State Government

Gov. Mike Dunleavy is once again threatening to veto a compromise bill legislators hammered out to boost funding for the state’s public schools and make a variety of policy changes.

Dunleavy has yet to make the threat publicly. But Clayton Holland, the superintendent of the Kenai Peninsula Borough School District, said in an interview that the governor made his intentions clear in a teleconference with school district leaders from across the state.

“Really, what it ended up boiling down to is that he does plan to veto (House Bill 57),” Holland said.

It’s the first time the governor has indicated whether he’ll sign or veto the high-profile bill, which passed the Legislature by a combined vote of 48 to 11. Lawmakers in the bipartisan, Democrat-heavy majority caucuses have said boosting education funding is their top priority for this year’s legislative session, which is now entering its final weeks.

The veto threat Dunleavy delivered to superintendents was first reported by the Alaska Landmine, a political news site.

Asked about the meeting, the governor’s press office pointed to a midday statement on the governor’s social media accounts, which did not say explicitly whether Dunleavy planned to veto the bill.

“We need a system that delivers results, not just more spending,” part of the statement said.

House Bill 57 would boost long-term public school funding by increasing basic per-student funding by $700. In an effort to compromise with Republicans in the House and Senate’s minorities and the governor, lawmakers added a variety of education policy changes to the bill. Those range from a ban on student cellphone use to incentive grants aimed at boosting reading performance and an increase in career and technical education funding.

But Dunleavy wants more, Holland said. The governor told superintendents to lobby their local legislators to pass several additional policy items.

Dunleavy told superintendents to advocate for a statewide open enrollment system, which would allow students living in one district to enroll in another. He also asked for additional changes to state laws around charter schools, and for lawmakers to fund a reading incentive grant program included in House Bill 57 without expanding corporate income taxes on out-of-state companies as lawmakers have proposed, Holland said.

School districts, community members, business leaders and local elected officials have pleaded with lawmakers for years to increase formula funding for schools by raising the base student allocation. Leaders say they’ve been forced to close schools, increase class sizes and slash electives and career and technical education programs as the formula has remained largely unchanged since 2017.

Though lawmakers have provided one-time funding for public schools in recent years, district leaders say a boost to the funding formula is essential to stopping a cycle of cuts that have dramatically reduced their offerings.

“It feels like all of the students, even the students that are most in need, are being held as bargaining chips,” said Madeline Aguillard, the head of the Kuspuk School District, who also attended the meeting and confirmed the veto threat.

Aguillard’s district, with nine schools in seven remote communities along the Kuskokwim River in Western Alaska, is already operating with bare-minimum staff and will face a 10% budget shortfall without additional funding, she said. Even the $700 increase lawmakers approved would leave her district wanting, she said.

“We have nothing left to cut,” she said.

A report from KYUK and ProPublica this year found that the state had so badly underfunded rural schools, including those in Aguillard’s district, that many are crumbling and pose health and safety hazards for students and staff alike.

Already, seven of the district’s schools are forced to rely on offsite teachers, she said, because the district is unable to afford in-person certified teachers. One school in the district has no certified teachers in it at all, she said. In others, students must rely on online learning for core subjects.

“A group of them, it’s, it’s full-blown math class. A group of them, it’s for electives,” she said. “There’s always been online programs, and supplemental (instruction), and things like that. But this isn’t supplemental anymore.”

Without a boost in funding, the few remaining cultural activities for the district’s students, which are more than 95% Alaska Native, would be among the programs on the chopping block.

“Eventually, you get to the point where you can’t cut because you literally don’t have the capacity, the staff, the resources to even open the doors,” she said. “It really feels like we’re being strangled out.”

Aguillard said she was worried the worsening offerings of the local school district would lead village residents to move their families elsewhere, forcing school closures. The Kuspuk School District’s enrollment has dropped roughly 20% since 2019, according to state data.

The threat is existential for the Alaska Native communities her district serves, she said.

“It will kill the village if the school is closed. We’ve had that happen in Kuspuk before,” she said. “We have previously closed a village school, and there are now between one and four residents in that village.”

