Matt Acuña Buxton Profile picture
Jan 25 127 tweets 21 min read
Day three of the Alaska Redistricting Board trial is underway. Today, they're getting into the Valdez witnesses today. If they get through Valdez, they'll start with intervenor (Doyon, Limited group) witnesses.

#akleg #akredistrict

Here's Day 1 (East Anchorage):…

Here's Day 2 (Mat-Su):…
Right off the bat, they're starting off with a dispute about when plaintiffs will get to do cross examination of the board witnesses. It sounds like the potential of having them today is catching some plaintiffs by surprise.
Brena says that he was expecting time to review the pre-filed testimony and other documents offered by the intervenors' plaintiffs.

Judge Matthews says everyone's getting ahead of themselves given yesterday ran up against the clock.
Each side gets 6.5 hours of time (I'm not sure if that applies to the board, which is defending 5 suits). We get a status update on time:

Board has used 206 minutes
East Anchorage has used 15
Mat-Su has used 34
Valdez has used 85
Intervenors has used 81
Calista 0
Skagway 0
Up first is the Valdez witness Nathan Duval, the Valdez Capital Facilities Director, who had testified on the road show about where Valdez should be positioned.

He says that Valdez was a better fit with either Richardson Highway Corridor or the Prince Williams Sound districts.
Stone (for Mat-Su plaintiffs): Is Valdez integrated with Prince Williams Sound?

Duval says, yes, of course. He outlines several connections to the region, including sharing fish taxes with other communities.
Duval opines a bit about contiguity. He says that it should be two areas that are not just touching (which has been the standard so far) but also having "interrelated features" and that are integrated.
Stone asks whether the board took public testimony from Valdez seriously.

Duval says he believes it was wholly ignored. He says they invited subject matter experts, but says none were familiar with the Richardson or PWS regions.
Duval talks about some differences between Valdez/Mat-Su. Valdez is interested in:
Safe transportation of oil
Health of Port of Valdez
Road trucking of munitions to Interior bases, mines, etc

Mat-Su's on the rail system w/ Port MacKenzie, he says, and could threatens Valdez.
Now into cross from Matt Singer (Redistricting Board).

His questioning so far has focused on Duval's opportunities to review and testify on the board's plans (one of which included a map that was pretty similar to the final plan) making the case that he had a shot.
Singer asks whether Duval has EVER driven to visit his legislator. "Can you think of any instance where you've got in a car to drive to meet with a legislator?"

Duval says no. It's been by email.
Duval says it's not so important about the means of communication but whether they understand the community's common interest, whether they're friends and neighbors.

He says that's the case for folks along the Glenn/Richardson, which isn't the case for the Mat-Su.
Singer asks about Duval's recreating activities and use of the local airports. Duval says if he's flying out of state, he typically drives up to Fairbanks and flies out of there.
Singer asks whether Mat-Su residents have boats in Valdez. Duval says yeah, but they're about 10%. Fairbanks region is in the 30% range.

That's it for Singer. Onto Amdur-Clark from the Doyon, Limited plaintiffs.
Amdur-Clark's questioning was limited. He asked about the other alternative maps on the wall at the Board townhall in Valdez.
Into redirect by Brena (Valdez).

He focuses in on the "maps on the wall" at the town hall. Brena asks whether maps 1 and 2 adopted by the board were there.

Duval says they weren't and it was unfortunate because those were the ones Valdez liked. He say they were confusing.
Brena is focusing in on a process violation, suggesting that the board maps (Maps 3 and 4) were adopted outside of the allowable windows.

The Alaska Constitution does require a public testimony period. Brena and others argue the board didn't follow it appropriately.
Brena asks whether Duval is aware of any other district where you "have to drive 120 miles past your neighbors" to reach the rest of the district?

Duval says no.

Brena does that seem logical?

Duval: "It's peculiar."
Duval continues in on the competing interests. He says that many projects in the Richardson/Valdez region are at direct competition with projects in the Mat-Su region.

He mentions senior housing for example and says he think they'd get the same attention from a Mat-Su rep.
Brena asks how Valdez's current representation is working out (Rep. George Rauscher). He says it's fine, noting that 40% of the current district is in Mat-Su but complains about their Senator (Sen. Hughes) supporting legislation that would've undermined Valdez's tax base.
Duval: "We got better representation from Sen. Click Bishop out of Fairbanks."
There's a bit of a dispute over the property tax issues.

