State Government

An Alaska Superior Court judge has ruled that a state law limiting live shows at breweries, distilleries and wineries in Alaska is an unconstitutional violation of the First Amendment and the Alaska Constitution’s protections for free speech.

Judge Adolf Zeman issued his decision Wednesday in a two-year-old lawsuit filed by three alcohol manufacturers against the state of Alaska’s alcohol regulator two years ago.

“The speech restrictions fail the tests of strict and intermediate scrutiny, and such suppression of speech by the state cannot stand,” Zeman wrote at the conclusion of his 25-page order.

Until 2022, alcohol manufacturers were prohibited from having entertainment — including TVs, dancing, games and live music — on site. That year, as part of a sweeping modernization of the state’s alcohol laws, breweries, distilleries and wineries were allowed up to four live events per year if approved by the Alaska Alcohol and Marijuana Control Office, the state regulator.

Bars continued to be allowed an unlimited number of live events without permit; the difference in limits was billed as a political compromise necessary for the reform to pass the Legislature and become law.

Three companies — Zip Kombucha, Sweetgale Meadworks and Cider House, and Grace Ridge Brewing Company — filed suit to overturn the four-event limit, raising free-speech and equal-protection claims.

They were represented in court by a national group, the Pacific Legal Foundation. While the plaintiffs eventually dropped the equal-protection argument, the free-speech debate continued through written arguments.

Zeman ultimately concluded that the state failed to show how restricting live entertainment at breweries and distilleries, but not bars, would protect public health or safety.

“This court recognized that the challenged speech restrictions were once a critical piece of a grand compromise … however, political compromise is not recognized as a substantial government interest for the purposes of restricting speech under the First Amendment. Neither is the codification of preference for one industry actor over another,” he wrote.

While Zeman overturned a law limiting live entertainment, he upheld a law forbidding breweries, distilleries and wineries from having pool tables, dartboards and similar games, “because they are not speech.”

He also gave nodding approval to a law that restricts brewery, distillery and winery operating hours and serving sizes to less than what’s allowed for bars.

“The Legislature has, and can further address public health and safety risks associated with alcohol consumption in breweries and wineries by limiting the amount of product that can be served, the hours during which they can operate, or by reducing the cap for the number of brewery or winery licenses allowed in a given community,” he wrote.

Alaska Cabaret, Hotel, Restaurant & Retailers Association, or CHARR, a trade group representing all kinds of alcohol retailers — including bars and package stores — did not return a request for comment before the reporting deadline for this article.

An appeal to the Alaska Supreme Court is possible by either side. Representatives of the Alaska Alcohol and Marijuana Control Office and the Alaska Department of Law said those agencies were still analyzing the decision.

“AMCO does not have an opinion on the ruling and is discussing the matter with agency legal counsel,” said Jenae Erickson, acting public information officer for the Alaska Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development, the parent agency of AMCO. “At this time, we can’t definitively state how the order will be implemented, or what Alaskans can expect. When AMCO has appropriate guidance, an advisory notice will be released.”

Donna Matias, an attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation who represented the plaintiffs, said she is “really pleased” with the decision and said Alaska limits on live events are “actually very unusual” on a national level.

“It was a political compromise, but the legislature really never had the breweries’ First Amendment rights to use as political bargaining chips,” she said, “and I think the court in this opinion recognizes that very explicitly.”

Lee Ellis, head of the government affairs committee for the Brewers Guild of Alaska, said by phone that the guild had been pushing for a legislative solution to the issue, “but we’re happy to see those entertainment live-music restrictions are finally lifted. I think it’s a win regardless, and we look forward to offering a lot of opportunities for small-time musicians to further present their craft.”

One of those musicians is Juneau singer-songwriter Marian Call, who also works as executive director of MusicAlaska, a group devoted to boosting Alaskan musicians.

Call hosted a Christmas concert in a Juneau distillery before the end of the year, one of four events allowed at that space last year.

She said her group applauds Zeman’s ruling.

“Musicians have a superpower — we can enter an empty room and fill it with people. We create economic activity out of nothing but sound waves. Many businesses benefit from our labor, but none more than restaurants, bars, and the alcohol industry at large,” she said. “Limiting music professionals’ opportunities to work as a part of the SB9 compromise was inappropriate and, as the Superior Court has now ruled, unconstitutional, since musical performance is a form of speech.”

Call said MusicAlaska would love to see Thursday’s ruling bring more music to all kinds of venues — bars, breweries and those that don’t serve alcohol at all.

