HB 19 to End Daylight Savings Time

The other two meetings going on right now are dealing with issues of far greater impact on Alaska I presume.  But this is one most Alaskans can understand easily and are impacted by most directly and tangibly.


Here is the table with copies of emails and letters for and against the bill. 










[Update:  I looked through these and they are all dated March 18 and some 17.  Actually this stack is misleading.  I didn't realize I have one big stack twice.  The vote was 62 for HB 19, 18 against, and four had other options, like get the US to change, but not just Alaska.]

Sen. Olson and Sen. Menard listen to phone testimony on the ending daylight savings time in Alaska. 

Rep. Anna Fairclough, the bill sponsor, responded to the comments received through the mail, email, and by phone today.  She said there were two reasons that have real justification for not changing:

1.  People in Southeast Alaska have a real issue because they are basically in Pacific time, so they get less light in the evening while the sun comes up 3am at solstice.
2.  The difficulty in coordinating with people outside of Alaska.  (I think this was the second one)

Other than these two points, most people prefer getting rid of daylight savings time.  A lot of this is about having to change and the disruption that causes with relatively little daylight impact for most Alaskans (further north and west than Southeast.)

Other issue:  Why don't we just spring forward and stay on daylight savings time the whole year.  There area a couple of issues:
1.  Feds, not states, can change time zones.
2.  Western Alaska would be even further off of sun time (opposite problem of Southeast.)

Meeting was adjourned just about 5pm with the decision postponed.

Too Many Places to Be

I'm in the House Finance meeting on the fifth floor where John Katz, director of state and federal relations and general counsel to the governor, is calling in from DC.  Former senators Stevens and Murkowski and former governor and current railroad head Bill Sheffield are in a resource meeting on the 2nd floor.  And another meeting they are discussing an issue of more immediate interest, I'm sure, to many Alaskans, on the repeal of daylight savings time.

But I'm here to hear John Katz, an Alaska legend.  I'll blog as I go, so excuse the many typos. 

Hard to predict, but
1.  Attempts to shift costs to states
2.  Amount of money coming to Alaska will shrink in real terms, especially considering inflation
3.  Federal receipts compared to state money will decrease


This comes from need for the federal government to reduce debt.

Congressional earmarks.  Even though percent is quite low, averaging between 1 and 2% or 16 billion out of 1.2 trillion, they get a lot of attention.  They're a metaphor.  Easier to talk about earmarks than entitlements.

State has seen earmarks as a way to address fed funding sources that don't figure in Alaska's unique circumstances.  Even before the lst election we were seeing signals that Congress was going to tighten hold on earmarks.  Focus on transparency, sponsors and benefactors of earmarks.
Rules more stringent in House.  Republicans have declared moritorium though Young resists.  Democrats moratorium on earmarks to private companies.

Senate side different.  Congress' duty through control of federal purse, up to Congress to shape federal budget which may include earmarks.  In Alaksa context, lst year about 700 earmark requests from Alaskans.  This year about 500 = @$3billion.  this year reduced in numbers and size.  Few over $1million.  Those reduced by quarter to half.
Alaska's response:
1.  Jawbone more with bureuacrats

3.  Federal grants



Last year STate requested 8 and the same this year for about $23 million and they all have strong federal nexus, strong public support, and we can show some other source of money.  We see literally dozens of Alaskan mumicipalities and non-profits.  They're chaning too.  Fewer earmarks, and only one source of funding for a project.

Number of earmarks will reduce over time, but won't go away altogether.  Denali Commission.  Budget at times has exceeded $100 million at times.  Obama admin says it's compatible with their rural policy, but they don't like it being funded by earmarks.  Obama reduced it to about $16 million and earmarks are in jeopardy.  Suffering from other problems:
1.  needs to be reauthorized, not yet
2.  unlike Appalachian group, only represents one state
3.  others are jealous

State is starting to match some of the expenditures.
Transportation, two sources:
1.  AIT funds in FAA.  House has acted on that legislation as we speak,  Don't expect any big changes for Alaska which comes on formula, though national press has focused on some rural airports
2.  Surface transportation leg.
a.  earmarks - these unique, draw directly on highway trust fund, advantages to states.  In past, earmarks additive to forumula funds, but last time, some earmarks deducted from formula funds.  We had trouble with that and we think deductive earmarks detract from p
This law is up to be extended.  $20 billion of which AK might get $150 million.  Some Congress members want to reauthorize comprehensive legislation.  This could be difficult because fund dependent on gas taxes which went down as people drive less.  Conflict between donor and donee states.  Ak poster child we get $5 for every $ we contribute.