Duval says that the oil infrastructure property tax bill is about $40M annually. Says he's concerned under the bill supported by Sen. Shower, he's afraid that it would've effectively been funneled to Mat-Su.
This is the bill they're discussing:…
Oh, apologies for the previous tweets about Sen. Hughes. I was mistaken.

Valdez's Senator is Sen. Mike Shower.

Duval says Shower has never attended Valdez town halls and has shown no interest in representing the community.

He reiterates that Fairbanks Sens. have been better.
Brena starts to get into the ExxonValdez oil spill and its impact on the community.

There's objections from both Singer and Amdur-Clark about it, but Judge Matthews allows it to go on. Duval had talked about safety of oil transportation.
Brena asks more about Valdez's reliance on the Fairbanks delegation to get attention from the Legislature.

Duval says Rep. Rauscher is alright but says Shower has shown "little to no interest" in Valdez. Says that Fairbanks delegation has been more effective on DOT issues, etc.
There's a little more about Valdez's connection to the Interior military bases and some of the recreation agreements.

That's it for Duval.
They're on a 15-minute morning break between witnesses.

I went ahead and looked up the 2018 election results (when Sen. Shower was last up) and Valdez voted pretty heavily in his favor... to only get completely ignored.

(This is only the HD9 half of the Senate E vote)
Back from break.

They're taking up Valdez witness Sheri Pierce, the Valdez City Clerk. She was one of the main Valdez city employees who tracked the redistricting board and provided some updates to other witnesses.
Pierce says the quality of the city's representation in the Legislature has declined under Rep. Rauscher and Sen. Shower. She says she's concerned it would further slide under the even more Mat-Su-focused maps from this board.
Asked to elaborate more on her comments about the city's representation has been "diminished significantly," Pierce says things were much better when they were paired in the Prince Williams Sound district.

Richardson Highway into Fairbanks area was "a good working relationship"
PWS was for the 90s. The Richardson Highway into Fairbanks was the 00s. The 10s pushed it more into the Palmer/Mat-Su area. The 20s plan would push it almost fully into Mat-Su.

Pierce: "It became progressively worse over the years."
Stone (Mat-Su) asks about Valdez's connection to the Interior. Pierce talks at length about shared recreational interests and Fairbanks residents having boats in Valdez. Adds that the motto on lots of Valdez signage is "Gateway to the Interior."
Pierce says she was concerned that the Alaka Redistricting Board seemed far more concerned about preserving the Interior district's boundaries than it was in hearing the Valdez concerns.
Now into cross examination from Singer, who asks Pierce about her attendance at the town hall and one-on-one conversations with board members.

Pierce says the printed maps were unclear about communities that were in the Valdez house district.
Singer: You're displeased with the unattentiveness of your current senator, is that correct?

Pierce: That's correct.

Singer: But that's a problem that cannot be fixed by redistricting, right?

Pierce doesn't really agree.
Singer points out that the Valdez-preferred placement would likely produce representation out of Fairbanks. No guarantee that they'd come visit Valdez, right?

Pierce says perhaps but says the past history has shown Fairbanks representation is more attentive to Valdez.
She says it's not just about whether that representation would visit but whether that representation listens to Valdez's concerns.
Singer argues that the Alaska Constitution makes no guarantee that they get quality representation, just that House districts be compact, contiguous and relatively socio-economically integrated.

Singer: "There's no fifth criteria that folks like their current incumbent, right?"
Pierce says, sure, they're not required to like their constituents but that it's an indicator of underlying problems with socio-economic integration and other constitutional problems with the district.
That's it for the cross examination by Singer.

Now onto Amdur-Clark (Doyon group) who's now questioning about the Valdez-proposed maps that'd totally upend how the Interior villages are grouped.

Doyon is hoping to maintain the Interior district that unites Interior villages.
Amdur-Clark asks Pierce whether the boundaries proposed by Valdez for the Interior villages are compact, socio-economically integrated or share common interests (such as health care, language or subsistence foods).

