By Suzanne Downing 
A small group of about 19 protesters gathered outside the Westmark Hotel on Tuesday evening, holding “DIVEST” signs and waiting for someone to notice them.
The target of their demonstration: NANA Regional Corporation, the Inupiat-owned Alaska Native corporation that holds federal contracts with the Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to provide detention-related services.
These contracts are not new. They existed under the Biden administration—yet not a single protest occurred then. In fact, NANA (through its subsidiary Akima) began securing contracts with ICE in late 2013, when it bid on and won a major contract to manage the Krome Service Processing Center near Miami, Florida, a facility previously operated by another Alaska Native corporation. This marked the start of their involvement in ICE detention operations, amid high deportation rates under the Obama administration.
As of November, that initial contract has been in place for over a decade, with Akima now operating multiple ICE facilities nationwide, including in Guantánamo Bay (contracted in August 2024).
But now, with President Donald Trump ramping up enforcement and securing the borders, suddenly a handful of activists, all appearing to be young, white, and very eager for cameras, arrived to make a statement.
They positioned themselves at about 5:30 pm, just as NANA shareholders were gathering for a meeting, hoping to pressure the corporation to sever ties with federal agencies responsible for enforcing national immigration laws.
The message written on their social media was aimed at NANA’s Inupiat leadership: “Nana Regional Corp. is supposed to uphold Iñupiat values.”
Still, the scene looked less like a groundswell of shareholder revolt and more like a small activist photo-op, what one might call “earned media cosplay.”
Between the lengthy pauses, periodic glances at their phones, and the occasional repositioning to catch headlights for better lighting, it became clear the protest itself was as much about being seen protesting as it was about the issue.
Akima management is just cashing in on the welfare program set up by the Democrats to payoff the native American vote by allowing the native owned 8A bidders to be awarded a bid up to 10% higher than low bid which in turn is just raising the cost of maintenance contracts taxpayers are having to support.
Just another reason national debt is snowballing down the mountain.
NANA should and will ignore the protesters over a program setup to pay for their support at the polls as well as fill shareholder pockets which encourages them to vote D at every opportunity.
As Obama promised “change” this is another mechanism designed for the “transfer of wealth” as well as keeping the Dems in total control…. at least until Joe went rogue and screwed his plan so badly MAGA had to step in and save the sinking ship.
I am sure these protesters cant see through their frosty noses to understand who “engineered” this plan.
The illegally invited immigrants targeted by ICE are just another by product of the Dems vote purchase.
Agree Akima using nana to get rich and the idiots in nana allowing it nothing new it’s not for the INUPIAQ PEOPLE it’s all about greed
Uhhh, I believe(?) … Uncle Ted & Frank had a part to play in this criminal 8(a) Ponzi scheme too!
You can’t hardly bid (competitively) on a Federal Contract without having your village cousin.
Daddy’s Little Princess is just maximizing the windfall benefits to her favor!
Leave it to Downing to insult a peaceful process.
You should be used to “truthful reporting” especially when the fake media reported “mostly peaceful” protesting when rioters attempted to burn down the Mark Hatfield federal building after blockading the door with employees inside in Portlandia. (:
Andy, I think we can rely on the wisdom of the Osmonds here. In their song, One Bad Apple, there is this lyric: “One bad apple don’t spoil the whole bunch, girl
Oh, I don’t care what they say
I don’t care what you heard”.
Or to put it another way, for every Progressive protest that gets confrontational or violent, there are twenty million thousand on the Conservative side. Think January 6 or Charlottesville.
But really, my point was that Downing, through her superb bitchiness, can find poop in a wedding cake.
Uhhh…that would’ve been the Jackson Five. The Osmonds are Republicans. But apparently Evan doesn’t know the difference between a bad apple and poop. He reads the apple and eats the poop……then complains about it at the wedding. Democrat logic is so effing entertaining. Another reason I subscribe to Alaska Story.
Paul. Negative. According to wikipedia, “”One Bad Apple” is a song by the Osmonds, released as a single on November 14, 1970. My point (which you missed) was that Downing can be a drag. Something peaceful and positive occurs, and there she is with her digital water cannon.
The main organizer is David Leslie, a performative bleeding heart they/them genderqueer etc liberal
That’s (his) name? This person is present at most lefty protests in Fairbanks. Must have lots of time and money on his hands. I expect he has a position at UAF.
If the folks on the left had a moral, ethical, or knowledge based understanding they would be protesting the practice of awarding no-bid contracts based solely upon the race of the business owner.
This story highlights a fascinating and often overlooked dynamic in local politics: the power of a vocal minority to shape a narrative, even after years of public acquiescence. While the protest was small, its timing—at the moment of contract renewal—is what makes it politically significant. It forces officials to publicly address concerns that may have been simmering under the surface, regardless of their validity.
The article rightly focuses on the “years of silence” preceding this. That’s the real crux of the story. It makes you wonder if this protest represents a genuine, growing groundswell of discontent, or if it’s a last-ditch effort by a very small group that feels it has no other avenue to be heard.
What do you believe truly explains the “years of silence” on this issue? Was it general public satisfaction with the contract, a lack of accessible avenues for complaint, or simply that the perceived inconvenience wasn’t significant enough to mobilize people until the contract’s renewal made the stakes feel immediate and tangible?
Hoo-eee. That’s some AI slop there!