David Ignell: The LNG project boils down to transparency and trust

By DAVID IGNELL

Aug. 1, 2026 – The ongoing debate over the Alaska LNG project has paralyzed our state government.  Unable to reach an agreement with the Legislature during its regular session, Governor Mike Dunleavy has called a second special session. Einstein’s definition of insanity rules this Alaskan summer.

It’s gotten personal.  Sen. Bill Wielechowski recently posted on Facebook that a Texas billionaire is calling the shots in major legislation in Alaska.  Dunleavy retorted that Wielechowski is a “bull*****er”.

Which politician is speaking the truth, and which politician is out in the cow pasture mingling with the bulls during their excretions?

The war between our politicians has generated thousands of public comments. The stakes are high. Some Alaskans believe the LNG project has the potential to generate substantial economic benefits to all Alaskans while delivering affordable energy security to the state’s largest population centers.  Other Alaskans see nothing but a pipe dream, a guaranteed financial disaster that only puts the state deeper in the hole.

In its December 2025 report, GaffneyCline, independent energy advisor to the Alaska Legislative Budget and Audit Committee, took a somewhat middle road.  It concluded the LNG project is “one of the most ambitious infrastructure projects ever attempted globally and would require resolution of complex commercial, technical and logistical features to come to fruition.”

Ever. Attempted. Globally.  Now that’s saying something.

In reaching an informed opinion on the project’s feasibility and ultimately which politician to believe, the 50-year history of the LNG project is highly relevant.  For decades, the substantial complexities identified by GaffneyCline have proven to be too high of a hurdle for the State to overcome.

In 2016, energy giants with substantial Alaska experience — Exxon/Mobil, BP, and ConocoPhillips — backed out of the project.  The Walker Administration then turned to Communist China for help and opened our doors to dozens of their “industry officials”.

A few months later, it was reported Alaska servers were targeted, including the Department of Natural Resources, by Chinese hackers.  The Walker administration denied the hackers succeeded. But that’s a different story. Or is it?

The Alaska Story reader and conservative commenter “Morrigan” invoked some of these concerns earlier this year when he wrote, “Nurse Giessel may have a point. Could this thing be in extremis, on life support, and nobody outside the ER realizes it?”

The LNG project received a big boost from President Donald Trump last year in his Executive Order 14153, entitled “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential”.  He specifically prioritized the development of Alaska’s LNG potential.

However, Trump was not the first US president to provide strong support for the Alaska LNG project.   Jimmy Carter was a strong advocate back in the late 1970s.  The Bush and Clinton administrations also supported the project.

In the end, the ideas, proposals, and deals haven’t worked because the numbers don’t work.  But that inconvenient truth doesn’t deter some politicians, especially when the numbers are blurred.

The recent GaffneyCline report cited Alaska’s ability to participate as a full equity partner in the LNG project as an important component to the project’s success.

“With its dual role as host government and project participant, equity participation also enables a range of other commercial or economic features which may help lead to a successful FID [final investment decision].  A major consideration in this context is how state and private investors arrive at an overall project framework that meets a reasonable return to equity investors and maintains an attractive outcome for the government.”

At the beginning of the GaffneyCline report, it asserted, “a detailed economic model of the project is required before the legislature can take an informed view as to the appropriate degree of government take that the project can sustain, and how this could evolve over time.”  The report concluded, “for a detailed policy framework and fiscal package to be agreed, the project economics would need to be defined.”

Despite these clear admonitions by the Legislature’s respected expert calling for a detailed model and framework, two to three months later executives from the Alaska Gas Development Corporation refused to give the Senate Resources Committee an adequate basis for an informed view on the proposed development deal with Glenfarne.

At the public hearing on February 23, the senators asked basic questions on corporate governance between Glenfarne, the State, and future equity partners.  The AGDC executives replied that they couldn’t respond because of a confidentiality agreement with Glenfarne.  The senators seemed rightfully incredulous.

