Adam Prestidge
44:01 - 45:05
“our suggestion is that instead of having a broad amendment that dictates a few high-level principles about project labor agreements, we could instead legislate into law a requirement that the PLAs entered into will be substantially consistent with the binding MOU that was already executed between the project developer, between Glenfarm and the building trades councils.”
- Speaker
- Adam Prestidge
- Timestamp
- 44:01 – 45:05
- Community
- Alaska News
- Location
- Alaska
- Captured at
From the transcript
In conclusion, our suggestion is that instead of having a broad amendment that dictates a few high-level principles about project labor agreements, we could instead legislate into law a requirement that the PLAs entered into will be substantially consistent with the binding MOU that was already executed between the project developer, between Glenfarm and the building trades councils. We, as I said, we have an agreement in place. Glenfarn stands by it with full commitment, and if it is— if we're asked to put that agreement into law as a legal requirement, we're totally okay with that. We are very grateful and thrilled to have this project be worked on by the incredible labor force of the state of Alaska. Uh, we just needed to have the laws and regulations that apply to the project be conducive to actually financing it and getting lenders and investors to, to put the money in to build it.
Related Coverage
Gas-line developer warns Alaska's Senate terms could drive it off
Glenfarne told lawmakers the Senate's gas-line amendments — a 9.4% investor tax, an automatic state takeover clause, tough labor rules — could make it walk. Lawmakers say they're protecting the state.