The outlook is similarly dire for the relatively urban Kenai Peninsula school district, Holland said. The local board voted Monday to close one school, and Holland said that without additional funding, local officials would likely be forced to close at least eight more.

“We have expansive cuts happening already,” he said.

Districts around the state are in crisis, said Holland, who is also the president of the Alaska Superintendents Association.

“There’s not a district in Alaska that is not in this situation,” he said. “This isn’t a superintendent problem. This isn’t a school board problem. When the whole state is in the same boat, it’s a bigger problem, right? It lands back in the executive office and with the legislators.”

The meeting with Dunleavy and Education Commissioner Deena Bishop left Holland disappointed, frustrated and desperate, he said.

“We’ve asked about compromise all year, that’s been our theme,” he said. “And I believe the legislators did that, right? They came up with a bill that no one really got everything they wanted out of it, which I think is … a good thing.”

Lawmakers have said they’re confident they have the requisite 40 votes to override a veto of House Bill 57. At least six minority Republicans, one more than would be necessary, told Alaska Public Media they’d vote to override the governor.

But that may not be enough to actually boost education funding next school year.

The Alaska Constitution allows Dunleavy to issue line-item vetoes that reduce or eliminate spending, even if it’s required by state law. Holland said Dunleavy had threatened to issue a line-item veto reducing school funding if lawmakers don’t pass the additional policy items he demanded.

It would take 45 of 60 legislators to override a line-item veto, and it’s not clear that enough lawmakers would vote to do so.

It’s thus possible lawmakers could succeed in changing the formula dictating how much school districts should get from the state, but fail to force the governor to actually fund the full amount specified by law.

If Dunleavy were to veto the funding, said Rep. Jeremy Bynum, R-Ketchikan, that would clash with his approach to the Permanent Fund dividend. Dunleavy has consistently proposed budgets with a dividend in line with the amount laid out in statute — even this year, when doing so would have required draining half the state’s savings.

“That’s what he has done this whole time that I’m aware that he’s been putting these budgets out, is that he’s trying to follow what’s in statute,” Bynum said. “I think it’d be a departure from that practice to go in and then veto funding out from a statutory formula.”

Put another way, vetoing the school funding “would effectively be breaking the law,” said Rep. Rebecca Himschoot, I-Sitka.

Even so, overriding a budget veto is difficult — not only because of the three-quarters majority required, but also because it would require lawmakers to gather in a somewhat rare special session. Line-item vetoes are typically announced in mid-to-late June, long after the May 21 deadline for the regular session to conclude.

“I think that veto would be sustained,” said Rep. Andy Josephson, D-Anchorage. “I mean, I can only base it on the experience I’ve had.”

This marks the second year in a row Dunleavy has threatened to veto a school funding bill unless lawmakers pass his preferred policies. Last year, he followed through on that threat, and the Legislature fell one vote short of overriding him.

As lawmakers debated the override last year, several cited a similar threat from Dunleavy to veto education funding even if the override succeeded.

The Senate minority leader, Sen. Mike Shower, R-Wasilla, said he was optimistic lawmakers and the governor could come to an agreement.

“The daylight between what the governor is asking for and what is left is very small,” he said.

But Himschoot said she remained skeptical of key elements of the governor’s request, especially his call for open enrollment. Lawmakers have previously said the system Dunleavy requested could prevent military families from enrolling in their local school after they’re transferred from elsewhere.

“So many things that work or work differently somewhere else have a different impact in Alaska, and I’m not willing to take risks like that with our system,” Himschoot said.

Josephson said he was frustrated with the governor’s veto threat and the prospect that schools could go another year without a long-term boost in funding.

“I think at some point, supporters of our public schools need to sue,” he said. “I don’t know what else to tell them.”

This story has been updated. 

The Alaska Senate approved its version of the state budget Wednesday, including a $1,000 Permanent Fund dividend and, for now, a $150 million surplus. But senators say they expect that surplus to evaporate in the year to come, and they’re warning of rough seas ahead.