Making matters worse, the AGDC executives couldn’t provide the senators with any sense of the return the State could expect on the $1 billion it has already invested in the venture.  The senators were told it all depends on whether the State continues to invest more money in the project as Glenfarne continues to raise equity.

Wielechowski eventually caught on to the development scheme: “So we really don’t have 25% of the project.  There’s no circumstance where we just get 25% of the project because we invested a billion dollars over the years and gave that work project to Glenfarne.  We could effectively get nothing for this.”

In watching the February committee hearing, I was astonished to learn of the veil of secrecy and the completely speculative nature of whatever deal AGDC has cut with Glenfarne.  The AGDC executives appearing before the Senate would have been thrown out of any institutional investor’s boardroom within 15 minutes.  The scheme is essentially a black hole and there’s simply no way the Alaska Legislature can make an informed decision on any aspect of Glenfarne’s proposed LNG project.

Dunleavy is ultimately responsible for the AGDC’s lack of transparency and inability to provide the Legislature with an informed view.  He selected the AGDC board of directors.

A few weeks after this disastrous Senate hearing, Dunleavy proposed tax legislation to provide financial incentives to producers and developers.  His proposal called for replacing Alaska’s existing oil and gas property tax structure.  It could have wide ranging implications.  The impact on municipalities would be significant.

The GaffneyCline report had suggested the State might be able to offer tax incentive packages that could help make the LNG project financially feasible.  But for Dunleavy to push tax legislation without presenting the Legislature with a comprehensive and detailed economic model and framework for them to consider was a waste of time.

With the lack of transparency surrounding the Glenfarne deal, it was impossible for the Legislature to make an informed decision.  Ultimately, the dialogue turned to entity taxation and whether to close the loophole that gas and oil S corps enjoy over their C corps colleagues.  And look where that got us.

So which politician is trying to bull**** us?  The answer is the one who is the least transparent and generates the least trust.

Dunleavy himself recently talked about the importance of confidence as an issue in the LNG debate.  His Wall Street Journal opinion article in March stated: “Energy security isn’t only about price.  Its’s about confidence…. Confidence that strategic partners share common strategic interests.”

Confidence is generated by transparency and trust.  The LNG project being pushed by Dunleavy has an appalling lack of transparency.  And it’s worsening by the month.

In late June the Legislature learned of a secret agreement between AGDC and Glenfarne which might result in the State having to pay Glenfarne if the LNG project doesn’t go forward. A draft analysis of the secret agreement, previously prepared by AGDC, was leaked and somehow found its way into the hands of a few legislators. Apparently, there are elected legislators who haven’t seen the draft analysis.

Are you kidding me? Why would the full terms of this agreement not be disclosed to the public? The more we find out about the Glenfarne deal, the higher the stink invades heaven. Under no circumstances should the Legislature agree with Dunleavy on any bill involving the LNG project or taxes before everything is laid out on the table.

Adding insult to injury were the subsequent comments of one of Dunleavy’s appointees to the AGDC board, after the secret agreement was leaked.  Apparently during a board meeting, one of the members compared our elected representatives who want to know the truth about the Glenfarne deal to mosquitoes – irritating, relentless, and somehow always present.

Apologists will try to spin this statement as tongue and cheek, but it represents a very dangerous and alarming mindset.

Perhaps before the 3^rd special session expires, the Legislature should rescind the authority of the AGDC and consider disbanding it.  Under Dunleavy, the AGDC has gone way too far.

When it comes to matters of trust and transparency, it’s not just the LNG project where Dunleavy fails.  Many conservatives, including myself, have learned over the years that Dunleavy and his administration can’t be trusted to do the right thing.

Consider the view of Ms. Sharon Walls who recently wrote me that “the Dunleavy administration demonstrates a profound lack of accountability.”

