Comments by DeltaLady
Page 1 of 2 | Next
Posted on August 8 at 6:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Whoa with the "pat on the back". Aren't they obligated as part of the SCC hierarchy to not "publically support" one candidate or another in a contested party primary?
Posted on August 7 at 8:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Don't forget you will be taxed on that pfd....
Posted on August 7 at 7:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
the senate version at 850 gallon fuel oil per winter at $6 per gallon will equal $2550 with a $3 cap. In addition to $500 cash, that will be a very significant inroad to my energy expense. $3050 versus $1200, you do the math. And rest assured the bulk of it does go to energy versus the big screen.
Posted on June 8 at 11:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Thursday June 12th thru Saturday. 10-5 Thursday, 9-5 Friday, 9-5 Saturday. Carlson Center. Thursday topic: INSTATE GAS, Saturday Public Testimony!
Posted on June 8 at 10:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Come join those of us with questions at the AGIA rally this Thursday and ask those legislators in person.
Posted on May 25 at 8:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
What happened to your "analysis" for past years? Show too much $$ for "Fair"banks rather than SE Alaska?
On Capital budget shows need for external review of legislative operations
Posted on May 23 at 11:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"They (Legislators) need to help us understand how the governor arrived at the conclusion that the TransCanada proposal is better than the proposal put forward outside AGIA by ConocoPhillips and BP, two of the three companies holding rights to much of the North Slope’s gas." Should it not be encumbent upon the administration to convince the legislators with their "analysis" why it is in the best interest to continue with AGIA and a check for $500 million. Why the road show? Won't deliberations in Juneau serve the process better than going over the same information in each community?
One last thing: "granting an exclusive pipeline license" appears mischaracterized beacause isn't it FERC that grants "licenses"
Posted on May 6 at 2:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It is the constituents that asked for these projects...why don't you analyze their "reasoning"? After all it is included with the bill as "back-up".
On Palin takes reasonable approach in asking legislators to identify top priorities
Posted on May 3 at 4:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Project importance was self fulfulling upon inclusion into the budget. (The wrangling already took place when requests that numbered over 2,000 according to another news story, was pared down to 900) Where and why it came forth is presented in the bill on the leg finance website. Pretty "open and transparent" by the legislators on the why and where they came forth. They were driven by community, agency, and administration requests.
Page 1 of 2 | Next
Posted on August 9 at 9:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
SCC = state central committee of the republican party. bylaws on endorsements, no public contested pre-primary endorsements if you sit on the committee, which as legislators, i think they are included.
On Interior Alaska legislators back Parnell for U.S. House