Clock ticking for Alaska lawmakers to draft energy bill
Originally published Tuesday, August 5, 2008 at 3:46 p.m.
Updated Tuesday, August 5, 2008 at 10:11 p.m.
Digg
delicious
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!JUNEAU -- Lawmakers are down to two days to agree on an energy relief package to help Alaskans with soaring energy costs, but they appear light years apart on a solution.
On the table so far is the Senate's $1.3 billion, two-year plan approved late Monday night that dramatically reduces Gov. Sarah Palin's call for a $1,200 cash payment to most residents, but adds several utility and heating subsidies.
The House Finance Committee didn't agree with that version, instead backing its own plan that calls for a $1,200 payout and suspension of the fuel tax, but without the assistance on wintertime energy bills. That two-year plan would cost about $825 million.
The House planned to vote on its plan Wednesday morning, while lawmakers have until 11:59 p.m. Thursday to resolve their differences.
The question: What's fair? A blanket sum for all Alaskans or assistance based on utility rates that could mean thousands of dollars for some and hundreds for others? Perhaps a little of each?
The debate has also prompted some lawmakers to question whether a $1.3 billion assistance bill - even if the state can afford it with its oil production riches - isn't simply putting every Alaskan "on the dole."
On Tuesday, lawmakers took their differences public in a House Finance Committee hearing, then resumed their parallel but divergent paths as the clock kept ticking.
The respectful exchange between the Senate and the House kicked off Tuesday afternoon's hearing with the Senate defending its bill.
The Senate's two-year package includes a $500 one-time payout to most Alaskans. That's $700 less that what Palin and the House recommend.
Senate Finance Committee Co-chairmen Lyman Hoffman and Bert Stedman said the bill is inclusive but conceded it could be improved.
Hoffman, a Bethel Democrat, stressed the importance of a two-year plan that includes various heating and utility subsidies.
"That gets us away from trying to work out an energy package for another year, next year," Hoffman said. "This will give us breathing room so we can address the high cost of energy and a longer term solution for all Alaskans.
"It's critical whatever package we come up with, it should entail a two-year solution so that it will give the next Legislature breathing room so Alaskans will know their high energy costs will be addressed."
It's urgent that lawmakers act now, Hoffman stressed.
"Our job is half done, and we have 14 votes (out of 20) for the Senate plan," Hoffman said. "We are half way there; in light of the problems we are facing, Alaskans need energy relief and we have two days to get that accomplished."
But the Senate's version got to be too inclusive and too complex, said House Finance Co-chairman Kevin Meyer, an Anchorage Republican.
Initially, the Senate looked to subsidize heating fuel costs above $3 a gallon for no more than 600 gallons of heating fuel or propane per family for a winter covering a seven-month period. That got boosted to 850 gallons by the time it hit the Senate floor.
Additionally, relief would also be provided to natural gas consumers for costs above $3 per million cubic feet for up to 100 mcf purchased for a winter. The national average for residential natural gas costs is $16 per mcf. Places like Anchorage that rely heavily on natural gas barely pay half that.
After hearing from the Senate leaders in the committee meeting, Meyer opted for a simpler version that the House Finance Committee quickly approved so the entire House could begin debating it.
"It's too much for us to accept; it's gotten too complicated," Meyer said. "We are trying to decide as government that we know best on how to deal with your heating cost and motor vehicle costs.
"That's why we've reverted back to saying, 'Here's $1,200, you decide best how to deal with your heating and fuel costs.' It's easier to let the people decide themselves rather than us."
That meant pulling back from thoughts of devising a program that subsidizes utility costs, primarily in rural areas whose retail prices far outstrip national averages.
Rep. Mary Nelson, D-Bethel, warned that the House's version does not help those who need it the most: people living in the state's 170 rural villages.
"We are going back to the same very shallow, very arbitrary distribution," Nelson said. "Twelve hundred dollars in one part of Alaska does not meet the same needs that $1,200 in another part of Alaska does. I really hope that on the House floor we make some substantive changes."
