Video Clips

Quoted moments from Alaska public meetings, hearings, and press conferences.

Clips from Alaska Gasline Development CorporationClear

Bert Stedman

“on Phase 1, the mid-range of the low and the high went from $13 to almost $17 billion, is $15 billion. Then you could add the 15% contingency, that puts you at $17 billion. So you can use $17 or a common number is 20%, that'd be $18 billion.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:40

Justin Ruffridge

“I really would like to know how much the construction cost, because it seems to me to be a large assumption, weighs into what we're going to see here later, particularly on breakeven prices and other areas of, I think, importance to us as we're making decisions. If the construction cost is higher than what this model has assumed, what main areas does that affect in these following slides?”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:43

Dan Stickel

“The act of agreeing on a new set of baseline assumptions, ideally that would be a months-long process where we would collaborate, we would review all of the latest information in detail, spend some time with it. We would collaborate with stakeholders, partners and agencies, developer, AGDC, industry, and kind of synthesize all of that information. And come up with a new set of baseline assumptions.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:49

Dan Stickel

“a lot of these assumptions were developed before Glenfarn came onto the scene. We have not received a lot of detailed information and details details on project plan from them, given confidentiality. And so we have carried forward many of these assumptions. There was a significant amount of work that was done in 2018 and 2019.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:57

Justin Ruffridge

“if you have an entity who is consistently investing large-scale infrastructure dollars those large investments are always able to, or are usually able to offset any sort of revenue gain from the investment itself. Potentially if they continue to invest infrastructure dollars, you could perpetuate this sort of depre— or I guess lower value of tax paid in perpetuity.— is that an accurate assumption again? Representative Ruffridge, through the chair, yes. So a company that continues to make investments would— the capital investments would have a depreciation schedule and those would reduce the taxes owed.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

1:22

Dan Stickel

“once full export operations begin in 2033, you'd start to see more revenue, just shy of $200 million a year total, but you'd start to see more revenue from the oil and gas production in the upstream, and then once you get out into the later years of the project and you start to see the significant potential revenues from the midstream developer that the corporate income tax impact could be over $600 million per year from this provision.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:38

Bert Stedman

“My understanding from reading some of the articles that one of the news media person got it from somebody outside the building. Unconnected to the legislature. So where that came from, I don't know, but it's circulated.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:26

Bert Stedman

“I'm sure we'll be looking as we go forward in this process to ensure that there's, um, that it's clearly delineated that there could be no monetary value put on that, um, concession, whatever concessions we make here with property tax. So it won't be left up to an arbitrator in, in arguments.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:32

Adam Prestidge

“this is a mechanism that is only exercisable at the state's option. In terms of Glenfarn's ability to seek recourse or any kind of compensation, we don't have that mechanism. We can't ask the state to exercise this option. If Glenfarn decides to abandon the project, we do so with no recourse.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:12

Bert Stedman

“they can draw erroneous conclusions from just reading that in isolation. And we've tried to ferret some of that out in our questions.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:54

Justin Ruffridge

“If this assumption, let's say on slide 21, from 20— looks like '46 and moving onward, is that there is the assumed, I would say, increase in potential revenue from a corporate income tax, that is only if the entity in question here does not take some of those dollars and let's say they reinvest those things in an export facility expansion, maybe an additional gas line, other sort of areas, all of those potential revenue dollars would have— could disappear. Is that an accurate assumption?”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:36

Bert Stedman

“As far as it being a hypothetical potential of not going forward with the project, I don't believe it's that hypothetical because we've had numerous gas line projects that have not succeeded. This is just the latest one over the last 30 years. And there's a lot of FERC permits issued that never come to fruition.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:27

Adam Prestidge

“First, in response, Senator Hoffman, you asked about Glenfarm's willingness to continue to pursue the project, and we're absolutely willing to continue to pursue the project, and we will. It doesn't— it creates a little bit of a hesitation around how— around business principles and how, you know, how we will be able to trust certain confidential— confidentiality protections.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:38

Dan Stickel

“we've heard from some impacted taxpayers that the top end of the range may be an aggressive assumption. And so we continue to present this as a range.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:33

Dan Stickel

“Under the AKLNG project, this would also apply to incremental revenue from the project. So we assume that about two-thirds of the upstream oil and gas production associated with AKLNG would be subject to corporate income tax. Um, this pass-through entity tax would apply to that remaining one-third of production. We assume that the midstream operator is not subject to corporate income tax. And so this pass-through entity tax would also apply to the midstream operator under our modeling.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:41