“It’s clear to me that the decisions next year will be even more difficult than the decisions that we have made today,” said Sen. Lyman Hoffman, D-Bethel, the Senate Finance Committee co-chair responsible for the operating budget.

In an effort to avoid using the state’s $2.8 billion savings account, the Constitutional Budget Reserve, senators stripped out nearly every budget increase requested by the governor and those approved by the House in its version of the budget last month.

In total, the Senate’s version of the budget is $350 million less than was approved by the House, and $1.7 billion less than Gov. Mike Dunleavy proposed, according to the Legislature’s nonpartisan budget analysts.

“Now is the time to preserve our rainy-day fund for the coming storm,” Hoffman said.

Winds from that coming storm are already buffeting the current year’s budget.

One particularly stiff headwind is the worsening outlook for oil prices. As of Monday, a barrel of Alaska North Slope crude went for $65.63, according to the state Department of Revenue, below the $68 figure state forecasters said they expected in their March revenue forecast.

And it’s not looking like that headwind will let up anytime soon. The federal Energy Information Administration, in a forecast released Monday, said it expected oil prices to fall further due in part to slowing global economic growth fueled by President Donald Trump’s tariffs. A boost in OPEC production is expected to push prices down further. And though Trump has sought to expand oil production in Alaska, that’s not likely to provide relief in the short term, since drillers’ capital investments count against their tax bills.

State officials warned Hoffman and other legislative budgeters that prices could average as low as $64 a barrel in the coming fiscal year, he said.

Another headwind Hoffman identified is federal spending. The federal government is the biggest single source of state revenue.

“The state’s budget has over $6 billion in federal revenues that help pay for many services, from Medicaid and heating assistance to fish and game research and K 12 education,” Hoffman said.

Even a 5% cut to federal spending would leave the budget reeling, he said.

“Time will sort out what funds are cut in Washington,” Hoffman said. “If only 5% of the federal revenues are cut to the $6 billion that we receive, that would leave an impact of over $300 million to our budget.”

On the Senate floor Wednesday, there was, as there has been for roughly the past decade, debate over how big the Permanent Fund dividend should be. The planned $1,000 figure would be the lowest inflation-adjusted dividend in state history. Even Hoffman said it would be too little.

But the debate was, at times, halfhearted. There were familiar attempts to raise the dividend to the amount set out in state law — nearly $3,900 this year — and the amount specified by a 50-50 formula Dunleavy proposed in 2021. Senate Minority Leader Mike Shower, R-Wasilla, put forward and quickly withdrew amendments that would raise the dividend to those amounts.

He did it largely for the Alaskans watching the proceedings at home, he said, simultaneously acknowledging the lean times now and to come made it unrealistic.

“This is not forgotten,” he said. “The headwinds of the fiscal situation and other things are changing that dynamic at the moment.”

The one dividend amendment that did come to a vote — a Shower proposal to boost it to $1,500, a move that would require exceeding the government’s 5% annual drawdown from the Permanent Fund set out in state law — failed with the bipartisan, Democrat-heavy majority caucus in opposition.

There was also plenty of debate about how the state should fix its structural budget issues. There were calls from, among others, Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, to expand state revenue.

“We are not following our constitutional obligation to get the maximum value for our resources,” he said. “You want a full PFD, you want a half PFD, a 50-50, PFD, you’ve got to fix oil taxes.”

The Legislature has passed one bill that would raise state revenue, a corporate income tax change aimed at bringing in more money from out-of-state companies, but has failed to come to terms on other proposals that would expand taxes on oil-producing businesses.

And there were calls from others, including Shower, to return to negotiations on a long-term fiscal plan — including an expansion of taxes and ways to keep government spending in check, like a spending cap and a periodic review of state programs.

“Part of why we are here is because we haven’t enacted enough of that yet,” he said.

There was even a rebuke of the governor’s budget proposal from Republican Sen. Rob Yundt, R-Wasilla. Dunleavy’s budget, released in December, proposed drawing $1.5 billion from the $2.8 billion rainy-day fund.