Obama wants to allocate more funds on competitive basis.  Disadvantage for less populous states.  Rank pedestrian and bike travel with motorized uses.

Military.  Everyone knows the strategic import of our bases.  Supportive community.  Principle disadvantage is high cost of business in Alaska and of fuel and energy.  Up til now, military has been immune from budget cuts.  This could end after election.  Another round of base reallingment and closures coming up.  Governor has formed committee for this.  When AF didn't place F35 fighter in Alaska in first round, that was a signal to all of us and our concerns about Eilson.  We need to be

Medicaid.  First or second largest expenditure of most states.
1.  FMAP formula - state and fed outlay formula
2.  Benefits a state provides and whether feds require enefits to be provided.  This is in state of flux.  Initial attempt to shift costs to states.  Now 50/50.  Was 70% fed 30 State.  Mitigated for the short term by extra match in stimulus package and likely to be extended to end of calendar year.  Also language in health care billl for newly eligible which would be much higher match.  States concerned how long that would last.  State will continue to lobby for higher rates because state health care so much higher.  Tribal health - hard to get handle $200-400 million.  So far in tact.  But domestic discretionary funds.  Have to keep careful eye on them.  Fed funds tend to be focused on tribes in Indian country, since Venetie decision, there's little Indian Country in Alaska.

Education.  Bulk comes from states and localities. but fed formulas in k-12 are important source of funding.  Obama put out 47 page outline of changes he would like to see.  Broad spectrum of issues.  Formulas:
1.  more competition
2.  premisted on core academic standards, bench marks, reading, math, etc.
Alaska hasn't yet become invovled in setting national standards.  Also concerned about standards that don't relect Alaska's unique circumstances.

Misc. category.  Obama's proposed budget.  A number of items of significance for AK
1.  All subsidies for oil and gas repealed - deliterious for AK
2.  Funding for conveyance of land for state of Alaska.  Obama recommending 1/3 cut for surveys at BLM.  Necessary for land selections.  Can retard development.

In conclusion we can do several things:
1.  Jawbone with Federal agencies to include funds for Alaska programs in their budget.  Getting more adept in competing with agencies.  Scrutinizing fed formulas when they come along.  Population doesn't help us.
2.  Conception of Alaska Statehood Act.  In 1959, many Congress were afraid Alaksa would become ward of US.  Gave Alaska land with expectation they would become self sufficient.  But didn't foresee EPA etc.
3.  Federal domain, 60% of land mass of Alaska continues to be owned by feds.  We've supported OCS exploration and get OCS revenue sharing.

Conclusion
Can expect significant federal funds, but not as in the past. 

I'll post now, and then add as this continues.

4pm:
Wilson:  What taxes on oil being repealed?
Katz:  8 in total.  I don't know the full spectrum.  In total they would wipe out subsidies and incentives the oil industry receives.  President's response:  These subsidies gerrymander the  the energy field by pushing industry in certain areas.
Wilson:  We're currently doing in the resources just that - cutting some taxes and adding incentives.  Because that has dropped dramatically in last three years.
Katz:  You're considering the exact opposite of the Obama administration.  Hoping Congress won't support President on this.  There'd be a disproportionate effect on Alaska.

Joule:  Denali Commission.   Didn't quite understand the question.
Katz:  Concern for some in congress.  Not sure if real concern or rationalization

End of Katz portion.

John Boucher, senior economist with OMB.  I've got a printout of his powerpoint, so I'll go check in the other rooms.  4:07pm

[Photo:  John Boucher testifying with Reps. Peggy Wilson and Doogan in background.]










4:40pm  I checked in on the resources committee meeting.  It was crowded.

And then I went off to see what was happening in the Community and Regional Affairs committee to hear the HB 19 bill to end daylight savings time.  I'll cover that in the next post. 