“Alaskan musicians’ desire and ability to host music events is not a limited resource,” she said, “and the more we get to work, the more Alaskans get to play.”

The Alaska Court of Appeals took up the case of a Whittier woman Thursday who was indicted in 2023 on felony charges of voter misconduct.

Like others born in American Samoa, Tupe Smith is a U.S. national but not a U.S. citizen. Smith says she thought that meant she could vote in local elections but not presidential elections.

When filling out voter registration forms in the past, Smith and her lawyers say a Whittier city official told her to check a box that said she was a U.S. citizen, even though Smith knew she wasn’t, because the forms did not have a box for U.S. national.

That led to an investigation by Alaska State Troopers, who arrested Smith in late November 2023.

Voting rights advocates have linked Smith’s case – and a similar, separate case that includes some of her family members in Whittier – to national efforts by conservatives to end birthright citizenship in the United States. The advocates say the plight of people born in American Samoa highlights a group that is already being denied the right to vote.

After a grand jury indicted Smith in early 2024, her lawyers asked a Superior Court judge to toss the indictment, saying a trooper who testified to the grand jury had misled them on the issue of whether Smith intentionally checked the box saying she was a U.S. citizen.

The judge denied the request. But in a rare move, the Alaska Court of Appeals accepted Smith’s appeal before the Superior Court judge’s final decision and on Thursday heard oral arguments from one of her lawyers, as well as an attorney for the state.

Now, one of the main sticking points is whether the words “knowingly” and “intentionally” mean the same thing in regards to a person making a false statement on a voter registration form.

While some people might use the terms interchangeably, doing something “intentionally” requires a higher mental state – in legal terms, mens rea, or “guilty mind” in Latin – than doing something “knowingly.”

Smith’s attorney, Whitney Brown, told the three-judge Appeals Court panel Thursday that the words do not mean the same thing. In writing the law on voter misconduct, Brown said, the Legislature used both terms differently and therefore they should be understood differently.

“The record also reflects that if she had known she was not supposed to vote, she would not have done so,” Brown said. “So the state has just shown no evidence of an intent to mislead or deceive. So we believe that the court, in this instance, can take the extra step of just dismissing the indictment.”

The state wants the Appeals Court to send the case back to the Superior Court for a final decision. The state’s attorneys argue that the words “intentionally” and “knowingly” can mean the same thing.

“It’s not that she didn’t know what she was writing was false. It’s that she thought she was supposed to write something that she knew was false for these specific purposes, and that’s a little bit different,” Assistant Attorney General Kayla Doyle told the Appeals Court judges.

Doyle agreed with Brown that it was a difficult, but important, case. And there were multiple puns made in Thursday’s oral arguments – intended or not – about how intentional the Legislature had been in including the word “intentional” in the law on voter misconduct.

The Appeals Court will make a decision in the case at a later date, though it’s unclear when that will be.

With the second regular session of the 34th Alaska Legislature beginning on Tuesday, it’s a good time to check in with members of Juneau’s delegation to talk priorities, predictions and plans for the session.

Sen. Jesse Kiehl (D-Juneau) spoke with KTOO’s Mike Lane about what he expects to see this year.

The following transcript has been lightly edited for clarity.

Mike Lane: We’re in the studio with Sen. Jesse Kiehl. Welcome Senator. 

Sen. Kiehl: Well, thank you. 

Mike Lane: How are you feeling about going into the second regular session?

Sen. Kiehl: Well, I’m, I’m excited to have everybody come back to the capital city. It’s always, always good to have colleagues from around the state gather at the Capitol and get to work. And also, you know, catch up a little bit. Some of these folks are even friends.

Mike Lane: Is there anything that you’re looking forward to or not looking forward to in this particular session?

Sen. Kiehl: Well, I think that the biggest question is going to be, what issues catch fire and get the most traction? Crucially, the thing you always have to do has got to be a budget, right? The Constitution limits us to one year at a time. Gives us some duties — public safety, public health, managing our resources, education, couple other things. And so we we have to pass and fund a budget. And one thing I’m not looking forward to is making that balance. That’s going to be, without a doubt, one of the biggest and most difficult issues in front of the Legislature this year. That’s not new. The Governor, who has for all of his terms, stood squarely in the way of any kind of fiscal plan with a reasonable possibility of happening, has said that this year he’s proposing one. If the governor proposes something that is serious, if the governor proposes something that has a kerosene snowballs chance in Hades of passing, then that will be, I think, the primary issue of the session. If it’s something that can’t get the votes, won’t get the votes Alaskans aren’t going to support, then we won’t probably spend huge amounts of time and effort on that. I’m a fiscal plan guy. We need to stabilize the state’s resources, stabilize the state’s ability to do the basic things we all need a government to do, infrastructure, safety, education, et cetera, can’t do them on your own. And so we have a structural deficit. And with the price of oil down and looking to maybe go down further, balancing the books is going to be really brutal this year, without some revenue.