Dan Stickel

“for that midstream operator, we're estimating $29 million in 2036. That's the first year of expected revenues. That increases to $65 million in 2041 and then up to $358 million in 2051. And what that shift from the 2041 to the 2051 represents is the exhaustion of those carryforward net operating losses.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:49

Bert Stedman

“when you look at the, at least from what I can gather on the economics of the gas line, with their interest cost and their depreciation, there's gonna be no net income, taxable net income for 2 decades. Literally, 2 decades. So I don't know how that, I guess, will wind up into a tax conversation later on the next couple of days, but you don't pay taxes unless you have a net income.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:46

Dan Stickel

“the depreciation offsets— when we're doing an analysis of potential midstream corporate income tax, the depreciation offsets a lot of that income for the first several years, which is why I think 2036 was the first year that we would project a positive corporate income tax from the developer under the project. They also earn— to the extent that they have losses during construction, they could earn a net operating loss that could be carried forward. That net operating loss can offset up to 80% of a tax liability. And so once we get to the 2036 timeframe, we assume that the developer would still have those net operating losses until sometime in the 2040s.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:53

Dan Stickel

“the upstream and midstream would pay additional corporate income tax with the pass-through entity analysis. A portion of that would be an offset on federal tax because state taxes become a deduction against the federal tax. And then that would shift over life of project a little over— around $6 billion of cumulative revenue would shift from the companies and federal government to the state government.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:29

Dan Stickel

“broadly speaking, the various, you know, the various versions of the bill have kind of targeted that 50 cents or so reduction to that break-even cost of supply plus or minus 5 or 10 cents.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:24

Dan Stickel

“We note the significant policy difference between the two versions of the bill is that pass-through entity tax that is in the version that came out of the Senate floor. That does create— that does add a level of uncertainty uncertainty and is a significant policy decision for the committee to consider.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:24

Bert Stedman

“I would recommend you redact that information out of them if you were to release it. It seems like the bulk of that document is not commercially sensitive from what I could see. There's a few things in there that's best left private.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:46

Dan Stickel

“One additional bullet point that should have been on this slide for the version that passed out of the Senate floor is the implementation of a new pass-through entity tax that would apply to certain oil and gas companies in the state.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:42

Dan Stickel

“The biggest one of these was the— that directly impacts the Department of Revenue was the implementation of the pass-through entity tax for oil and gas companies. This is a significant policy decision that's before the committee and the legislature.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:22

Dan Stickel

“Representative Ruffridge to the Chair, correct, yes. So the assumption is that there is significant capital expenditure for the Phase 2 and then kind of a steady-state operations beyond that. If the developer were to do a significant expansion, yes, that would reduce their corporate income tax liability.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

1:14

Frank Richards

“The document that we are discussing today is a draft document that AGDC staff created specifically to provide information to AGDC's board while we were working on the definitive agreement. It contains a summary description of the, the documents that we were negotiating with Glenfarm at the time, specifically naming them, but it also includes information around the selection of Glenfarm as the lead developer as compared to other parties. And so there is commercially sensitive information in there about other parties that we would find, again, would breach our confidentiality agreements with those other parties.”

Alaska Legislature: MSC2-20260626-1410

0:23

Matt Kissinger

“that was not in the main agreement. And the main agreement has the abandonment provisions that we have also discussed where there is not a payment.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:08

Calvin Schrage

“With that, I'd like to call the roll. Senator Cronk. No. Senator Steadman. No.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:16

Calvin Schrage

“From there, we will move on to amendments adopted on the Senate floor, which I expect will form the basis of most of our decision-making. While our initial focus will be on the Senate components, the committee retains the ability to consider the House version and its individual provisions as we work toward a final product.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:57

Matt Kissinger

“I think everyone knows what I'm talking about with respect to a stolen AGDC document, confidential document. I thought it would be worthwhile just to take a few minutes just to address it openly to let you ask any questions that you have on it, but also to clarify that we've been clear actually about these mechanisms on the record.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:39

Adam Prestidge

“this is a mechanism that is only exercisable at the state's option. In terms of Glenfarm's ability to seek recourse or any kind of compensation, we don't have that mechanism. We can't ask the state to exercise this option.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:51

Adam Prestidge

“we do have the view that if there were ever a cash consideration or a cash repurchase, we would not ask for the monetary value of any tax arrangement to be reflected in terms of in any repurchase.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:49

