial Geology Section involved
identifying surface resources such as gravel for road
construction and understanding water resources across the
state. He noted that Alaska's frozen water systems often
posed geologic hazards, but also served as essential
resources for development and everyday life in many
communities.
Mr. Crowther continued to slide 21 and discussed the
Geologic Information Center, which he described as a
crucial part of the division. The center was responsible
for translating highly technical scientific research into
accessible information for the public, for industry, and
for academic researchers. The center published reports and
maps and managed increasingly large and complex datasets.
He also highlighted the Geologic Materials Center, which
was a nearly 15-year-old facility housed in a former Sam's
Club warehouse that had been repurposed with support from
the legislature. The center stored physical samples and
information collected from over a century of exploration
activity. He emphasized that the value of the archive could
not be overstated, as reproducing the data would be cost-
prohibitive and potentially impossible. He also shared that
new funding had recently been received to apply emerging
technologies to the stored samples, which would expand the
center's capabilities and relevance.
9:31:37 AM
Mr. Crowther moved to slide 22 and provided an update on
the Alaska Volcano Observatory, which was a joint effort
between state staff and USGS. The observatory had been
especially active due to ongoing upgrades and improved data
collection systems for monitoring remote volcanoes. He
noted that the Aleutian Islands remained sparsely
populated, but the islands were located along critical air
cargo and passenger flight routes. He explained that
monitoring volcanic activity helped prevent disruptions to
air travel. He noted that Mount Spurr, which was located
near Anchorage, was a volcano of particular concern given
past eruptions in the region.
Mr. Crowther continued to detail the the Alaska Geospatial
Office, which coordinated geospatial data collection and
sharing within DNR and other state government entities. He
stressed that the office was critical in creating
efficiencies and ensuring timely access to updated data.
Mr. Crowther continued to slide 23 and detailed the
priorities for DGGS for FY 25. The division planned to
continue its work on mineral assessments, with a focus on
improving access to reliable geologic data. The energy
resources program would also expand, including the newly
supported geothermal initiative. He reiterated that
geological hazard mitigation and emergency readiness would
remain a top priority and that the division would continue
publishing data and preparing for future natural disasters.
Co-Chair Josephson asked for more information about the
area survey located at Illinois Creek Mine. He noted that
the mine site had previously been mothballed due to
noncompliance by the leaseholder.
Mr. Goodrum responded that there were a number of years
during which the project had been in an idle status and
there had been routine visits to ensure that environmental
conditions were sufficient. He relayed that there was
renewed interest in considering Illinois Creek for
mineralization.
9:34:33 AM
Mr. Goodrum advanced to slide 24 and read the slide as
follows:
The Division of Mining, Land and Water (DMLW) manages
more than 165 million acres a land base comparable
in size to California and most of Oregon combined.
DMLW supports the department's core mission by:
• Acquiring and disposing of land and resources
• Providing use of and access to state lands for the
public
• Fostering responsible development of lands and
resources
Managing resource data
• Protecting the State's natural resource assets
consistent with the public interest
Mr. Goodrum continued to slide 25 and read from it as
follows:
FY2024 Accomplishments:
• Generated $37.9 in revenue for FY2024, an 8.7
percent increase from FY2023
• Eliminated patent issuance backlog, allowing for
immediate issuance to the purchaser once due diligence
is complete. Previous timeline was nine months
• Completed planning efforts for the Matanuska Valley
Moose Range and Jonesville Public Use Area
• Conveyed a total of 733 acres to three different
municipalities
• Generated $5.9 million in revenue for the Land
Disposal Income Fund, a 9.1 percent increase from
FY2023
• Sold 165 parcels of land to the public totaling
approximately 1,177 acres
• Issued 75 permits to appropriate water and
187certificates of appropriation
Mr. Goodrum moved to slide 26 and read from it as follows:
FY2025 Priorities:
• Continue to responsibly authorize permits, leases
and easements to develop the state's resources and
help diversify the state economy
• Focused acquisition of 4.8 million acres in
remaining statehood entitlement lands through
legislation and acquisition requests
• Finalize a decision for the Ambler Road easement
authorization to the Alaska Industrial Development and
Export Authority (AIDEA)
• Maintain our efforts to implement the Governor's
"Unlocking Alaska" initiative
Co-Chair Josephson asked for more information on the bullet
point regarding Ambler Road. He asked if it meant that DNR
would make the Alaska Industrial Development and Export
Authority (AIDEA) the possessor of the easement and if it
would have the right and title to the easement.