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
Anyone heard of the details around a price refund for anything over three dollars a gallon up to 850 gallons of heating fuel. Is it per person, family, house, etc. Would seem it would be pretty hard to follow a person around the state and keep track of how much oil they may buy and at what price. Do you pay up front and get a refund? Seems like this could get complicated. Then again, if oil keeps falling (down to $118 a barrel today) by October, it may be a mute issue.
Here is the link to the Senate Bill SB4002C
http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/get_b...
Five hundred what happened to the twelve hundred guess we are not worth it. They must of found something else to use our money on typical politicians the lowest form of scum on earth. Keep your little five hundred bucks and just lower the cost of fuels and electric
I had the following questions/notes after reading the bill:
For GVEA customers, will a $0.10 / kw-hr be credited at the time of billing to the residential customer under the power cost equalization program or does it fall under the $0.05 /kw-hr minimum?
Is the electrical utility subsidy year round?
The plan penalizes those who supplement their heat using wood (and coal). The cost of fuel for hauling and cutting wood and vehicle maintenance or purchasing delivered wood has to come out of the $500 disbursement. The use of wood heat could be considered a renewable energy resource. Nor is coal purchase covered.
Will landlords with a combined leasing and motel rental units receive a 300 gal/per unit regardless of lease or motel status and would residential/non-residential portions be calculated solely on unit numbers or pro-rated based on square footage?
How is renter to know if they are entitled to a rent reduction based on the landlord’s relief payment / credit?
Will residences with an attached business but single fuel source be required to pro-rate their fuel usage or is it considered a single residential unit?
No energy relief is provided for fuel oil or gas purchased from April 1 – August 31 which may be deemed an inequity for those on automatic fill or boiler/gas hot water service.
What happens if resident switches from oil heat to natural gas during the September 1 – March 31 time period as that would be “more than one type of fuel delivered”?
Additional questions/notes:
When and where will forms be available to submit payment requests and will payment plans require monthly submission?
When and how will the list approved suppliers be provided?
Where will the payment requests be submitted and the intended turn around time by the state?
How many additional state employees and overhead is required to administer the “emergency energy relief” and review payment requests, processing and mailing out checks?
Will the payments under “emergency energy relief” be considered non-taxable income by the federal government?
With the additional revenues from current North Slope crude royalties, how many additional dollars will be allocated to the Permanent Fund account and how will the additional funds be deposited and spent by the legislature?
The $500 payment does not adequately comply with the intent of Governor Palin’s statement of June 21:
"It's a one-time, special return of the vast wealth that Alaska has right now. We're returning it to the resource owners, the people of Alaska," the governor said Friday. "I am confident the people of Alaska can spend the surplus dollars better than state government is going to spend them."
allegheny's questions (above) only point out some of the obvious issues with this mess. What a cockamamie bunch of crapola the elected morons have pulled together this time. The overpaid fools sitting with their fingers up their noses in Juneau could take a simple 2 + 2 equation and make up some complicated formula, 'discuss' it for days on end and then STILL get the wrong answer.
Bottom line: don't expect any real 'help' from the government, no matter how loudly the sheeple bleet. Take steps NOW to take care of yourself, whether that's turning down the thermostat and learning to live like you're in a sub-arctic climate or just packing it up and leaving. And.... (you guessed it):
VOTE OUT ALL INCUMBENTS THIS ELECTION CYCLE. If you think not, tell me what positive thing your fine representatives have done for you lately...
If Energy Relief for Alaskans doesn't include all of Alaska's propane staying in Alaska for the use of Alaskan's then we should trade Juneau to Canada for taking AGIA back TO THE CHOPPING BLOCK.
KEEP ALL THE PROPANE IN ALASKA !!
FIFTY FOUR FORTY OR FIGHT !!
...I used to have a girlfriend named Juneau.
She was mentally ill and drank herself to death.
In 1982 I was fortunate enough to have been assigned to the 82nd Airborne Division when my unit was selected to undergo training at the Northern Warfare Training Center at Ft. Greely.