“I cannot wrap my mind around walking into my house and dropping a budget on my wife’s desk that’s a billion and a half dollars upside down on Day One,” Yundt said. “It shouldn’t even be legal.”

Hoffman said it was a herculean task to construct a balanced budget given all of the state’s headwinds, and he said he’s not happy with the budget’s cuts to key programs, from child care to corrections.

“We all wish we could provide all the services that every Alaskan desires. But that is not reality,” he said. “The bottom line is, our constituents want and deserve more.”

At the end of it, though, he said lawmakers had no choice.

The budget passed 16-4, with votes from all of the bipartisan majority caucus and two minority Republicans, Sens. Mike Cronk, R-Tok, and James Kaufman, R-Anchorage, who said they were glad their voices were heard in the Finance Committee.

The budget now goes back to the House, which is likely to reject the Senate’s changes in a simple up-or-down vote, setting up a conference committee to hammer out a final budget proposal. Senators said they expected the conference committee to convene early next week.

The House and Senate have until midnight May 21, the constitutional end of the legislative session, to approve a final budget.

Alaska’s oldest ferry is too expensive to repair, according to officials with the Alaska Marine Highway System, who say it would cost millions to fix the 62-year-old Matanuska.

Craig Tornga, the marine director, said seeking that funding would compete with other future projects.

“Funding is tight, and will those dollars stay there in the rural ferry program? You know, with the new administration? We just don’t want to be competing against our new build plan that’s in the long-range plan,” he said.

Tornga was speaking to the Alaska Marine Highway Operations Board during an April 25 meeting. The nine-member board makes recommendations to the state’s Department of Transportation, which controls the ferry system. The board made a formal recommendation that the Matanuska be officially retired from the fleet.

At the bare minimum, the ferry would require at least $45 million to return to service and around $130 million if it’s certified for international travel.

The ferry’s problems surfaced during an overhaul two years ago and then multiplied. Surveys of the ship showed asbestos in the crew quarters and deteriorating steel throughout. The Matanuska would need about 125,000 pounds of steel in repairs.

Operations Board Chair Wanetta Ayers said fixing it would be too challenging.

“It’s regrettable,” she said. “It will be a sad day when the Matanuska is no longer in the fleet.”

The Matanuska is a large ferry, carrying up to 450 passengers and dozens of vehicles. It used to be one of Southeast Alaska’s mainliners sailing the route from Lynn Canal north of Juneau all the way south to Prince Rupert, British Columbia. However, for more than two years, the Matanuska has been used as a hotel ship for ferry workers in Ketchikan. Tornga said it’s very useful right now, but it’s still too expensive to operate long-term, even as a hotel.

Board member Captain Keith Hillard said the Matanuska is a prime example of what happens when you defer maintenance.

“The report you just got here is a poster child of exactly where we do not want to be 10 years from now,” he said, “with the Tazlina, the Hubbard, the Kennicott, Columbia.”

He said it’s also a warning for the six new ferries the system plans to bring on in the next decade or so. He said it’s like the old adage: paying a little now can save a lot later.

Both chambers of the Alaska Legislature have approved a resolution stating its support for Canadian independence and opposing “restrictive trade measures or tolls” that would affect commerce between Alaska and Canada.

House Joint Resolution 11, which would be sent to President Donald Trump, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and other top officials in both countries, implicitly rejects Trump’s call to make Canada the 51st state in the United States.

“Alaska recognizes the importance of a strong and sovereign nation of Canada and firmly supports Canada’s right to self-determination, national security, and economic independence,” the resolution states in part.

The Alaska Senate approved that language in a 13-6 vote on Monday with one lawmaker excused absent. The state House voted 33-4 on March 24 to approve a slightly different version.

Resolutions are statements of opinion by the Legislature and not subject to a governor’s veto.

The resolution will return to the House for a concurrence vote before becoming final.

Rep. Chuck Kopp, R-Anchorage and the resolution’s sponsor, said he believes there is good support in the House for the amended language.

The Senate’s vote came a day before Trump met Carney at the White House and declined to back down from claims that Canada should be “the 51st state.”