9:38:04 AM
Mr. Goodrum responded that DMLW continued to work on an
application it had received from AIDEA for a right-of-way
that would extend from the Dalton Highway to the Ambler
Road project area. The application remained an active
authorization before the division and it anticipated
finalizing the process soon.
Representative Hannan asked whether the easement crossed
privately held Native Corporation lands. She understood
that two Native Corporations would not agree to an
easement. She asked if the original platting remained in
place or if the state planned to relocate the access
easement.
Mr. Goodrum replied that the state could only authorize
easements on lands in which it held interest and was able
to make authorizations. He explained that other landowners
would need to come to an agreement separately. He added
that the division's team was closely evaluating the matter.
Representative Hannan asked if section-line easement access
applied over Native Corporation lands.
Mr. Goodrum responded that he would follow up with details.
Representative Hannan commented that she had only learned
about section-line easements during her time in office. She
credited Mr. Goodrum for introducing her to the concept six
years earlier.
9:40:20 AM
Mr. Crowther continued on slide 27 and relayed that DOG
operated with a mission to understand Alaska's oil and gas
resources, make the resources available for lease, maximize
the state's revenue, and provide the state with benefits
from development. He emphasized that the division also
aimed to ensure development occurred responsibly and with
protections in place for both the environment and nearby
communities. He explained that the division's work involved
lease sales, lease management, royalty collection and
administration, royalty auditing, and the commercial review
of development terms to ensure the state received the best
possible returns.
Mr. Crowther proceeded to slide 28 and highlighted some of
DOG's key accomplishments. He emphasized that the division
had collected $1.8 billion in royalties, which represented
a critical portion of the state's direct financial return
from oil and gas production. He stated that DNR worked to
maintain the revenues from existing production while also
seeking to expand future royalty sources through new
development. He noted that the final bullet on the slide
referenced departmental efforts in Cook Inlet, which was a
priority area for ensuring full development of state
resources and maintaining adequate energy supply for
Alaskans. He added that the department would be available
offline to provide a more detailed briefing on the topic.
Mr. Crowther continued to slide 29 and stated that one of
the most exciting accomplishments was the creation of four
new units. He explained that a unit treated a group of
leases as a single entity for exploration and potential
project development. The formation of new units signaled
new drilling activity, which generated jobs for Alaskans
and offered the possibility of additional future projects
and royalty revenues for the state.
Mr. Crowther proceeded to slide 30 and explained that OPMP
played a critical coordination role for the state by
facilitating permitting, reviews, and information sharing
for complex resource development and infrastructure
projects. He relayed that the office supported both project
applicants and the public and ensured coordination across
jurisdictions, including local authorities, state
departments such as the Department of Fish and Game (DFG),
the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), DOT,
and some federal agencies.
9:43:47 AM
Mr. Crowther advanced to slide 31 and listed some of the
major projects OPMP had supported. The left side of the
slide displayed large-scale mining projects and exploration
activities. He stated that the office maintained a
dedicated large mine permitting team that worked to ensure
comprehensive, timely, and safe reviews, revisions, and
authorizations of mining operations. The office ensured
that operations could safely proceed. The office also
played an important role in energy projects such as Pikka
and Willow. He relayed that the office had been heavily
involved in the permitting for both projects and expressed
hope that more energy and infrastructure projects would be
added to the list in the coming years.
Co-Chair Josephson noted that there were several mines and
associated sites listed on the slide that he had never
heard of. He asked for the location of Gil.
Mr. Crowther responded that he was not able to locate it on
a map without assistance and deferred to Mr. Goodrum.
Mr. Goodrum stated that Gil was located near Fort Knox. He
explained that it was a satellite deposit situated on AMHTA
land and that ore from Gil was transported to Fort Knox for
processing.
Co-Chair Josephson asked where the Johnson Tract was.
Mr. Goodrum explained that it was a promising Cook Inlet
Regional Inc (CIRI) property located on the opposite side
of Cook Inlet.
Co-Chair Josephson asked where Anarraaq-Aktigiruq was.
Mr. Goodrum stated that the deposit was located
approximately ten miles north of Red Dog and was situated
on state land.
Co-Chair Josephson thought that Red Devil was near Crooked
Creek and the Donlin site [he had confused Red Devil and
Red Dog, which was later clarified.]
Mr. Crowther clarified that Red Dog was located in the far
northwest region of the state.
