Anchorage city leaders call for Gov. Dunleavy to require dam owners to replenish full length of Eklutna River

Anchorage’s city leaders are calling for Gov. Mike Dunleavy to intervene in a final proposal from two Southcentral Alaska electric utilities to return water flow to most of the Eklutna River and to instead pursue ways to replenish the river’s entire length.

The call comes as part of a continuing effort by the Anchorage Assembly to stop the advancement of the electric utilities’ $63.8 million plan, which relies on using the city’s drinking water infrastructure and would leave a mile of riverbed dry directly below the dam at Eklutna Lake.

The electric associations and former Mayor Dave Bronson submitted their final proposal to Dunleavy in April and called for the governor to approve it by the end of October.

In a letter and a resolution, Mayor Suzanne LaFrance and the Assembly asked Dunleavy to “attempt to reconcile differences” by requiring the owners of the Eklutna Hydroelectric Project — the Chugach and Matanuska electric associations and the Anchorage municipality — to spend two years coming up with a viable alternative.

The hydroelectric project’s dam has long dried up much of the riverbed. The electric utilities and the municipality have been undertaking a legally required effort to reduce the dam’s impacts on fish and wildlife by restoring water flow. That effort comes from an agreement signed in 1991 that allowed the city and electric utilities to buy the Eklutna Hydroelectric Project from the federal government.

LaFrance, in the letter to Dunleavy, said that the time would allow the owners to find a practical alternative that would “ensure continuous water flow to all 12 miles”; “protect drinking water supply for Anchorage”; and “further contribute to a reliable, affordable energy future for Southcentral Alaska.”

“My Administration believes that all practical alternatives to the proposed Program should be fully developed. Some of these alternatives have already been identified. The best alternative may not yet be discovered,” LaFrance said in the letter.

The Anchorage Assembly, in a 10-1 vote Friday, approved a resolution making the request and formally submitting the city’s comments to the governor.

“The MOA’s position is clear: the proposed final Program should not be adopted in its current form,” the Assembly resolution said. “Ultimately, the policy direction of the Eklutna River should reflect the will of Anchorage residents, who will bear significant financial, social, and environmental costs of the final restoration plan into the future.”

Assembly member Randy Sulte voted against the resolution. Member Scott Myers was not present and did not vote.

A spokesman for Dunleavy on Monday said the governor has not yet received LaFrance’s letter.

“The 1991 Agreement gives you the authority to establish the final program, which could incorporate and include further process,” LaFrance said in the letter to Dunleavy. “The 1991 Agreement also states: ‘The Governor shall attempt to reconcile any differences between the parties.’”

[What’s behind the fight over the Eklutna River?]

The utilities’ plan would use a portal valve to remove water from a pipe owned by the Anchorage Water and Wastewater Utility, which diverts the city’s drinking water from Eklutna Lake. Water redirected from the pipe would be released 1 mile below the dam.

The utilities have said their plan would put in place “significant fish and wildlife measures” while “simultaneously protecting the municipal water supply and continuing to provide firm, low cost, renewable energy to Southcentral Alaska.”

Bronson supported the utilities’ plan and clashed with the Assembly over the issue.

LaFrance took office July 1 after winning a runoff election against Bronson. Her letter to Dunleavy marks a departure from the previous fiery disagreements between the mayor’s office and the Assembly over the project.

Along with the Assembly, the Dena’ina Native Village of Eklutna and some conservation groups have also opposed the plan, in large part because it would not allow fish passage into Eklutna Lake. The village previously proposed alternatives that the electric utilities then rejected.

“We want to see water throughout. We want to see fish. We want to see restoration, and we want to do so now as a unified voice, as a municipality, unified with the Native Village of Eklutna,” Assembly Vice Chair Meg Zaletel said of the resolution at Friday’s meeting.

Assembly members have voiced numerous other concerns about the plan, saying that potential impacts to the city’s drinking water aren’t yet fully understood; that the costs to utility ratepayers and property taxpayers are poorly understood; and that the utilities’ analysis of possible alternatives was incomplete.

Another point of contention is that the municipality has not had voting rights among the ownership group for years, even though it is the majority owner of the hydroelectric project. The Regulatory Commission of Alaska revoked the city’s voting rights in 2020, citing the absence of a qualified executive to oversee the Anchorage Hydropower Utility.

City leaders say the RCA’s decision essentially left the Chugach and Matanuska electric associations in charge of the plan, despite potentially large impacts on property taxpayers, utility ratepayers and the city’s drinking water.

LaFrance and the Assembly are currently pushing to get the city’s voting rights reinstated. Earlier this month, LaFrance appointed AWWU director Mark Corsentino to also head the hydropower utility. The city has since filed a notice with the RCA that it has acquired the necessary expertise, according to the resolution.