The Trump administration has prepared a large number of tariffs against Canadian imports, and the Canadian government has preemptively enacted retaliatory measures.

In British Columbia, the government has introduced legislation that could lead to tolls on traffic traveling between Alaska and the Lower 48.

In floor debate, Senate Majority Leader Cathy Giessel, R-Anchorage, noted the amount of trade that goes across the border between Alaska and Canada.

“The purpose of HJR 11 is to remind Alaskans that we have an important relationship with Canadians, those shared values of Arctic partners, our relationship as good neighbors, and keeping our partnership with Canada alive isn’t just good policy, it’s critical to the way we live,” she said.

Parts of Alaska are unconnected to each other without a trip through Canada. Fresh produce, dairy products and other perishable goods are shipped to Alaska via Canada.

Alaska Natives and Canadian First Nations are connected across the border, the resolution notes, and even the region’s sports teams compete together. The resolution observes that curling teams in Whitehorse and Fairbanks have been playing against each other for decades.

All of the votes against the resolution came from members of the Senate’s Republican minority caucus.

Senate Minority Leader Mike Shower, R-Wasilla, alleged that the resolution is more about speaking against Trump than speaking in support of Canada. The resolution “is kind of a slap in a certain direction,” he said.

He suggested that if Alaska is serious about improving relations with Canada, it should consider reviving the state’s liaison program, which used to have an Alaska delegate communicating with Canada and a Canadian in Alaska to work on cross-border issues.

Sen. Mike Cronk, R-Tok, represents a broad district that abuts the Canadian border along the Alaska Highway. He supports Trump and opposed the resolution.

“This really doesn’t change anything,” he said of the resolution. “We still respect each other, we still support each other, and the resolution is not going to change that.”

“It’s just poking at Trump,” said Sen. James Kaufman, R-Anchorage, after the vote.

He said Canada isn’t pulling its weight in NATO, and that’s reason for concern.

“If you look at their contributions to defense, they’re lagging way behind,” he said.

Sen. Jesse Kiehl, D-Juneau, represents northern Southeast Alaska, including the towns of Skagway and Haines, which are connected by road to Canada but not to the rest of Alaska.

“My constituents are asking for it,” he said of the resolution.

“When there are conflicts going on, when someone else has issues, and it starts to impact the relationships we do have, have long had, it’s worth it for us to reaffirm those relationships, to reach back out and say the close ties we’ve always had are good. We should continue them, because there’s real damage going on right now,” he said.

He gave an example: Over the winter, a restaurant in Haines burned down. Its owner later told Kiehl that they had good news from their insurance company and would get a full payout.

“I said, ‘Wonderful. Are you going to rebuild?’ And the answer was, ‘No.’” Kiehl said.

The owner said that customers from Canada had represented a significant portion of their income, and with Canadians shunning Alaska, it wasn’t worth reopening.

Sen. Bert Stedman, R-Sitka, represents the town of Hyder, which is almost split in two by the Canadian border. Hyder’s children go to school in Stewart, British Columbia. Its residents shop in Stewart.

He voted in support of the resolution and said that “the boys in Washington, D.C.,” might be seeing problems with Canada, but he’s not.

“We’re not having problems with our border here,” he said.

In an emailed statement, Yukon Premier Ranj Pillai congratulated the Alaska Legislature for its action.

“The Yukon and Alaska benefit from strong people-to-people connections, close economic ties, and a shared appreciation for the realities of life in the North. Yukoners appreciate the efforts by the Alaska legislature to ensure that these important cross-border connections are understood by federal leaders on both sides of the Canada-US border,” he wrote.

“While Canadians will always stand up for our sovereignty, our economy, and our way of life, we hope that Americans will continue to come visit the Yukon and experience all that our incredible territory has to offer.”

Murray Lundberg, a Yukon resident and member of the Order of Yukon, is an outspoken critic of Trump on social media and said the resolution is unlikely to help matters because Canadians remain scared of their treatment by American border guards.