When I arrived that winter I was elated to say the least. You have to understand, that as a Newyorican, whenever I was taken to Yankee Stadium by my grandfather for night games, he would tell us about a place called Fairbanks, Alaska, where baseball was played without the aid of artificial light. To me, Alaska was a place filled with natural wonders and a stoic people.
In 1992, I again was fortunate when the FAA hired me and subsequently assigned me to the Fairbanks Automated Flight Service Station. Finally, I had a place I could call "home" and not just a residence.
Now for the rub. I have marvelled at how the place, that I had romanticized in my youth, has turned out be nothing but a Socialist State with an endless roll of whiners, me first and generally people who can best be described as sheeple.
For years now, I have tried to reconcile the dichotomy that is Alaska. Alas, I think my grandfather may have erred by not having visited Alaska before he started to fill my head with thoughts of a faraway Eden.
Do not get me wrong. I have found some wonderful souls here in Fairbanks, including my wife, but I think that most of my fellow citizens cannot or will not look beyond their own selfish needs to achieve a greatness that could indeed make us the envy of our country.
Perhaps my children will learn from the all too frequent calls for more State and Federal funding in our name.
Alaskans, you need to decide what it is you want. A state in which you are "king of your castle" or a State where you are a serf, a peon, a drudge, a footman, a hand, a laborer, a messenger, a pawn, a peasant, a servant or indeed, a slave.
The Legislature can keep the $500 an use it for their retirement. The "surplus revenue rebate" is turning into a joke!!! And I am not laughing. The Alaska Senate has made the problem worse by delaying any meaningful distribution of the windfall profits that rightfully belong to the People of Alaska for the sale of OUR resources. For all purposes this is surplus of the needs to run State Government and in place of ALASKAN'S State tax liabilities.
While ALASKANS are suffering extra ordinary energy cost and facing ominous financial and in some cases, life threatening consequences...we got Legislators playing games.
THEY HAVE JUST TAXED THEMSELVES OUT OF A JOB!!!
out_in_the_cold, you are what is wrong with America today.
What are " ALASKAN'S State tax liabilities"?
More than 80% of our state government is bought and paid for by our friends in Big Oil.
What you pay, if anything, is insignificant.
Hum....Makes me want to leave Alaska now after 6 years of being up here...Senators are lining their pockets with cash while most can't even pay for oil. Maybe the whole Senate needs to go under judicial review. Time for Alaska to clean out all the corrupt members in the House and Senate.
Ulises Gonzalez: You mean BIG OIL "owns" all the resources that they lease...that's kind of like a renter getting title to the house cause he lives in the place and making the landlord pay them for being there. SORRY, fellow...I think you might be what is wrong with America if you think every thing belongs to the wealthy and they can run over all of us average Americans.
You might call BIG OIL your "friend" but I view the Multi-National as strictly business partners that need a REAL CLOSE over-sight.
I just read the official senate bill text and ran the numbers. The Senate bill would cut the already low natural gas price in Anchorage in half. The equivalent of 1 gallon of heating oil would cost 42 cents in Anchorage! This is absolute insanity to say the least. Here is a complete list of prices and the bill text as it pertains to natural gas.
Source --- $ per million BTU's
GVEA Electricity 59.89
Chugach Electricity 34.31
Fairbanks Heating Oil 34.33
Fairbanks Natural Gas 22.67
Heating Oil with rebate 22.06
US Average Natural Gas 16.24
Wood Pellets 15.53
Spruce Firewood 13.79
Birch Firewood 12.32
Anchorage Natural Gas 10.22
Coal 4.40
Anchorage Gas with rebate 3.00
"A customer may receive an emergency energy relief credit from a natural gas supplier on the qualified distributor list prepared under (i) of this section. The credit is based on the amount that exceeds $3.00 an Mcf that the customer pays for each Mcf of natural gas delivered September 1, 2008, through March 31, 2009, and September 1, 2009, through March 31, 2010, for a building in the state that is primarily used for one or more residences. The credit is limited to not more than 100 Mcf of natural gas used for a single family residence, or 50 Mcf of natural gas used for each unit in a multi-unit structure, during September 1, 2008, through March 31, 2009, and not more than 100 Mcf used for a single family residence, or 50 Mcf used for each unit in a multi-unit structure, during September 1, 2009, through March 31, 2010."
read it here:
http://www.legis.state.ak.us/basis/get_b...