Walls is the wife of former Ketchikan Police Chief Jeff Walls who was railroaded out of the state by Dunleavy’s administrators after the Ketchikan Police Department increased fentanyl seizures by over 500% during Chief Walls’ first year on the job.  The Alaska State Troopers and the Attorney General’s office combined to mislead 3 separate grand juries into issuing indictments against Chief Walls that were later dismissed by Ketchikan Superior Court Judge Kathryn Lybrand.

Ms. Walls was assaulted and injured by her husband’s assailant.  In addition to fabricating charges against her husband, Dunleavy’s administration did not pursue charges against Ms. Walls’ assailant.  She is still understandably upset.

Last summer I wrote a few articles about this extremely dark stain on Dunleavy’s resume.  When retired Alaska Public Safety Commissioner Dick Burton heard about the first indictment, he emailed colleagues that “something here is really stinky”.  Retired Trooper Lt. Jeff Hall who previously headed up major crime investigations in Southeast, did an investigation and concluded “this case should never have been brought forward”.

Another investigating officer concluded the State’s investigation was both illegal and unethical.  One of the things he cited was the State changing words and statements to make the probable cause statement fit criminal charges.  Another was intentionally writing the narrative in the police report in contradiction to what was said.

Ms. Walls described to me the attitude of certain politicians in our country who think “citizens work for them, not the other way around.”  She wrote Dunleavy’s administration not only “mirrored the same entrenched political behavior” but “stepped it up a few notches.”

As for Dunleavy, Ms. Walls wrote, “after the second grand jury I was informed via a Dunleavy staffer that he was aware of the situation and did not want anything to do with it, wished it would go away.  Revelations warns of the cowardly facing severe judgement.  I can’t think of anything more cowardly than robbing a person of their freedom because you don’t have the courage to act.”

Dunleavy didn’t get his wish.  The matter didn’t just go away.  Instead, his administration continued their malicious prosecution against Chief Walls, while Dunleavy sat on his hands and watched a good man get railroaded out of the state along with his good wife, a victim without recourse.

The sordid story behind Chief Walls’ ouster should be the subject of an independent grand jury investigation, but the Dunleavy administration has quashed that possibility too.  Credible evidence indicates Dunleavy and his administration knowingly tampered with the successful removal of large quantities of deadly fentanyl from Alaska’s streets.

Chief Walls was highly successful in carrying out objectives that would later become the subject of an Executive Order by President Trump.  What prevented Dunleavy from stepping in and stopping the malicious prosecution?  Who really runs this state?

Dunleavy and his administration have terrorized other Alaskans.  I’ve written several articles over the last three years about the persecution of AK Mom’s family by Office of Children’s Services and the Department of Law.  Those two agencies fought to keep one of AK Mom’s children in a homeless shelter, vulnerable to traffickers, and to prevent him from returning home.

Dunleavy knew AK Mom, a conservative Christian woman who attended Republican events.  Yet, he did nothing, just like in the Walls’ malicious prosecution.

When the Alaska governor won’t stand up for good families being persecuted by his own administration, why should we have any confidence he’s doing the right thing on the LNG project?

Why shouldn’t we believe Wielechowski?  Why shouldn’t we be concerned that Dunleavy’s tax schemes are proposed as a vehicle to benefit out of state billionaires using the carrot of a speculative pipe dream?

Your past actions matter, Governor. At this point, I have no confidence your tax incentives aren’t a Trojan Horse through which the barbarians can enter through our gates and sack us.

I’m in favor of letting the next few months pass by without any legislative action other than curbing the powers of the AGDC, and hoping Alaskans will elect an honest governor in an honest election.  Let’s pray our next governor can be better trusted to put ordinary Alaskans first, to prioritize transparency in the LNG project and other economic ventures, and to empower citizen grand jury investigations using independent counsel.

David Ignell was born and raised in Juneau where he currently resides.  He formerly practiced law in California state and federal courts and was a volunteer analyst for the California Innocence Project. He is currently a forensic journalist and recently wrote a book on the Alaska Grand Jury.

Alaska Senate has a new move against the gasline: S corp tax with a carve out for some, not others