“It’s not a minority opinion, and I don’t know why it’s not being mentioned more. People are soft-pedaling around this, and it’s a big issue,” he said.

In March, a Yukon-born woman was imprisoned by Immigration and Customs Enforcement for two weeks in squalid facilities before being released with no charges filed.

“I love visiting Skagway and Haines, but you know, it’s just not going to happen,” Lundberg said.

“Friends do not convince friends to put themselves in a dangerous situation. So I really object to (messages like the resolution) because that’s what it is. That’s not what a friend would do.”

The Alaska House is scheduled to vote Wednesday on a change to corporate income taxes that could raise millions of dollars as the state faces deficits and an uncertain financial future.

It’s also tied to funding for two key elements of an education bill pending on the governor’s desk.

Senate Bill 113 would change the way many companies calculate their state corporate income taxes. Backers are pitching it as a tax on large, out-of-state businesses. Sen. Bill Wielechowski, D-Anchorage, told the House Finance Committee on Friday that the bill would change the state’s corporate income tax system to require businesses to pay taxes on the money they bring in from Alaska customers.

“If you buy a Netflix subscription, instead of Netflix claiming the sale occurred at its headquarters in Los Gatos, California, or at its server farm in Texas, the sale is deemed to have occurred where the service is delivered — under this bill, in Alaska,” Wielechowski said.

In a related change, for companies who do a majority of their Alaska business over the internet, the bill would change the corporate income tax formula to look primarily at sales.

The corporate income tax formula currently takes companies’ Alaska payroll and property into account, which means lower taxes for corporations that don’t have much of a physical presence in the state. That means those companies aren’t paying their fair share for state infrastructure like roads, bridges and ports, Wielechowski said.

“Guess who’s picking up the tab for that? Alaskan consumers, Alaskan businesses. That is not fair to our brick and mortar companies,” Wielechowski said. “In fact, I would argue that’s taking Alaskans’ Permanent Fund dividend checks. That’s taking money out of Alaskans’ pockets, because these out-of-state corporations are not paying what they should be paying.”

The bill enjoyed broad support in the Senate, where it passed 16-4 with crossover votes from two Republicans in the minority caucus. The bill would only apply to so-called C corporations, which are typically large businesses, and would not change corporate income tax rates or brackets.

Rep. Jamie Allard, R-Eagle River, said she was concerned the bill could result in higher prices for Alaska consumers.

“I think it’s going to impact people greatly,” she said. “I feel like this is a hidden cost to Alaskans.”

At least 36 other states, from Alabama to Hawaii, have made similar changes to their tax codes. Wielechowski said he didn’t think Alaska was a large enough market to make a substantial difference on prices. Across the U.S., he said, no matter a state’s corporate income taxes, a Netflix subscription is the same price.

At least two House minority Republicans on the House Finance Committee agreed. Rep. Jeremy Bynum, R-Ketchikan, said he doesn’t expect the bill to result in across-the-board price increases.

“Whether it’s Netflix or some other digital company, when they’re paying taxes, they build that into their taxing or into their pricing structure overall,” Bynum said. “Could it cause prices to go up? Maybe. Maybe, in the big scheme of things. … But will they have an Alaska tax? I don’t believe so.”

Another minority Republican, Rep. Will Stapp, R-Fairbanks, said he thought taxing out-of-state businesses would level the playing field for Alaska businesses looking to compete with them.

“Where I live, in Fairbanks, everyone has seen these small businesses go out of business and be replaced by big, national chains,” he said. “Perhaps if we didn’t tax our local businesses unfavorably compared to the ones who don’t live here, fewer of them would go out of business.”

The state’s tax division says the bill could raise $25 to $65 million. If House lawmakers greenlight the bill, it would be the first significant revenue bill to pass this year as lawmakers reckon with large deficits.

Money from the bill would go toward incentive grants for school districts rewarding student reading performance and bolster career and technical education. Lawmakers tied the two programs to the tax bill because of the looming deficits.