Subsidized 850 gallons of fuel oil to $3 a gallon
Subsidizes 5cents of the price of electricity for those the HEAT THEIR HOMES ELECTRICALLY
subsidizes the first 100 MCF of natural gas to $3 per MCF.
The fuel oil subsidy is a real subsidy.
the gas susidy is a giveaway, designed to give all customers extra money.
BUT the fuel subsidy is worth more.
On the other hand, an even amount off the top for fairbanks and anchorage means anchorage gets a much higher percent off. $1000 off our heating bills means some of us will be paying $4000... whereas anchorage-ites may see much more significant portions of their total heating bills reduced.
Also to answer another question, the fuel benefit is written as a rebate. meaning you PAY the amount on the bill, and the state will cut you a check or whatever for the amount you are due.
The natural gas benefit is designed as a credit on their gas bill.... which is way better. I'm not sure if the credit will be instant or not, though.
To put it real simple, 7.2 gallons worth of heating oil would cost you $3 in Anchorage while it would cost you $22 in Fairbanks.
It's quite sad what the legislature can do to a simple idea.
Ulises Gonzalez - apparently you haven't paid much attention as to why we "are nothing but a Socialist State with an endless roll of whiners, me first and generally people who can best be described as sheeple and cannot or will not look beyond their own selfish needs." Perhaps you ought to study the State of Alaska constitution and see how the Federal Government owns 65% of lands in Alaska and we individual property owners do not own mineral rights like all other States.
Also if you'd read Fairbanksgas' comment above, see how much Anchorage pays for its heating and electric costs which are 1/3 of more less than the cost of the rest of Alaska. Anchorage has been provided with natural gas out of the Cook Inlet area for 50 or so years at a greatly subsidized rate. Since Alaska's resources belongs to ALL Alaskans, this is UNCONSTITUTIONAL and that is why we are a bunch of whiners. Hopefully, a class action lawsuit will be filed so an equitable energy cost can be implemented as you can see with this "new" plan, we will be paying $3.00/gallon for heating oil and Anchorage costs for the same btu's will be $.25 a gallon. Thank you Fairbanksgas for all your information. Whining, you betcha I am.
Sorry, that should be "we will be paying $3.00/gallon for heating oil and Anchorage costs for the same btu's will be $.42."
Don't care for the difference of "relief" between Anchorage and Fairbanks, but I do like the fact they are looking at subsidizing heating oil after $3.00
I said this about a month ago, subsidized energy is wrong. The only way to ensure that all Alaskans get a fair and equitable share is through a full rebate. The other posts on this thread make the point too well that our 20 member Senate didn't get it right, and neither will the 40 member House. It is too easy. We have a surplus, decide what is a fair amount to return to the people, and send it out. The Feds get a share, more from higher income homes and less from lower income homes. How much is it going to cost to manage the fuel rebate program versus what we would pay out in Federal income taxes?
People accept the differences in the cost of living between rural Alaska, Fairbanks, and Anchorage. Alaskans don't expect that to change with this cost sharing plan. We simply expect a fair share of the surplus so we can spend it where we need to spend it. The simpler the State makes it, the more value they will get out of the money they spend. One amature built the ark, hundreds of experts built the titanic.
Onapa-
This energy issue does not affect all Alaskan's equally....far from it. I'm glad the legislature isn't taking the easy way out.
I notice the updated version 7:35 pm...Looks like the Legislature is reverting back to the original '$1200 SURPLUS REVENUE REBATE...and you decide how to best deal with your heating and fuel costs.'..per Rep Kevin Meyers.
About time Government quit treating us like stupid fools...I don't need some dumb bureaucrat telling me how to spend my money.