Co-Chair Josephson asked for more information about the
Arctic deposit listed on the slide.
Mr. Goodrum responded that Arctic represented the first
likely project in the Ambler Mining District. He described
the project as one of several volcanogenic massive sulfide
deposits in the area, which included other projects such as
the Boronite deposit located on Northwest Alaska Native
Association (NANA) land. He stated that multiple prominent
mining projects were situated in the area, and that gaining
access would be important.
Co-Chair Josephson asked for information on the Accelerate
project.
9:47:03 AM
Mr. Crowther responded that the Accelerate project focused
on potential floating regasification facilities in Cook
Inlet. He stated that it was not a traditional oil and gas
field development but was related to energy supply in Cook
Inlet. The entity involved had sought support from OPMP to
better understand the permitting process.
Representative Bynum asked whether there was a general
summary available of the financial benefits that the
projects would bring to Alaska. He asked for more
information about the specific fiscal impacts of existing
projects.
Mr. Crowther responded that project summaries and general
descriptions of fiscal benefits were already available and
that it would likely be more efficient to follow up
offline. He noted that the projects generated revenue
through several channels, including royalty payments,
production taxes, corporate income taxes, and property
taxes paid to local jurisdictions. He emphasized the
importance of local employment particularly for mining
projects, which typically employed significant numbers of
workers in high-paying jobs. He added that oil and gas
fields on the North Slope had a substantial employment
impact across the state.
Mr. Crowther continued on slide 32. He stated that an
additional important responsibility of OPMP was
facilitating and managing the state's interaction with the
federal government. The responsibility included
participating as a cooperating agency, coordinating the
state's comments, ensuring Alaska's active role in federal
administrative processes, and supporting litigation against
the federal government in necessary instances of federal
overreach or when federal decisions failed to adequately
consider Alaska's laws, input, or needs. He explained that
the items listed on the slide illustrated several of the
major federal processes in recent years in which the office
had coordinated the state's involvement. Many of the
federal actions had been viewed as imposing significant
restrictions on Alaska's economic activities and
development opportunities. He noted that there was
potential for change in federal approaches with the new
federal administration. State coordination through OPMP
would remain crucial to ensuring Alaska's voice was
incorporated in revisions to federal actions, including
those related to the North Slope, the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) plans, and the Izembek land exchange.
Co-Chair Josephson asked whether the state still had
representation in Washington, D.C., similar to the role
historically filled by Mr. John Katz.
Mr. Crowther confirmed that the governor maintained an
office in Washington, D.C. and stated that Mr. Jerry Moses
currently served as the Director of State and Federal
Relations. He also noted that the governor received
additional support and information through various other
resources. He affirmed that Alaska remained well
represented and positioned to take advantage of
opportunities in the federal sphere.
Co-Chair Josephson asked if the state office in Washington
D.C. primarily focused on DNR issues.
Mr. Crowther responded that the office covered a broad
range of topics, but natural resource use, development, and
access continued to be central issues. He explained that
the issues had been foundational to Alaska's statehood and
remained a core part of the office's work.
Mr. Crowther continued on slide 33. He explained that the
Alaska Strategic Transportation and Resources (ASTAR)
project focused on evaluating options to improve access for
North Slope communities, many of which currently relied on
seasonal winter trails. The project aimed to assess the
feasibility of longer-term infrastructure to better support
communities. He noted that OPMP housed the state's carbon
offset team and that Mr. Trevor Fulton served as the carbon
project manager.
Co-Chair Josephson asked whether the state continued to
request direct appropriations for ASTAR. He recalled that
several million dollars had been allocated to the project
in past years.
Mr. Crowther responded that the legislature had provided a
sequence of capital appropriations to support ASTAR and
that the work continued under those funds. He noted that
the project had made significant progress in gathering
resource data. However, no new appropriation had been made
for the current calendar year.
9:53:14 AM
Mr. Goodrum continued on slide 34 and relayed that DPOR
continued to operate the largest state park system in the
country and that Alaskans and visitors continued to utilize
the parks in record numbers. The division had leveraged its
upgraded reservation system, increased the number of
commercial and special permits issued through a new online
portal, and installed 90 electronic fee stations. The fee
stations reduced the need to handle cash and improved both
revenue collection and security. He noted that state park
rangers routinely provided law enforcement and public
safety services within the 157 designated state park units
and often participated in search and rescue operations
across the state. In the previous year, rangers had taken
part in 46 search and rescue missions. He expressed deep
gratitude for the dedication and service of the park
rangers in protecting both citizens and visitors.