Mike Lane: With that said, are there any other pressing or urgent issues that you believe are being overlooked at this time?

Sen. Kiehl: Well, I don’t know about overlooked, right? The other thing that has the potential to take a huge amount of time is this, this 50-year dream of a gas line, and if that project gets cash or customers, if it’s got customers with a balance sheet who will sign on the line? Yes, I’m in to buy gas that comes through this pipeline. Well, then we have some very serious and major issues as a Legislature that we’re going to have to work on to make sure that gas line can happen.

Mike Lane: All right, fair enough. And we touched very briefly on the budget. Where do you believe cuts are necessary?

Sen. Kiehl: We have done a lot of cutting already. We have done a huge amount, and so we are always looking at the most efficient way to deliver government services. But Alaskans, by and large, want the services the state provides. It just comes down to that. So we’re going to dig in. We’re going to get down to the nitty gritty and talk to everybody and figure out, what is the more effective, efficient way to deliver that necessary government service, what’s the most efficient, effective way to do that. We’re talking about saving 10s of 1000s or hundreds of 1000s of dollars a year max, and that counts. We’re going to work on it. But it’s not hundreds of millions of dollars. It’s not a budget deficit. And so we will always do those things, because we always need to do the best we can for Alaskans, but that’s not going to solve our budget issue.

Mike Lane: My last question. How can Alaska secure the PFD for the next five to 10 years? 

Sen. Kiehl: Fundamentally, the most important thing we’re going to need is some additional revenue with a moderate new revenue stream, or probably it’s a couple of little streams — right? — that come together to a moderate amount. We can stabilize, we can provide public safety, good education, infrastructure. We can run roads and ferries and airports, do the things that the Constitution requires us do, that Alaskans need us to do and still have a PFD going forward.

Mike Lane: And Senator, is there anything I didn’t ask you that you’d like to touch on?

Sen. Kiehl: I’ll just say it is such a privilege to represent the capital city. This town welcomes legislators, welcomes staff from all over the state. Agree with them, disagree with them. They’r here serving the public. They’re serving their constituents. They’re here to do a job for all of Alaska. And I’m always proud of the capital city welcoming my colleagues from around the state. I’m looking forward to that happening again this year. It’s going to be a hard session. I hope it’s a productive one.

Mike Lane: It is the second regular session of the 34th Alaska Legislature, it begins Tuesday the 20th of January. Senator, thanks for joining me. 

Sen. Kiehl: Thanks so much for having me.

The state Department of Natural Resources is moving forward with its effort to overhaul the longstanding plan that dictates how it manages one of Alaska’s three state forests.

Agency staff are in Haines this week to meet with a range of local groups to solicit input for the new roadmap, which would open the entire Haines State Forest to logging — a major departure from the plan that’s been in place since 2002.

The effort began in 2024 after Gov. Mike Dunleavy directed the state Division of Forestry to boost the timber industry in Southeast Alaska – particularly in the Haines State Forest. The new version of the plan would also need to accommodate another Dunleavy policy: the sale of carbon credits.

But the major change is that the new management plan would allow for timber harvest in the entire forest, as opposed to about half of it.

“Prior to that it was 42,000 acres” available for harvest,” State Forester Greg Palmieri said in an interview earlier this week. “Well, now there’s 74,360 acres available for access for that type of resource management.”

A draft plan is in the works, but it hasn’t been released to the public yet. First, the agency will meet with local groups – including tribes, the Haines Borough and various advisory committees.

State Forester Greg Palmieri said those meetings will inform the draft, which should be released for public comment this spring.

“If we’re going to do this here, what do you think is the most appropriate way to do it, to protect the interest that you represent?” Palmieri said. “That’s the meaningful contribution that we’re trying to acquire at this time.”

Take the state forest land around Chilkoot Lake, which previously was not available for timber harvest. Palmieri said that the new plan could specify, for instance, that even though some timber harvest in that area may be on the table, clear cutting is not.

But at two local meetings this week that addressed the plan, participants focused more on the state’s process and its goal to boost logging than they did on any specific forestry recommendations.