If lawmakers in the House approve it, it will go to Gov. Mike Dunleavy. It’s not clear whether he’d sign it. His press office said by email that Dunleavy will make a decision if the bill reaches his desk.

Former Republican state Sen. Click Bishop of Fairbanks and Republican Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom are running for governor.

On Monday, Bishop filed a letter of intent with the Alaska Public Offices Commission, an act that signals his readiness to begin raising money for the 2026 election. Hours later, Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom filed a similar letter of intent.

Incumbent Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy is term-limited and unable to run for reelection in 2026. Bishop was the first person to formally launch a campaign in next year’s governor’s race.

“I got bib No. 1 coming out of the starting chute,” Bishop said. “I just hope that we can maintain that through to the election.”

Dahlstrom did not answer a call on her listed number or immediately respond to a voicemail message seeking comment.

Dahlstrom, 67, has been Alaska’s lieutenant governor since replacing Kevin Meyer in 2022. A resident of Eagle River, she ran for Alaska’s lone U.S. House seat in 2024 but withdrew from that race after finishing third in the primary election. That decision helped consolidate Republican support behind the eventual winner, Republican Nick Begich.

Bishop, who served 11 years in the Alaska Senate, often as a member of a bipartisan coalition, declined to run for reelection in 2024. At the time, he said he was not done with public service, a comment that was widely interpreted to mean that Bishop was taking a break before running for statewide office.

“People have mentioned it over — about the last eight years, ‘Man, we think you’d make a great governor.’ And of course, your friends are going to tell you that, and they’re sincere. I don’t mean that in a flippant way. And, I got to thinking … (I’m) going to be 68 in July, and I think that if I’m going to do it, now is the time to do it,” he said.

Alaska’s next governor is likely to face immense challenges. The state’s budget is expected to be in deficit, and lawmakers are predicting that they will seek to tap the state’s main savings account next year, possibly leaving the incoming governor with few financial levers.

The state’s public schools are performing poorly by national testing standards, its population has plateaued for more than a decade, its violent crime rate is among the worst in the nation, and it has a large problem with homelessness.

In the Senate, Bishop governed as a moderate, willing to work across party lines while representing his district.

Asked if he governs like U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, he said, “I think that’s it. I don’t get mad and take all my toys home because I don’t get my way. I mean, you have to continue to work with people. … If somebody’s wanting an incendiary bomb-thrower, I’m not that person.”

While in the Senate, he proposed a per-person tax to benefit schools and an increase in the state’s lowest-in-the-nation gas tax. Neither proposal became law. He was able to create a statewide education lottery system based around the Permanent Fund dividend.

Monday’s filings are unusually early by historical standards. When Dunleavy applied for the 2018 governor’s race, he filed a letter of intent in July 2017. Ahead of the 2022 election, the three leading candidates all filed letters of intent in August 2021.

The 2026 governor’s race is expected to feature a crowded field of candidates. It will be the first time since 2002 that an incumbent governor is not on the ballot.

“I don’t know — you might see a dozen (candidates),” Bishop said when asked how many people he expects to enter the race.

Under Alaska’s election system, governor and lieutenant governor candidates run together, on a single ticket.

Bishop said he’s thought about some names for his lieutenant governor, but he isn’t ready to make a decision.

“I will not commit to anything as far as lieutenant governor at this point; we’re a long ways off, but we’ll see how it goes,” he said.

He added that a bellwether for his campaign will be his ability to raise money.

Alaska currently has no limit on the amount of money that an individual can donate to a political campaign. In the 2022 governor’s race, the top two candidates each reported raising more than $2 million. The third raised more than $1.5 million.

“I know a lot of little people and big people, but we’ll see,” he said. “We’ll give ‘er our best shot. Now we’re going to see who was serious about me running or not serious about me running.”

Bishop owns a small gold mine in Interior Alaska and when reached on Monday said he plans to spend the next week working there before fully launching his campaign.

“We’re going to mine this summer, but we’ve got strategic events — listening sessions — over the course of the summer, but they will ramp up after freezeup,” he said.

“I’m just looking forward to seeing and meeting with the people of Alaska to hear them.”