I just need some of MY money to spend as I best see fit. It should have been more than the $1,200 per person, but considering the education process to get this far and the alarm clock going off.
VOTE YES, on the simple version!!!!
And get it to the Governor be for the barge makes the last trip down the Yukon River for Alaskans out that direction.
Here's the phone list for YOUR legislators: http://w3.legis.state.ak.us/docs/pdf/Pho...
DOn't just b*tch on this forum; PICK UP THE PHONE and let the people who WORK FOR YOU know what you expect them to do. If you do not make your opinion known to the people in Juneau you have NO room to complain. Be part of the process or shut up.
Although the energy issue does not impact all Alaskans equally, every Alaskan who lives in their respective communities selected their community to live in and thus knows what to expect in terms of energy costs. The important thing to note is that the Parasites, Politicians, should not play with the the money that should be EQUALLY DIVIDED among all of the citizens of the State. The politicians should not be permitted to grab the money so that they can use it to guarantee their re-election, something that the parasitic politicians are clearly trying to do by their diversion of money to the most populous area of the State. The EQUAL distribution is the only truly FAIR way to spread the windfall for the Citizens of Alaska.
FrozenAK,
You are right, a person who lives in a cabin in denali with no heat, electricity, or vehicle is not being affected the same way people that live in the bush who are paying $8 for a gallon of gas. The Senate took your side, the House is taking the Governor's stance and my stance is that the Governor's proposal is not the be all end all solution. It is simply a first step. What is the State doing with the other 8 billion dollar and growing surplus? Use what they must for long term fixes, but show me a better short term option than the $1200 rebate and I will convert.
The Senate dragged their feet on AGIA, and pushed this out with two whole days to spare in the session. They didn't even take a vote on the Governor's proposal or ask for any public debate on their Grand Plan. This Senate proposal has WASTE and bigger government written all over it! It leaves more questions than AGIA presented and uses more funds than the Governor's plan.
Keep your welfare. Make Anchorage and Juneau part of Washington State which they are much more like. Move the capital to the Interior and lets straighten this mess out. Hydro Coal and other resources we have here will make up for the Governments lack of foresight.
Pat
Make your opinion known to your legislators: CALL THEM NOW!
http://w3.legis.state.ak.us/docs/pdf/Pho...
Onapa, don't know what "people" you are talking about; certainly not me re: People accept the differences in the cost of living between rural Alaska, Fairbanks, and Anchorage. The proposed plan makes more sense than sending out a full rebate as we won't be paying 1/3 of it in Federal taxes but needs to be tweaked to bring the $3.00/gallon to a more equitable cost of heating oil vs. natural gas. As I said before, it is unconstitutional for Anchorage to be provided with low cost natural gas and if just a rebate is sent out to everyone, hopefully a class action lawsuit will be filed.
ONOPA-
I'm with you.
The rebate should be based equally on the income from OUR resources. Not on the expenses of an individual. An equal share is the only fair way.
The Senate's bill was horribly complicated and was far from fair.
Here are some examples:
The Senate bill has special circumstances like . . .
(B) DURING CALENDAR YEAR 1983, HAD A RESIDENTIAL CONSUMPTION LEVEL OF POWER ELIGIBLE FOR POWER COST EQUALIZATION . . . ."
"(C) DURING CALENDAR YEAR 1984, USED DIESEL FIRED GENERATORS . . . . ."
"(2) "fuel" means heating oil, natural gas, or propane"
Then they want to subsidize energy for purchases between September 1 and March 31.
I don't think that's even fair.
I just got my winter oil delivery yesterday, August 4, for $4.80/gal.
Those who heat with electricity or natural gas don't typically store it for oncoming the winter.
There is also a section about landlord and tenants. The landlord can keep 10% of the rebate for administrative costs.
Subsidizing "fuel" (remember:means heating oil, natural gas, or propane) does not promote conservation, or use of alternate sources like wood or coal. It's not fair to those who conserve or use alternatives. In fact it promotes the use of "fuel".