One of those meetings happened Wednesday morning. Forestry officials met with a group that advises the state on how to manage the Alaska Chilkat Bald Eagle Preserve. Some, including Bill Thomas, seemed supportive of the effort.

“People forget, if it wasn’t for the logging industry, you wouldn’t have access out here anywhere,” he said.

Others, including Haines Mayor Tom Morphet, questioned the intent of the plan revision and potential outcome for local people.

“The state I think is going to have to make a lot better job explaining why it wants to start logging on recreation lands,” he said. “What’s the benefit to the community?”

People also voiced confusion over the process – and how they were supposed to weigh in on the issue without seeing the current draft or specific questions from the state.

That sentiment also arose on Monday, during a meeting of the area Fish and Game Advisory Committee. The group had yet to meet with DNR about the plan, but members spent the bulk of its regular meeting discussing it.

“They want us to comment when we have absolutely no idea of what their specific intentions are in any of these areas,” said committee member Kip Kermoian. “We have more meetings, but I think we need to insist on, if they want us to make informed decisions, we need more information.”

The group had yet to schedule a meeting with the state agency, but it voted to send a letter noting that the state is required by law to consult with them on such matters – and that the group’s members don’t think that what’s happened so far amounts to good-faith consultation.

Both committees indicated they planned to provide more specific, forestry-related feedback in the coming weeks.

The Alaska House of Representatives will have two new faces when lawmakers return next week for the start of the legislative session. Gov. Mike Dunleavy appointed Mat-Su Republicans Steve St. Clair and Garret Nelson to fill two open seats in the state House.

So, who are these two new lawmakers, and what do they hope to accomplish in their first year as a budget crunch looms?

The newcomer: Rep. Garret Nelson, R-Sutton

Newly minted Rep. Garret Nelson says he’s doing his best to get up to speed with the session fast approaching.

“I’ve never been up until 2 o’clock in the morning so many days in a week in my life as I have been this week, trying to figure this stuff out,” Nelson said in an interview.

Nelson grew up on a family cattle ranch in Mackay, Idaho, and has spent most of his life in the private sector. He spent some of his early career as a welder, later moving into sales at the financial services firm Gravity Payments. He, his wife and nine children moved to the Mat-Su community of Sutton in 2016, where he served as chair of the local community council.

Nelson is steeling himself for what could be a tough first year. He called the world of politics a “cesspool.”

“My expectations are, like, to hold to principles as much as I can,” he said. “I just expect to go down and get my teeth kicked in.”

Nelson has already found himself in something of a spat with a senior Republican senator, Anchorage Sen. Cathy Giessel, who suggested in a newsletter that his large family could compromise his ability to act in the state’s best interest when voting on the Permanent Fund dividend.

“At what point does a vote for a ‘full dividend’ comprise a conflict of interest, or even a breach of ethics? Legislators have gone to jail in the past for accepting money in payment for their votes,” Giessel wrote in a newsletter to constituents.

Nelson said the comment was “grossly inappropriate” and “weird.”

In a text message, Giessel stood by the comment and said she had raised a legitimate question. Giessel said any suggestion that she had insulted Nelson’s family was “absurd.”

Nelson calls himself an “unashamed conservative” and often references his Christian faith and devotion to family. He says he’s in favor of paying large Permanent Fund dividends in line with a formula outlined in state law, about $3,800 this year. Gov. Mike Dunleavy’s budget proposal would do exactly that by taking $1.8 billion from the state’s main savings account.

At the same time, though, Nelson said that drawing from savings might not be the right move. The state shouldn’t just try to live off its savings and put off harder questions for another day, he said, just as a family shouldn’t spend more than it brings in.

“We could raid the Permanent Fund and pay all our bills this year, piece of cake, you know what I’m saying? We could pay all the bills and give everyone a full PFD, and everyone’s going to be happy, but that’s not a good long term solution.”

Nelson says he hasn’t quite figured out the right approach — he says he’s still boning up on the ins and outs of the myriad issues facing the Legislature.

But Nelson says he’s planning to bring with him a built-in support system. Nelson says the whole family will join him in Juneau for the session.

“The way that we’re doing it is, like, it’s a family adventure,” he said. “We are all in this together.”

The veteran: Rep. Steve St. Clair, R-Wasilla

Joining Nelson in the House is Rep. Steve St. Clair, a longtime staffer for former House speaker and now-Sen. Cathy Tilton, a Wasilla Republican. St. Clair spent two decades as a military policeman, including a stint at Fort Wainwright in the early 2000s, before moving into conservative politics.