Info Security Plan and Candidate Ineligibility at State Affairs

(H)STATE AFFAIRS		STANDING COMMITTEE *
Mar 18 Thursday 8:00 AM		CAPITOL 106
*+	HB 394	EXECUTIVE BRANCH RECORDS SECURITY	TELECONFERENCED
=+	HB 53	CANDIDATES INELIGIBLE FOR BDS/COMMISSIONS	TELECONFERENCED
+		Bills Previously Heard/Scheduled	TELECONFERENCED

I don't think the details here are that important so I'll summarize.  Rep. Keller has a bill to require the Commissioner of Administration to be the Chief Information Officer as well and to make the Department of Administration responsible for security of records.

[Photo:  Rep. Keller and aide testifying, Reps. Gruenberg and Petersen in the background.]

There were lots of questions about definitions, about the benefits and drawbacks of centralization, and answers from Deputy Commissioners  Rachel Petro and Kevin Brooks. My basic sense, and I talked to Dept. Commissioner Brooks afterward, was that overall, the Department is already doing most of the stuff the bill requires - setting up security plans and protocols and coordinating the policies of all departments. They, in fact, said that while there needs to be one general set of policies and standards, the various agencies also need some leeway to be sure they can meet various federal standards with which some of their programs must comply. What this bill would do is confirm in statute what is already happening, and formally place the overall responsibility with the Commissioner of Administration.

The bill passed out of committee.

HB 53	CANDIDATES INELIGIBLE FOR BDS/COMMISSIONS

Sponsor Rep. Doogan who presented the bill to the Committee.  There was some question for a while about exactly what problem the bill was solving.  Basically the bill would require that people serving on 98 specific State Boards and Commissions (the number 120 was also mentioned, so I'm not completely sure) would have to resign if they decided to run for state or federal office.  They also would have a one year waiting period before they could get back on a board.  The intent, as I understood it, was threefold:
1.  So that people weren't in a position to solicit campaign funds from people subject to decisions of the board they served.
2.  To make sure there was no perception of a conflict of interest by the public.
3.  To not give a candidates 'a leg up' from the State when they run for office
An aide also mentioned that the Department of Law had noted that there is a potential separation of powers question the way things work now.

Questions revolved around whether this would make it even harder to get good people to sit on boards and commissions as well as on details about how it would work.

There was also a bit of good-natured humor.  Rep. Gatto was suggesting that public minded citizens who served on boards would be penalized for running for office.  Then Rep. Johnson came to Rep. Doogan's defense.

Johnson:  I think Rep. Gatto gave us a great example of why someone should resign.  If you have a group you could help, those folks would contribute.  Win or lose, that guy will either be on the Board of Fish or the legislature.  That's why I think this is a good piece of legislation.
Doogan:  Could we have Rep. Johnson repeat what he said? 

The bill was held to clear up a few technical issues that arose. 



Photo:  Outside (or sometimes inside) all the conference rooms there's a little table with copies of the bills and other related materials plus a sign up sheet for people who want to testify.

Republicans Sponsor Anti-Pebble Mine Movie

Did that title get your attention? It's true, but only indirectly. I was working on a post yesterday in the staff/public lounge when Rep. Ramras walked by, stuck his head in and said, "You want a film festival for your blog?" Hmmm, film festivals have been on my mind, so of course I followed him downstairs.

(S)WORLD TRADE, TECH, INNOVATIONS SPECIAL COMMITTEE
Rural Alaska Honor Institute (RAHI)
Student Documentary Film Debut


The Beltz conference room was packed.  This was a joint committee meeting, they were showing movies, and there was free pizza and popcorn.  So there were a lot of senators and representatives there.  Someone pointed me to a Denise Wartes who explained that we would be seeing movies made by Alaska Native students from various villages.

Then Sen. McGuire began to speak.

"Rep. Ramras and I had this idea after we were in New York and seeing film festivals come together at the Alaska House that our Alaska students would have something to say."

They contacted Denise Wartes who is head of the Rural Alaska Honors Institute (RAHI) at the University of Alaska Fairbanks.  RAHI has summer college prep, including college level classes, for rural Alaskan students.  They took on this film making project as part of the program students were given video cameras and tripods to use and went off to make their own movies.

So each student did a brief intro and they showed the movies.



I have to give them lots of credit.  Here was this flat out anti-Pebble Mine movie.  They had seen all the movies ahead.  They knew what was coming.  But they played it anyway.  Their kept their commitment to the students.  Later there was a movie about how global climate change was affecting Barrow.

I was able to get one of the students on video before they were rushed off to other meetings.  He was articulate, he was poised, and he had something important to say.  This young man had a powerful energy.  I highly recommend you take a minute to listen to what Coreau Joseph of Kwigillingok.