Pierce says she has no knowledge of those things.
Amdur-Clark is specifically talking about the blue district that would span from the western half of the Interior villages all the way out to the coast. A similar-ish map was proposed in 2010 round (reached all the way into Fairbanks) that was ultimately thrown out.
That proposal created one legislative cycle where Sen. Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel, was part of the Interior delegation and Rep. David Guttenberg, D-Fairbanks, represented coastal Alaska.
With Amdur-Clark's questioning of the Valdez option 1 proposal's problems created elsewhere, Pierce says her job is to represent Valdez.
Part of the problem, as I understand it, with the maps submitted to the Alaska Redistricting Board is that groups couldn't submit partial plans for a particular region. They had to try to map the rest of the state, too.
Amdur-Clark says that's basically because any changes to one area would impact the rest of the map.

Pierce says Valdez hoped that the board would have focused in on the Valdez-area concerns in the rest of the map creation.
The Valdez map would have broken the Interior district into three different districts.
Amdur-Clark wraps up his questioning. It had largely focused on whether the Valdez proposals were REALLY more integrated and constitutionally compliant than what the board had settled on.

Like: "Is Valdez integrated with Allakaket?"
Amdur-Clark also brought up Pierce's affidavit where she said these alternatives were more constitutional. She clarifies that what she meant is that they are more constitutional for Valdez's interests.
Now into redirect from Brena (Valdez). He asks how the above map better meets the redistricting criteria.

She says it's "much more acceptable" because Valdez would be paired with "our Richardson Highway communities."
The takeaway so far, is that Alaska really ought to have more House districts. The current layout creates situations where some communities are necessarily put with communities that aren't aligned.
Fix Valdez's concerns and someone else is left out.

The question here, is whether the balance taken by the board is fair.
Brena asks if there's reasons beyond just Sen. Shower's personality that result in his poor representation of Valdez.

Pierce says, yes, that Mat-Su doesn't understand the importance of oil and gas property taxes, maintenance of a harbor, etc.
Brena asks whether their concerns about the kind of representation they're getting from Mat-Su legislators (Sen. Shower) will improve when the district has MORE Mat-Su (going from 40% range to 76%).

Pierce: No.
Pierce brings up the Alaska Gasline Port Authority, a group formed by Fairbanks and Valdez.

Now that takes me back to my early News-Miner days.
Asked about the challenges that the Valdez-proposed map was unconstitutional for how it handled other parts of the state.

Pierce says the map was drawn quickly without expert help: "This was nothing but a conceptual-type map for the board to at least take a look at it."
Pierce says it seems like the board was fine with ignoring Valdez's concerns in its effort to satisfy many other area's concerns. She says it's not fair that Valdez has to suffer just because there's not a clear where to put it.

"We seem to get what's left."
Pierce says Valdez has always been a problem for redistricting but it's been a downhill slide:

"We have gone from good to bad to horrible, in my opinion. This particular map seems to be the very worst scenario for us."
Asked what she'd hope the judge would do, Pierce says she'd like to see Valdez placed into a more similar district.

"When we go to Juneau and attempt to talk to our representation—our senator doesn't want to speak with us—there's very little they can offer us."
That's it for Pierce.

They're into the lunch break and will be back at 1:15.

See y'all then.
They're back. They're taking up Valdez's professional witness Kimball Brace, the president of EDS Inc. an "election data services" company that specializes in redistricting, reapportionment, census and elections.
Brace gives us some history on redistricting process, describing a process where you'd climb up a ladder and call out lines to note keepers below.

Says it went from a process of drawing 10s of maps to 1,000s of maps. Computers have made it very sophisticated.
And some basic explanation of census blocks and census tracts. You can't split blocks because they're the smallest area created by the census.
Brace says that the census blocks CAN be updated with the input of the state. He says that Alaska didn't do a very good job of challenging/updating the blocks. He said they left it to the munis if at all, largely leaving it to Census' automated efforts.

Happens in '5, '6 yrs.
Brace starts to get into his analysis of the Alaska Redistricting Board's decisions. He starts to get into something about the data errors... which gets an objection from Alaska Redistricting Board attorney Matt Singer.
Brace: "The 30-day clock that is in Alaska law is very, very short. ... Most states give the Legislature or a commission more time. Not only do you have a short timetable, but you started way late."
Brace says the Alaska Redistricting Board was behind the ball on the process and should've been doing things to prepare to hit the ground running once the 30-day window to prepare maps opened with the arrival of census data.
He says the consequence was the 30-day window, which is already small, was used spending time understanding the software, etc.
Brace says he discovered "anomalies" in a majority of the districts, finding that the board's population numbers for the shape files and maps didn't match population numbers.
Brace: "What is the plan the board generated because I'm seeing two different things. How do I know what the board passed?"