Like Nelson, St. Clair said in an interview that he, too, is spending long nights preparing for his first session. But with seven years of experience in the Capitol, plus an MBA, he said he thinks he’ll be able to hit the ground running.

“I’m a budget guy,” he said, “but I’m also very familiar with all the other departments, their budgets. I’ve worked on amendments. I’ve worked on bills.”

That means he’s coming into the session with some ideas for how to shrink the state’s budget gap — for example, freezing state workers’ pay, and gradually reducing so-called optional Medicaid services offered by the state. Those include things like dental and vision care and prescription drugs.

“They’re not required by law. Basically, it’s the Cadillac version instead of the (Ford) Pinto version,” he said. “I think we need to pare that down.”

St. Clair said he’s also concerned about proposals to restructure the Permanent Fund to function more like a university endowment, one area he expects the bipartisan House and Senate majorities to focus on this year.

But on most fronts, St. Clair acknowledged he might not get his way, given that he’s in the minority for his first year in office.

St. Clair said he’s not expecting lawmakers to solve the state’s budget issues in the four months of the session, given that it’s an election year, but St. Clair says he’ll do his best to contribute.

“I’m humbled to be here and (I’m) going to do the best I can for my district and Alaskans,” he said.

The state of Alaska is preparing to give away millions of dollars worth of gravel to public corporations, a move that would amount to millions of dollars in assistance to some of the state’s biggest construction projects.

According to a Q&A posted by the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, the beneficiaries could include the proposed Ambler Access Project and the proposed trans-Alaska natural gas pipeline.

The state’s plans were disclosed the day before Thanksgiving in a public notice stating that DNR is planning “regulation changes on material sales and conveyances to state agencies.”

The Department of Natural Resources oversees mining on state lands in Alaska, including the extraction of gravel and fill dirt for use in construction.

While humble, gravel can be serious business — in November, DNR commissioner-designee John Crowther signed an order that prohibits gold, silver and other kinds of mining near gravel quarries along the Dalton Highway, which links Fairbanks to Prudhoe Bay.

For state maintenance crews that need to keep the highway open, gravel is more important than rare minerals.

In 2024, High Country News reported that for construction projects on the North Slope, gravel is a “precious commodity” because of its scarcity.

One of DNR’s proposed changes to its gravel rules declares “that the department convey material to a state agency or public corporation at a base price of $0.00 per cubic yard and without retaining a reversionary interest.”

Currently posted price charts show the state selling gravel for $3 per cubic yard in Interior Alaska.

State law prescribes that any time DNR wants to sell land or public resources for less than market value, the commissioner must declare that the sales “serve a public purpose and are in the public interest.”

The upcoming regulation change states that transfer to a state agency or state corporation is automatically consistent with that requirement.

That would allow the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities to get gravel from state land for free, excepting the cost of processing and transportation.

In a question and answer notice published Dec. 26, DNR said the change is intended to allow “for maximum use of state land consistent with the public interest.”

“Examples of a public purpose would be a state agency or public corporation using gravel to construct a gravel pad on a state leased site for infrastructure development; to construct a new state highway right-of-way or expand an existing state right-of-way; or to build an embankment along a river; or gravel needed for the development of a gas line right-of-way,” it wrote.

The free gravel and dirt would also be available to state-owned corporations, which is likely to affect some of the state’s biggest development projects.

The Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority is developing a 211-mile road between the Dalton Highway and mine sites in northwest Alaska and would be eligible for the free rock and dirt. So would the Alaska Gasline Development Corp., which is now a junior partner in the development of the proposed trans-Alaska natural gas pipeline.

A spokesperson for Glenfarne, the pipeline’s lead developer, said the firm did not request the regulation change.

In 2024, the Bureau of Land Management estimated that the proposed Ambler Road would need between 15 million and 22 million cubic yards of gravel, plus an additional 220,000 to 347,000 yards annually for maintenance.

If the state of Alaska provides that gravel for free, it would be a revenue loss of between $45 million and $66 million for construction alone.

The public comment period on the change expired on Jan. 2, and it was not immediately clear when the change would take effect.

Lorraine Henry, director of communications for DNR, said by email that it isn’t yet clear how much gravel might be affected by the regulation change, and that the agency didn’t intend to benefit any specific project.

“DNR cannot speculate on the volume of gravel that may be involved, as each application from State of Alaska agencies will be evaluated on its merits – and will include a public process and follow statutory authorities,” she said.