Alaska congressional delegation urges cooperation to maximize infrastructure funding

How much money will Alaska get from the $1 trillion infrastructure bill that passed last year? The answer will depend on collaboration between the state’s congressional delegation, the governor and the Legislature, members of the delegation said Friday.

According to a White House analysis, the bipartisan infrastructure deal will provide an estimated $4.9 billion for Alaska based on formulas already finalized in the bill. But around a third of the funding available through the bill over the next five years will be distributed through competitive grant applications. That means that without proper guidance on how and when to apply, Alaska communities could lose out.

“The hard part is just beginning,” Sen. Dan Sullivan told the Alaska House’s Labor and Commerce Committee during a presentation by the entire delegation Friday morning.

Sullivan, along with Sen. Lisa Murkowski and Rep. Don Young — all Republicans — presented a united front on the need for a coordinated effort from the state government to make the most of the bill, which promises funding for projects including roads, ferries, airports, broadband, water and energy.

“You should be bird dogging this legislation and cooperating with the delegation and the governor to make sure that we get the monies that are in this bill,” Young told the committee. “If we can’t do that, we will lose out.”

Young’s enthusiasm for the bill was echoed by Rep. Zack Fields, an Anchorage Democrat who co-chairs the House Labor and Commerce Committee along with fellow Anchorage Democrat Ivy Spohnholz.

“It’s almost like the bill is so good for Alaska, and so expansive in how it benefits Alaska, that it’s actually hard to wrap your head around it,” Fields said in a phone interview after the committee meeting.

On a per capita basis, Alaska is expected to get more than any other state, with more $6,000 per person over five years. The benefits include money that can shore up the ailing Alaska Marine Highway System and more than $100 million toward broadband projects that can help bring reliable internet connectivity to rural communities.

To ensure the state makes the most of it, “it’s all hands on deck,” said Fields.

But the state faces significant challenges in capturing the available funding, including a potential shortage of the workforce needed to make some projects a reality, and a lack of resources in small communities to support grant applications and matching dollars required for some categories of funding.

“We do not want to all of a sudden say, ‘Oh wait, we have so much work that we have to import workers from the Lower 48.’ We should be doing these projects with our workers, our employees,” Sullivan said.

Gov. Mike Dunleavy proposed spending $10 million on job training next year to meet the need for workers, Dunleavy spokesman Jeff Turner said in an email.

Murkowski warned that some communities “will be struggling to find the resources to apply” and urged the Legislature to provide assistance and matching funds when needed.

“I would really hate for us to lose out on federal assistance that can cover 80% of the project’s costs because we couldn’t find that match,” Murkowski said.

Young suggested setting up an “oversight committee” that would bring together congressional staff and state government officials to oversee funding opportunities. That proposal was met with enthusiasm from Fields, but hesitation from Miles Baker, infrastructure investment coordinator for Dunleavy.

Baker said that he would “hesitate to have another task force or a working group.” He noted that he already intended to have regular calls on funding opportunities with “key folks” in Dunleavy’s administration. Turner also said the governor’s staff meets regularly with congressional delegation staff and has already applied for three funding programs available under the bill.

In a presentation before the House Finance Committee on Thursday, Baker was more cautious in his assessment of the infrastructure bill, saying there is “a significant amount of money” in the bill that Alaska will not qualify for. He also downgraded the possibility that funding will be available for key projects in the state, including the modernization of the Port of Alaska.

But Young said he believed the port would be prioritized because of its strategic use by the military on top of it serving communities across the state for food and fuel shipments. The full cost of modernizing the port and making it resilient to earthquake damage is expected to be upwards of $1 billion.

Young was one of only 13 Republican members of the U.S. House of Representatives who voted in favor of the bill, drawing criticism from former President Donald Trump and some party leaders. Sullivan and Murkowski were two of 19 Republican Senate members who voted in favor of the legislation. Murkowski was one of a bipartisan group of senators tasked with crafting the bill details.

Specific funding that has already been appropriated to Alaska includes $75 million for the Denali Commission — six times more than what the commission tasked with providing economic support throughout Alaska has typically received from the federal government in recent years. That money can go towards job training and federal grant matching, among other uses.

Both the Legislature and the governor’s office say they are awaiting additional guidance from the federal government as they figure out how the funding will be made available.

Baker said he expected the governor would bring before the Legislature a separate appropriations bill toward the end of the regular legislative session to cover the programs that fall under the infrastructure bill. But Spohnholz said there could be a need for a “scalpel-like” special session if additional information is released after the end of the session.

With billions on the line, Young ended his message to state lawmakers with a stern request: “I don’t want to see any bickering.”