He says the final plan produced by the Alaska Redistricting Board isn't exactly clear what they produced.
Stone (Mat-Su) asks what's the consequence of the anomalies?

Brace says it's unclear what happened with 27 House districts (Districts 11 through 37, it sounds like).
Asked about the remedy, Brace says he'd like to asks the board: "What's the right numbers? What's the right geography? What did you pass? What did you think you passed?"
Brace says the decision not to start with a consistent numbering of House districts (like, say, start with 1 in a certain area) was an error that affected much of the rest of the process, creating confusion in mapping and testimony.
To be clear, I didn't get a super good read on which districts were impacted. I thought it was 27 total districts.

Brace says he believes the board improperly looked at the Voting Rights Act too early, which is a huge no-no for the state's established Hickel Process.

The 2010's round focused first on the VRA and then the Alaska Constitutional bounds. It's why the Supreme Court tossed it.
Brace says that the board had the racial data on too early in the process. He notes that they eventually turned it off later in the process.
Brace says that the racial data being turned off later in the process isn't a cover because the board already saw the data and may have already been drawing maps with the data in mind.
Now he's getting into concerns about how Republicans pack minorities into a handful of districts while Democrats want to take those concentrations of minorities into different districts.

Did he see any packing?

Brace: Yes, HDs 38 and 39. (Bethel and Nome districts)
Brace says Binkley's focus on Fairbanks affected everything: "It looked as though Chairman Binkley was focused on protecting Fairbanks and not allowing Fairbanks to be split. ... It was that intransigence ... that caused a basic structure of how the board's plan came into place."
There's some supplemental testimony from Brace that was filed. Before they get into it, Singer objects. He says no one gets additional cracks at supplemental affidavits.
Amdur-Clark agrees with Singer, adding that he has an objection to considering Brace to be considered an expert on socio-economic issues.
We're getting a pause on the trial now to handle this issue.

Brena argues that supplemental testimony/affidavits should be allowed because the trial is STILL going through discovery and fights over the record. He says they should get an opportunity to respond to new revelations.
Brena continues that it's not the time and place—in the middle of Valdez's witness testimony—to try to challenge the filing of a new affidavit. He says Singer had plenty of opportunity to move to strike the supplement.
After hearing the back and forth, Judge Matthews says he's not going to exclude any of the supplemental affidavits. He says everyone gets a crack at updating the affidavits because of the nature of the trial.

Matthews: "Ultimately, I want all the information."
All that for Stone (Mat-Su) to ask Brace about his supplemental affidavit and why it was filed: "It was clear to me (Redistricting Board Executive Director) Mr. Torkelson's affidavit and supplemental was not accurately reflecting what I was testifying about."
And now they're into their afternoon break.

Back at 3 p.m.
Into the board’s cross of Brace.

Singer asks Brace for his hourly rate: $400

How much has he billed so far? No clue.

How long has he been in Alaska? Since the weekend.

Been before? Yes.

To bush Alaska? Kinda.

License plate? GMANDER
How about the Daily Show where they called you the “Picasso of gerrymandering”? Sure, it was satirical.

Brace also redistricted state Sen. Barack Obama out of his seat, launching his run to the U.S. Senate and presidency.
Singer gets into Brace's role in the Illinois 4th, called the most gerrymandered district in U.S. It was ordered by the court to preserve Hispanic voting preference.

It was featured in the WaPo minigolf:…
Brace says it's not pretty but he's proud of it.
Singer questions Brace's role in the Rhode Island maps, which allowed all incumbents to avoid being paired together.
Now that we're past Mr. Brace's interesting past involvement in other states' redistricting efforts, we're now going over his observations of the Alaska Redistricting Board.

He says he didn't see them draw maps until Sept. 7.

Singer argues they did prior at prior meetings.
Singer plays part of an 8/24 meeting where the board's fiddling with maps.

Brace says that they're looking at regions but not actually drawing maps.

Singer asks if he means that map drawing is actually drawing maps?

Brace says, yeah, that's what most would consider mapping.
Brace's review of the mapping data and early maps created by the board shows that the board did, in fact, have race data turned on. This is a big, potential red flag for the whole process.
Singer asks how Brace's statements that they didn't start mapping until Sept. 7 by the fact that there are several dozen draft plans contained in those files (where he discovered the race data being turned on).