I never know each day what I'm going to see, who I'm going to meet.  It's amazing.

Boom

When it was over, I sat there slightly stunned. This was, for me anyway, a totally original play.  The acting was outstanding.  The Barbara character - what can I say?  That such a person could actually exist is beyond imagination, yet she was frighteningly familiar.

We knew nothing about what we were going to see other than it was supposed to be good.  For me that's the best way to see something that is good the first time.  So I won't say much more, and nothing that will give anything away.

We got there early - we went with friends who have a car.  It's amazing how much smaller Juneau seems when you are in a car.  Mind you it doesn't seem big on foot.  Anyway, we walked down to the Douglas boat harbor which wasn't far from the Perseverance Theater.

Daylight savings time combined with almost being the equinox has really made a difference in the amount of evening light we have.  This was about 7:15 on a cloudy evening. 

This is what you walk into.

This is the last weekend.  If you miss this, you can only blame yourself. 

Cloudy St. Patrick's Day

Yesterday's blue skies and sunshine were gone today. But I needed a run and took off down the Glacier Highway route this time.

I saw several Bald Eagles, but this one on 

a pole was the closest I could get.

Here's the trail at Cope Park and I'm almost home.

When I got into the Capitol, the green covers on the announcements were, I assumed, a subtle nod to St. Patrick's Day.  I went to the Senate Judiciary meeting to see how they were doing with the Campaign Expenditure bill.  They only had a quorum for a short time, so I went to the House Judiciary where it seemed like the Chair Jay Ramras was acting in sharp contrast to the warm hospitality he showed to witnesses last week on the bill to add 30 days to the time that small businesses had until they had to file liens against non-payers.  Then he abruptly adjourned the committee at 2:30 pm. 

Juneau Liquor Store Owner Paints a Different Picture of the Underage Buyer Bounty

SB 194  would increase the bounty on underage liquor purchasers.  As I reported in the previous post, current law has the fine at $1000, but the money goes back to the liquor license holder who turns in the violator, so one could call it a bounty paid by the person who pays the fine.

Initial testimony from a Mr. Madden representing Brown Jug Liquor stores made it sound like a great program.  They waive $750 if the kid agrees to go to an alcohol awareness class and a sexual assault awareness class.  $200 goes to the cashier who turned him in.  And I guess Brown Jug keeps the rest.  But then Rep. Peggy Wilson reflected to bill sponsor Sen. Kevin Meyer that if only Brown Jug does this program, the kids will figure out they need to go to other liquor stores and when will that happen? 

Sen. Meyer responded that CHARR was now doing the work for independent liquor stores, and in fact, CHARR had asked the fine be raised to $1500 to cover the costs of tracking down violators.

That got me thinking about how this would actually work.  If I clerk gets an underage buyer, what does he do?   Tell him to sit and wait for the cops?  Grab him and cuff him? 

Rep. Gatto also asked questions about where the money goes if they raise it by $500.  If Brown Jug can do this for 12 years including waiving $750 if the kid goes to a class, why does CHARR need another $500?  In the previous post I calculated that at the rate Brown Jug said it's prosecuting people, they would bring in $200,000 per year if the fee was $1500. 

As I read the legislation, CHARR doesn't need extra money for costs because the bill already includes reasonable costs and attorney's fees.

(b) A licensee may bring a civil action against a person who violates this section if the violation occurs on the premises of that licensee. If judgment is entered in favor of the licensee, the court shall award civil damages in the amount of $1,000 and award reasonable costs and reasonable attorney fees allowed under the Alaska Rules of Civil Procedure.

As I read the new bill which changes the $1000 to $1500, it simply licenses CHARR and any liquor store owner to get $500 more per prosecution. 


I had 15 minutes to kill before meeting my wife and a friend for dinner.  I'd been inside most of the day so I walked around the block thinking about this.  I walked past Percy's liquor store.  Then I walked back again and went into the liquor store and asked the clerk about this. (I looked him up to get his name spelled right and the Juneau-Empire identifies him as a co-owner of Percy's.)  His answer was that it was a joke.  I asked if he would repeat his comments on video.



This is a very different perspective than we heard in committee.  Last week, Rep. Ramras extolled the small business owners who testified before the Judiciary Committee where this bill goes next.  Perhaps this small business owner will encourage his committee his committee to ask a few more questions.