Frank Richards

“If Glenfarm decides to abandon the project, we do so with no recourse. And that is a very important characterization of how this has been set up.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:19

Calvin Schrage

“One question that I would have, which has not been addressed as of yet, is who is able to claim value for any tax abatement that's provided by the legislature?”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:11

Adam Prestidge

“We would not ask for any numerical value to be assigned based on the implementation of a tax arrangement.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:57

Frank Richards

“The document that we are discussing today is a draft document that AGDC staff created specifically to provide information to AGDC's board while we were working on the definitive agreement.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:25

Matt Kissinger

“Senator Steadman, through the Chair, if you would be willing to provide us with a copy of that document, then we can consider redacting it and reviewing it. But as of now, we've only been able to to look at that document. We don't have our own copy of that document.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:18

Bryce Edgmon

“I move, Mr. Chairman, that we adopt the committee substitute for House Bill 381 Finance amended. For reference, it is 34-GH2038\W.A.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:45

Calvin Schrage

“For the House, 0 yeas, 3 nays. With 3 yeas, 0 nays in the Senate and 3 nays in the House, House Bill 381, Senate amended, fails to be adopted. Having not adopted either the House or Senate versions of HB 381, and after consultation with the presiding officers, the committee will proceed with its work under the expectation that limited powers of free conference will formally be granted later in the process when the bodies reconvene and before the adoption of the final committee reports by both bodies. Under limited powers of free conference, the conference committee can adopt any language, dates, or effective dates subject to conference.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:20

Calvin Schrage

“After discussions with committee members, there is interest in starting with the Senate Finance version. Which largely mirrors and builds upon the bill passed by the House.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:43

Matt Kissinger

“Representative Fields asked about these clawback mechanisms at that meeting, and what I said was, I said there— I said, and just to address this clearly, this is my words, and just to address this clearly because I've heard many questions that dance around this, the clawback would be a paid clawback. And there's real important reason for that. If you're moving towards milestones and you're gonna penalize your developer and they miss a milestone and you can just take everything away from them and they can lose everything, They will put nothing into it.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:25

Calvin Schrage

“Our next meeting of the HPPC HB 381 conference committee will take place tomorrow, Saturday, June 27th at 10:00 a.m. During that meeting, we will conclude this presentation as well as go over the amendments passed on the Senate floor to HB 381.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:31

Adam Prestidge

“it creates a little bit of a hesitation around how— around business principles and how, you know, how we will be able to trust certain confidentiality protections.”

Alaska Legislature: JHB381-260626-1400 · Jun 26, 2026

0:16

James Kaufman

“If people wanna try some amendments, do it. But I think it all should be done in the light of day. If we're squabbling over revenue that comes from this thing, we need to remember no revenue comes from bought gas. No revenue comes from windmills. None comes from solar panels.”

Alaska Legislature: SMIN-20260617-1630 · Jun 17, 2026

0:22

Robert Myers

“nothing in life is guaranteed here. And I think everybody agrees that passing this bill does not guarantee us a gas line, but not passing this bill guarantees we don't get a gas line. This is the last thing that we as a state can do to help this process along.”

Alaska Legislature: SMIN-20260617-1630 · Jun 17, 2026

0:28

Robert Yundt

“we are nowhere near ready to even consider that right now. So it needs to stand on its own merit in a year or 2 years or 4 years or possibly never. But we got to finish the financial modeling. We cannot— I don't think we should be considering jeopardizing this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity over something that we haven't even finished the committee process on.”

Alaska Legislature: SMIN-20260617-1630 · Jun 17, 2026

0:44

James Kaufman

“I don't know what the effort might be to make it unpalatable to people to vote for it, the old poison pill idea. I don't know how far we might go down that road if it comes to the floor, but I think the best thing we can do is get it to the floor and do it in the light of day, just like we should have been having committee meetings to get the final bill in shape and then send it to the floor. But instead, we've kind of collapsed into this closed-door caucus meetings rather than the committee meetings and the process that we should should be following.”

Alaska Legislature: SMIN-20260617-1630 · Jun 17, 2026

0:33

James Kaufman

“This getting to the point where suddenly things just collapse in committee and then we go into these caucus meetings, you know, behind closed doors. That was really kind of a breaking point that occurred that I think is unfortunate.”

Alaska Legislature: SMIN-20260617-1630 · Jun 17, 2026

← Newer Older →