I'm glad the Senate is begining to see the light. (Even if it's a low wattage compact fluorescent )
"That's why we've reverted back to saying, 'Here's $1,200, you decide best how to deal with your heating and fuel costs.' It's easier to let the people decide themselves rather than us."
But $1,200 is only 3% of my share of the income from "my" share of the resource income.
I think something like 10% or $3,600 is more reasonable.
If there was low or no resource income how much do you think Juneau would tax my income ?
endoftheroad: When you tell a Politician in person, they nod their head. When you tell a Politician in an open forum they shuffle their feet.
ONAPA: "One amateur built the ark, hundreds of experts built the Titanic." Like your humor, and it is most appropriate with this topic.
9pm GCI Ch15: The House is discussing an amendment to add funds to utilize methane from the Anchorage solid waste disposal. (wanting the long term solutions established by Thursday and rushed).
joy_Fairbanks,
How long have you known about the differences in the cost of living between Fairbanks, Anchorage, and Rural Alaska? Ever been to Delta Junction where gas has always been half a dollar higher than here? How about Coldfoot where it's normally twice as much? That aspect hasn't changed, it's just more noticeable. People in larger towns have more competition, more demand and thus lower prices most of the time. I am sorry this is a shock and unacceptable for you. Before you choose your next hometown, you might want to check out the cost of living.
I don't disagree that Anchorage is being unfairly supported by natural gas. If you start the petition I will sign it. We don't need to sue the state, we need to get our legislature to bring gas to the interior and villages using wind power and that cabin off by it's lonesome using no power. It's the totally fair thing to do regardless if the owners just want to be left alone. The problem is that there are only two days left in this legislative session to get it done.
The function of the Government isn't to redistribute the wealth to the poor and make everything equal. If they try to do that, look out, we'll all end up in the poor house either working there or receiving services.
Onapa, don't want to make it tit for tat like a lot of the comments but I'm a life-long Alaskan and I've lived in Fairbanks for over 40 years. As for knowing the difference between living costs between here and Anchorage, have known Anchorage has had lower costs but didn't know the reason was, was that the State of Alaska was subsidizing them at our costs. And as for picking my next hometown, this is my hometown. Your wind energy solution makes as much sense as Barak Obama's solution to the energy crisis: inflate your tires. Anyone with any brains knows wind and solar energy is not only not feasible in most of Alaska but cost prohibitive.
The Governor is ready to sign her proposal, I can't say the same about all these other plans. Last minute spending ideas are popping up everywhere. What is the plan for the rest of the surplus? Leave it in the bank and let it devalue further? Spend it quickly before anyone knows where the money will end up?
Legislators, Representatives and Senators, vote on the proposal from the Governor, then and only then, research alternate and additional proposals. The people of Alaska currently have over 8 billion dollars, spend it wisely, not necessarily quickly.
joy_ you wrote: "Anyone with any brains knows wind and solar energy is not only not feasible in most of Alaska but cost prohibitive."
Damn - I'm not sure how to take that, since I'm off the grid completely and my home is powered that way... has been for years. And didn't cost a fortune to do either... Are you telling me I have no brains?
It does take some creativity to set up and tweak to get right. There are lifestyle adjustments that make it much easier to live with reduced power consumption (I hate Mr. Coffee and the microwave anyway). There are AREAS of Alaska where it is not feasible. There are areas where it could be considered cost prohibitive. But a blanket statement like you wrote is inaccurate and ... well... just lame, honey.
http://www.legis.state.ak.us/poms/messag...
Send your message now
KISS
Just remember the term above.
Keep it simple stupid.
Let each man determine how to manage that which already belongs to him.
The people of alaska are adults. The windfall belongs to the adult citizens of alaska.
Lets not use each others biased perceptions of each other to rule out any help at all on the chance that some may squander what is rightfully there's to be squandered in the first place.