State Affairs: More on Personnel Board and Raising Bounty on Underage Drinkers

[I have been trying to report fairly objectively, but now and then I'll add my own questions in at the end. No one in the committee called this a bounty (though Gatto called it an award), but someone I mentioned it to said, "You mean a bounty?" Those comments are at the end.]

(H)STATE AFFAIRS		STANDING COMMITTEE *
Mar 16 Tuesday 8:00 AM		CAPITOL 106
=+	HB 348	PERSONNEL BOARD MEMBERSHIP	TELECONFERENCED
+	SB 194	ALCOHOL VIOLATIONS: PENALTY/CIVIL DAMAGES	TELECONFERENCED

HB 348 PERSONNEL BOARD MEMBERSHIP TELECONFERENCED

Two purposes:  1) Enlarge the committee from 3 to 5  and 2) insulate it from the Governor whose conduct could be reviewed by the Board.  (This bill was inspired by the Personnel Review Board's investigations of former Gov. Palin.)

I got there late.  The sky was blue, the sun was shining, and after a week of mostly clouds, snow, rain, and wind, I was distracted.  Attorney Doug Wooliver of the Court system was testifying as I got in and was saying something like:

"The Court doesn't typically support or oppose bills.  We don't support or oppose this bill. . . But . . . this isn't the kind of bill that the court is real enthusiastic about." 

The bill has the Chief Justice sending three proposed names to the Governor to choose from for Personnel Board appointees.  The idea is to make this less political since the Board might have to review the Governor and the Governor's appointees.

After trying to respond with options that didn't include the Court and playing around with wording about lobbyists for an hour, I think what happened is that they ended up with pretty much the same bill they started with (the Court sending names to the Governor) but they added "political" before the word "group," to clarify that 'group' didn't mean football team.  I did ask a few people if they got the same impression and everyone agreed, though no one was absolutely sure.

And then they passed the bill out of committee to Judiciary.

I was able to sit where I could watch the sun on Mt. Juneau reflected in the windows of the State Court Building across the street. 



The second bill was SB 194.

SB 194 ALCOHOL VIOLATIONS: PENALTY/CIVIL DAMAGES

This bill would increase penalties for minors buying alcohol.  This bill amends an existing law that
1.  fines minors caught trying to buy alcohol by licensed alcohol dealers.
2.  fines adults buying alcohol for minors and
3.  fines kids hanging around liquor stores soliciting adults to buy them liquor.

There's currently a $1000 fine and this bill would raise it to $1500. 


Here's how it works as described by witness Mr. Madden of Brown Jug liquor stores.


1.  It deters minors from coming in, in the first palce, gives us a means to go after them.  We use the penalty to award our employees.  Bonus of $200.  We offer minors the option to waive $750 if they go through an alcohol education program and sexual assault awareness program.  Gets the family involved with the minor.  In many cases they don't know kid was caught.  Now they get letter saying you owe Brown Jug $1000.  We've pursued action against over 2000 kids since 1998 (MOA law) though we haven't collected from all.
2.  Adults buying alcohol for minors.  Adult who has carload of kids outside the store.
3.  Kids outside soliciting adults to buy for them.

There were some question about what other licensees, besides Brown Jug, do. 

Rep. Peggy Wilson:  [This are from my notes, so it's a rough approximation of what was actually said]  Only Brown Jug and not a lot of other businesses doing it.  If they had more incentive to do something, maybe it would be worth it, we could catch more people this way.  For me it is a travesty that people would do something like this.
I'm trying to get other entities involved.  If Brown Jug has caught 2000, you know they are saying, we'll just go somewhere else.  If we could get others involved it would make a big difference.


Sen Kevin Meyers [bill sponsor]:  Yes, Brown Jug and Chilkoots, do have a reputation.  But now, CHARR will do this on your behalf. [CHARR = Cabaret, Restaurants, & Retailer's Association.  Known by some as the liquor lobby.]

Wilson:  Since CHARR has said they would do this, have you seen an increase?

Meyers:  Yes, they have been doing quite a few of these and they have asked us to bump up the price because of the cost of tracking down the kids.

Rep. Gatto:  We have existing fine, actually an award.  The liquor store owner gets $1000 and $750 waived if go to training.  This would just change his $300 to $800. 