Brace says there's a difference between minor maps and a full map.
Then there's a transcript from Nicole Borromeo that talks about "VRA members."

Brace wonders if it's "numbers." Singer concedes that the transcripts might not be perfect.
Singer is going after Brace's affidavit that splices together two statements from Borromeo 20 pages apart in her deposition. Brace says he was paraphrasing.

Singer: Is quoting the same thing as paraphrasing?

Brace: No, but it's direct quotes.

Singer: Isn't that misleading?
Brace says he doesn't think it's misleading. He could have been clearer about where the statements were coming from but says they capture the point of the problem.

Singer makes a lengthy hypothetical about the color of the sky and turkey sandwiches.
Brace says that'd be taking two completely different and unrelated statements.

He says this case is all about Alaska Redistricting Board and its connection with the Voting Rights Act.
Singer's also critical of this affidavit that splices together several statements from Borromeo without referencing the questions. Here's the blurry page and the footnote:
And now they're getting into the maps that Brace, the Picasso of Gerrymandering, suggested as alternatives. They're debating on what you have to do with excess population from a municipality.
The Hickel process (the rules for Alaska) say it needs to all go one place. Brace notes that in other states, there's an argument that having more representatives is good.

Singer says that's not the rule though for Hickel.
Singer says there were a load of other plans that split off Fairbanks' excess population into a single House district. So, isn't it possible?

Brace says, sure, it's possible but the Redistricting Board came into it with preset constraints that forced the problem with Valdez.
A lot of back and forth over the minority voting rights in the rural Alaska districts. Talking about the percentage needed to drive a decision, voting ages, etc.
Then there's some talk about the main industry in HD37 (Dillingham) and how it's fishing and how there's itinerant workers in that district.
A lot of questioning that was challenging Brace's assertions about the Voting Rights Act interplay with rural Alaska.
Some of it was hard to follow, but Brace was largely arguing that drawing down Alaska Native population in some districts (as contemplated by the Valdez plan) would be acceptable because those districts could still elect candidates of their preference.
Singer was challenging that assertion, by bringing up the reality that voter registration numbers and census numbers don't paint a complete picture on their own.

That's it for Singer's cross examination.
And now into cross by Amdur-Clark (Doyon).

Amdur-Clark questions just how well Brace understands the differences and complexities between Alaska Native populations. Brace says he's relying on the Census Bureau and their more detailed info is not available, yet.
Amdur-Clark asks whether Brace ever reviewed Alaska Native language demographics. Brace says he's done no research on the issue. He's also not done a deep dive on differences between Interior Alaska Native communities and coastal ones.
Amdur-Clark brings up a previous Alaska Supreme Court ruling that said matching Interior Alaska Native communities with North Slope communities was the "worst-case scenario" when it comes to socio-economic integration.
Amdur-Clark brings up this Valdez alternative. That would go from St. Lawrence Island to the eastern boundary of the Fairbanks North Star Borough, grabbing Nome and Elim along the way.

Brace says it's connecting communities along the Yukon River.
Amdur-Clark asks whether several Inupiaq communities are Inupiaq communities. Brace says he'll have to take his word for it.

Amdur-Clark asks if he was drawing these maps without any specific knowledge of these communities. Brace says, yeah, he was looking at Yukon River.
Again, this all comes back to my earlier point: Alaska needs more House districts if it wants them to reasonably reflect the interests of the state.
Some more back and forth that essentially boils down to: You don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the complex differences between Alaska Natives.
Hah, Amdur-Clark asks precisely that: Is it your opinion that Alaska Natives are a single monolithic group?

Brace: No, I didn't say that. But that's what the Census says (right now, they're working on more granular output) and I'm working off their data.
Amdur-Clark: You don't know about the socioeconomic integration of the villages in western Alaska, do you?

Brace says, no, but he's relying on the available data.

Amdur-Clark: Who's a better expert on this, Chair John Binkley or you?
Amdur-Clark now gets onto the Parks Highway-centered district basically suggesting that it raises some of the similar issues about socio economic integration and connectivity.
Amdur-Clark bringing up the Valdez-drawn alternatives. He points out that Brace had argued the point that residents should be able to travel within a district without leaving its boundaries.