"My" wind energy idea was from an episode of tougher in alaska where they are using wind turbines in a village to power their grid. It's already a reality. Whatever they decide for the long term is fine as long as they actually allow some input from the people. Hiding in Juneau and pulling this rabbit out of the hat at the last minute isn't good fiscal or political responsibility. Please use some of the windfall to prepare to get off of burning #2 diesel to produce electricity. My representatives have my surplus revenue message in their in-boxes and have for over a month. Vote on the bill at hand, then deal will the "good ideas".
Just a thought what is 1 billion divided by 620 thousand? Roughly 16 thousand? Just cut the check. I would even give 2000.00 for admin costs. So just to make it easy $14000.00
Remember, when they ask for your vote, how your representatives acted when you asked for help.
Personally, I think its time to get rid of all of them and start fresh.
Frankly, a $1200.00 subsidy is a slap in the face. 250 gallons put in the tank last week was just over $1100.00. That won't last the winter. There are some legitimate questions about energy costs in the interior. Take a look at an average electric bill ten years ago and one today. The fuel surcharge is more than a monthly electric bill for our neighbors to the South. We've got a refinery in our own back yard and more wealth in this state than most and yet we have people facing serious financial crisis because it's not just heating fuel or gas at the pump. Our groceries are more expensive because....right, transportation, fuel, heating, etc.... I have yet to run into a business that's willing to keep their prices low for the consumer and eat the increasing costs of doing business. Our dollar isn't buying what it did a year ago. Not even 6 months ago. Big Oil gets richer, the State gets Richer and the people get poorer. What's Fairbanks going to do when the mass exodus starts heading South? Who's gonna pick up the slack? It isn't going to get cheaper because there's less people here that's for sure! I don't see Big Oil jumping in there...
Rather than finding band aids to stop the bleeding we need to figure out what's causing the blood. Why are our costs higher than other metropolitan ares of the state? Why is oil going down and fuel hasn't even dropped a dime/gallon? Why isn't something being done to get GVEA off diesel generated power? Why create a program to "help" Alaskan's make their residences more energy efficient but have huge bottle necks (like staffing and a cumbersome application process) in order to participate? That particular program costs 1000.00 in inspection costs to be eligible for reimbursement. In a time where money is tight...why? Those same inspections were free a year ago.
I've never understood why Anchorage has lower fuel prices at the pump. Or lower heating costs. It's always about equality in other aspects of our state (game laws, etc) but when it comes to oil...it's every man for himself (Big Oil) and forget who gets in the way of that.
I don't see an end in sight either. Those we've asked to represent us can't seem to grasp the gravity of the situation here in the interior or other remote areas of the state. Not sure if they'll ever get it at this point.
icefshnak, on gasoline prices:
the FNSB Mayor’s Office Economic Development office did a market study in 2005 to study the price differences between Fairbanks, Anchorage and Seattle. Conclusion was our markets are isolated and small.
http://www.co.fairbanks.ak.us/MayorsOffi...
I suspect the GVEA NP diesel generating plant is part of their Energy$ense conservation program; the fuel surcharge forces co-op members to conserve electricity.
cdog63, you are off by one zero. It's roughly $1,600 not $16,000.
The earliest any money will hit is October 2nd if they add anything to the PFD.
I don't like the sound of the current fuel subsidy from the Senate. You might see some of that money in January if it passes and they stay in session long enough to figure out how to mis-manage it.
The home winterization program is a boondogle. We are wasting money trying to filter it through a beuracratic mess.
In two days they can no more equalize the cost of living between the interior and South Central area than they can control the weather. They can vote on the Governor's proposal, plan to repeat it if necessary, and start to work on a serious agenda for the next regular session. Addressing the inequity in fuel rates should get top billing. Building the bullet line to Fairbanks, and developing other power sources should be right up there. Our legislature has some home work to do before the next session and should continue the public debate on these issues between sessions so they are prepared to put forward a few bills from the start to be debated and voted on early. Hopefully this last minute haggling will be remebered and not repeated. Doubtful though.
DNM update your articles, the House passed a $1200 rebate last night. Check the ADN. With two days left wonder if anything will make it through. Back to committee it goes.
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.