Meyers:  That's Brown Jug's policy.  Others will pay employees or bouncers more.  CHARR says it is harder to find where they live.  Each establishment has different policies and costs.

Gatto:  No requirement that cashier share in the bonus?
Meyers:  No

The bill passed out of State Affairs Committee and to Judiciary next.

So, Rep. Gatto figured out that while it may be a penalty for the violators, it is a reward for the licensee who gets the payment.  Rep. Gatto began to ask a line of questions that does raise a good point:  how much are we rewarding liquor stores and CHARR for obeying the law themselves, by not selling to minors?  I think perhaps the committee accepted Sen. Meyers' response too easily.

The idea of using rewards instead of penalties is supported by behavioral psychology.  But we really don't know how much of this increased fine merely pays expenses and how much will enrich CHARR's coffers.  Sen. Meyer said CHARR asked for the increase.  Mr. Madden from Brown Jug didn't talk about the costs of tracking down kids.  He said that they'd pursued over 2000 violators in twelve years.  Say 25% don't pay (he said they didn't get them all), that's still about 125 per year, which now would be $1500 a pop.  That's $187,500 a year.  Say all the violators go to alcohol and sexual abuse awareness training and they waive $750 each, it's still $93,750. And it wasn't clear if that was a Brown Jug option and if CHARR gives the same option.  It's possible they do have to expend considerable monies to track down violators, but I think the legislators should get some accounting data before giving them what some might call a bounty. 




Photos:
 1.  Mt. Juneau from just outside our apartment.
2.  Walking down the steps above Capitol Park.  There's a white building in the middle.  That's the newly remodeled Tom Stewart building that is an annex to the Capitol, and where I'm writing right now.  To the right is a brick building - the Capitol - and behind it is a taller black building - the State Court House.
3.  Mt. Juneau from Capitol Building Room 107 reflected off the State Court Building.
4.  And then the sun even made it into the hearing room.  Representatives, from left to right:  Gatto, Seaton, Lynn, Gruenberg, P. Wilson, and Petersen.
5.  Sen. Meyer and his staffer Christine Marasigan testifying, Reps. Gatto and Seaton listening

Board of Regents Selects Gen. Gamble to Be New UA President

Here's the University's Press Release:

UA Regents announce new president—Patrick K. Gamble

The University of Alaska Board of Regents has offered the position of system president to Patrick K. Gamble, which he has accepted.

“We believe Pat has the leadership skills, the management expertise and familiarity with the state of Alaska that will serve UA well,” said Board Chair Cynthia Henry. “We are impressed by his support for the University of Alaska and his interest in addressing the issues we face. We’re very pleased he’s accepted our offer.”

Gamble currently is president and chief executive officer of the Alaska Railroad Corp., a position he’s held since 2001. He retired as a four-star general in 2001 after a long career with the U.S. Air Force.

Gamble will replace current UA President Mark Hamilton, who announced his retirement last June. Hamilton has served as president of the 15-campus UA System since 1998. The board expects a smooth transition between the two to occur in June.

“I’m excited but humbled by this opportunity,” Gamble said today. “I have a high degree of respect for the University of Alaska, its mission and its service to students. This is a very important appointment, but it’s not one I’ll do alone. I look forward to working with a variety of people in the months and years ahead, including our students, faculty, staff, community members, elected officials, alumni, donors, business partners and others with an interest in the success of this institution.”

Gamble said his number one priority as president will be to ensure a quality education for students. He also wants to gain more public support for the University of Alaska, continue the university’s strong presence in research important to Alaskans and engage the university in broader state economic development opportunities.
Gamble received a Bachelor of Arts in mathematics from Texas A & M University and a Master of Business Administration in management from Auburn University.

Under Gamble’s tenure at the Alaska Railroad, railroad assets tripled to over $860 million and net earnings more than doubled.  Before leading the railroad, Gamble served as the top U.S. Air Force executive in the Pacific Region.  As Commander of Pacific Air Forces, Gamble was responsible for planning, programming, budgeting and operations of 14 installations that included 45,000 employees and 400 aircraft, with an annual operating budget of $1.4 billion.

I wish the new president well and may he lead the University to new levels of achievement in teaching, service to Alaska, and research. 

Mackey Wins Iditarod

 Here's Mackey  after crossing the finish line in Nome on 

the big screen in the staff/public lounge in the Capitol.