But this district does just that:
That wraps up today's questioning.

Amdur-Clark will continue questioning Brace tomorrow morning. Redirect after with Brena.

Then we'll get into Doyon's witnesses, which includes Alaska Redistricting Board member Nicole Borromeo.
Calista is set to start on Monday of next week.

Borromeo has a hard cut-off for a flight tomorrow and would be available again Tuesday/Wednesday next week.
Judge Matthews acknowledges the risk in asking but asks how much time the plaintiffs need on cross examination of Borromeo. Gets some chuckles.
Interesting final point.

Atty Wells (East Anchorage) says they will be filing a motion to expand their complaint to include racial dilution issues based on the discovery and statistical errors that she says undermined the VRA analysis.
And NOW that's it.

We'll be back tomorrow at 9 a.m. with continued questioning of Mr. Brace followed by questioning of Alaska Redistricting Board Member Nicole Borromeo.


• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with Matt Acuña Buxton

Matt Acuña Buxton Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @mattbuxton

Jan 25
I'm tracking redistricting, but a really interesting presentation over in House Finance right now. Currently meeting with the Alaska Permanent Fund consultants, Callan and Associates, talking about risk modeling and ad hoc draws on the fund.

It's important because there's concern that following the firing of Executive Director Angela Rodell, the fund's Board of Trustees may opt for a riskier investment strategy and break with rules-based approach for payouts to government.
Earlier, Greg Allen of Callan and Associates said the fund's draw—5% POMV—is about right in terms of potential risk when you consider the growth and annual inflation.
Read 16 tweets
Jan 24
It's trial day for the Mat-Su Borough/MSB Manager Brown's challenge to the Alaska Redistricting Board. They've got two main points:

We don't like Valdez; they don't like us.
You crammed too many voters into Mat-Su districts.


#akleg #akredistrict
They'll also get an out-of-order witness from the Valdez case, Valdez Mayor Sharon Scheidt.

The Redistricting Board had objected to several Mat-Su witnesses (their testimony is pre-filed) and Judge Matthews has overruled them, but notes that he'll still weigh the concerns.
First up is Mat-Su Mayor Edna Devries. Questioning first comes from Brena (Valdez) who's asking her about the socio-economic integration between Valdez and Mat-Su.

She says Mat-Su and Valdez are pretty different.
Read 89 tweets
Jan 21
On the board testimony issues, Judge Matthews: "Both parties make arguments that are well-grounded."
He says Singer already had the chance to file testimony and supplemental affidavits for his witnesses. Singer doesn't get to call additional re-directs (additional questioning) but can file supplemental affidavits for consideration.

Plaintiffs would get opportunity for cross.
Wells apologizes for requiring Bahnke fly into Anchorage, says she will not be calling her for cross examination today
Read 33 tweets
Jan 21
The first day of the trial challenging the Alaska Redistricting Board's work is underway. Today, they'll be kicking it off with the East Anchorage plaintiffs, who are challenging the Senate pairings with the conservative Eagle River.

#akleg #akredistrict

It's going to be an unusual trial because the direct testimony has already been filed. The opening arguments, too. They'll be starting out with cross examination and then direct testimony.
First, they're taking up several objections raised by the Alaska Redistricting Board against lay testimony and expert testimony brought by East Anchorage.

Judge Matthews rejects both motions, adding that he'll take the hearsay testimony as it comes.
Read 87 tweets
Jan 20
The House Finance Committee is underway with an overview hearing on Gov. Dunleavy's budget proposal.


Steininger explaining how the state's budget has been reduced by ~5% since Dunleavy took office with most of the cuts coming to the University of Alaska and a few other areas. Notes quite a bit of it, though, has been eaten up by more spending on public safety, corrections.
Rep. Foster asks why Steininger chose FY19 as the starting point, asking whether it's intended to make the budget look better.

Steininger says it's to "focus on the achievements of this administration."
Read 36 tweets
Jan 20
S. Finance is underway. They're taking a look at the revenue forecast with DoR's Chief Economist Dan Stickel. Stedman prefaces by saying investments have surpassed oil, but "that might be switching around."


Stedman says they all need to start settling into a base number for oil price. The state has started to update it more regularly, which Stedman suggests is not particularly helpful because it can make for big swings in the budget outlook.
How's the state's economy doing? "Still a ways to go," Stickel says.
Read 21 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!