Mr. Goodrum continued on slide 35 and relayed that DPOR
managed 108 active and pending outdoor recreation grants,
conducted more than 350 boating safety classes, and reached
over 10,000 participants through the programs. He noted
that the Office of History and Archaeology (OHA) reviewed
1,738 projects and signed nine major project agreements
through the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO). In
2025, the country would celebrate America 250, and the
Alaska Historical Commission (AHC) had been designated as
the state's commemoration coordinator for the celebration.
He added that the Office of Design and Construction (ODC)
were awarded $10.6 million in contracts during FY 24 and
completed nine construction projects during the 2024
calendar year.
Co-Chair Josephson asked from whom the grants were awarded.
Mr. Goodrum replied that he would follow up with the
information.
Representative Hannan asked for more information about the
status of the regional State Parks Advisory Board (SPAB),
which was intended to consolidate the former Haines,
Juneau, and Ketchikan boards. She stated that the regional
board had not yet formed, despite plans to do so in the
previous fall. She noted that she had received inquiries
from former board members. She also asked for an update on
the implementation of signage at the expanded Funter Bay
State Marine Park (FBSMP), which was created five years ago
to preserve Aleut grave sites. She reported that approval
for the signage had been pending with OHA for several
years.
Mr. Goodrum responded that he would follow up and provide
answers to both questions.
9:56:41 AM
Mr. Goodrum advanced to slide 36 and stated that DSS
continued to meet and exceed internal and external customer
needs over the past year. He explained that the division
contributed significantly to DNR's Future Leaders Summit
training through facilitation, mentorship, and
coordination. Many participants from earlier cohorts had
returned to serve as instructors and were helping to pass
along knowledge to new members. He emphasized that
financial support, budget expertise, procurement, human
resources, and information technology services all played
critical roles in ensuring that the department functioned
smoothly. He expressed appreciation for the work of the
department's support services team.
Co-Chair Josephson suggested that slide 37 only needed to
be briefly reviewed because the committee had recently met
with AMHTA.
Mr. Crowther continued to slide 37 and explained that
AMTHA's TLO managed natural resource land holdings on
behalf of trust beneficiaries receiving mental health
services in Alaska. The office used appropriated funds to
conduct activities that generated revenue for trust
programs as part of its zero-based budgeting process. In
the prior year, the trust generated $17 million for its
programs.
Mr. Boyle continued to slide 38. He reiterated that the
department had a constitutional mandate to develop,
conserve, and maximize Alaska's natural resources for
public benefit. He stated that DNR took its responsibility
seriously and remained committed to expanding
opportunities, attracting investment, fostering a stronger
business climate, and creating jobs. He emphasized that
through effective stewardship of state lands and resources,
the department sought to generate new revenue and long-term
economic value for Alaska. He relayed that he and the
governor had recently traveled to the United Arab Emirates
(UAE) where they met with a number of large investment
firms. He shared that outside investors tended to overlook
Alaska when considering resource-rich states and that
Texas, New Mexico, and North Dakota were often at the
forefront of investors' minds. He emphasized that many
investors did not always recognize the significant mineral
endowment of the state or the opportunities available for
Alaska to play a larger role in the global economy.
Mr. Boyle highlighted that Alaska's ability to provide raw
natural resources had always been important. He noted that
there was also a desire to help the state transition into a
value-added manufacturing hub, including enhancing refining
and processing capabilities, utilizing locally grown timber
for lumber, and improving food security by expanding
agricultural initiatives. The overarching goal was to
diversify and grow the state's economy, which would provide
opportunities for current and future generations of
Alaskans to stay in the state and be gainfully employed. He
was optimistic about the next four years under the new
federal administration. He hoped the new administration
would allow more access to state lands and resources, which
would allow Alaska to be "masters of our own destiny" and
provide the state the ability to manage and develop its
resources as needed.
10:02:44 AM
Co-Chair Josephson thanked the presenters. He appreciated
Mr. Boyle's earlier comments about his deep affection for
the department.
HB 53 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
HB 55 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Josephson reviewed the agenda for the afternoon's
meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
10:03:29 AM
The meeting was adjourned at 10:03 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| DNR HFIN FY 26 Dept Budget and Overview 2.12.2025_final.pdf |
HFIN 2/12/2025 8:00:00 AM |
HB 53 HB 55 |