Rep. Paul Seaton

When the Department of Natural Resources announced its new mission statement, I first raised the issue in the Resources Committee. I questioned the unilateral replacement by the executive branch of the mission of the Department of Natural Resources. This has percolated and is becoming contentious.  The mission statement for DNR as adopted by the Legislature reads: “The mission of the Department of Natural Resources is to develop, conserve, and enhance natural resources for present and future Alaskans.”
The executive branch ‘new’ mission is set as “To responsibly develop Alaska’s resources by making them available for maximum use and benefit consistent with the public interest.”  
Although the mission statement adopted by the Legislature is in the temporary law section, there is no automatic sunset or termination of the provisions unless such is explicitly set – which there was not, for the legislatively defined mission.  Although in the purpose section there is specification that it will be used for the 2003 budget, there was no specification that it would only be used for 2003, sunset or expire. In fact the mission statement has continuously been used and published by DNR as its mission statement until Jan. 17, 2012.          
My hope was that DNR would just go back to the legislatively established mission and approach the legislature for adequate vetting and decision to change or not change the mission of the DNR. However, we are now looking forward to dueling legal opinions etc. At issue is whether the executive branch is usurping a specific responsibility of the legislature. The Saturday House Finance presentation on performance based budgeting demonstrated how critical an agency mission statement can be as the activities, core functions and measures of the department all are to be aligned to the mission.  This is important to the DNR mission statement issue, as the legislature created the Department and specified its job as follows:
Alaska Statute 44.37.020 “Duties of department with respect to natural resources.
(a) The Department of Natural Resources shall administer the state program for the conservation and development of natural resources, including forests, parks, and recreational areas, land, water, agriculture, soil conservation, and minerals including petroleum and natural gas, but excluding commercial fisheries, sport fish, game, and fur-bearing animals in their natural state.”
Specific language exists in regards to the responsibility of the legislature, not the executive branch in creating the mission statements that guide a department:
Alaska Stature 37.07.014  Responsibilities of the legislature.
(a) To carry out its legislative power under art. II, sec. 1, Constitution of the State of Alaska, and to promote results-based government, the legislature shall issue a mission statement for each agency and the desired results the agency should achieve. The legislature may issue a separate mission statement for a subunit of an agency. A mission statement and desired results should promote the efficient, measured use of the state’s resources. A mission statement and desired results constitute policy under which an agency shall operate, and, where appropriate, the mission statement may be implemented by statute.” 
I have included this material in the hope that constituents can judge from the statutes whether the Alaska Legislature or the executive branch is responsible for setting forth the mission statements of departments.
Natural Gas – South Peninsula Pipeline: We have received a letter from ENSTAR confirming the current estimated construction cost of the transmission line running from the end of the 8 inch Anchor Point pipeline section through the end of Kachemak City at $10.65 million.  We have also received the official estimate that the $1 per thousand cubic feet SPP surcharge tariff would repay ENSTAR $2.5 million for advanced capital in 10 years. This is based on the estimated usage volume of gas assuming Homer’s defined ‘core area’ and Kachemak City are the early year’s users.  If the core area expands faster or another large user develops, that amount would be paid back sooner since more volume would be used than estimated and the $1 tariff would disappear at that earlier date.  I had originally reported that the ten year term was a firm date but we have now found out that changing the existing ‘until paid’ tariff to a firm date would necessitate an extended RCA tariff proceeding which could delay the project. This is because if the $2.5 million had not been recovered it would put the liability on the existing customers.
Resources: Last week we held three separate overviews.  Monday we discussed invasive species in Alaska, marine and terrestrial as well as the action plans within the Department of Fish and Game and Natural Resources to deal with invasive species.  The committee requested follow up from the agencies on the specific statutory changes that may be needed to allow the departments to deal with emergency procedures for invasive species.  Wednesday the committee received interesting presentations on Methanol to Gasoline and Gas to Liquids.  The potential of this technology to monetize Alaska gas through shipment in the Trans-Alaska Pipeline is an issue that is important for all Alaskans to consider given our vast reserves of natural gas and declining volumes through TAPS.  On Friday the committee heard overviews on geothermal, seawater heat transfer, wind, and tidal power energy projects. 
This week we will discuss HJR 31 a resolution declaring that the United States Congress declare Central Park in New York City a Wilderness Area.  We will also hear HB 276 establishing oil and gas tax credits for development in the Nenana basin.  On Wednesday my legislation eliminating the mining license tax on sand and gravel operations will be heard. Friday the committee will hear HJR 26 requesting federal agencies to create a management plan for sea otters in Southeast Alaska.
 
Rep. Paul Seaton (R) represents District 35 in the Alaska Legislature.

By Kevin Kreitz

I have been watching this big push for the gas line to Homer with interest and concern. First, let me say I understand the desire to cut costs and the pressures to make a profit as a business. I have been a small business owner and an executive in larger businesses and, as most of you, I am a consumer paying high rates for personal use. From my experiences I have seen the desire for a return on investment drive some very bad decisions. Based upon the facts and history of the energy industry, I have some very big reservations. I hope I am wrong. So, I will present these thoughts and facts so that you have at least one alternative to the current hype.  
First, let me say that we, as a culture from environmental to financial, have had a rather dubious record extracting resources from the earth. Our current business and government structures are built on the back of cheap oil and cheap labor, both of which are disappearing rapidly. So, instead of learning from this and finding sustainable and humane alternatives, we continue to invest in these areas of decline. As we watch the foundations of our current financial and government structures crumble, maybe it’s time to realize that we cannot go back, we have to move forward and possibly fast forward to alternatives that can provide us with affordable and sustainable solutions.
On to the facts (or shall we say my understanding of the facts): These have been researched from what I would consider reliable and non-biased reports, studies and articles. However, as we know, history and facts are subjective. I will leave it to you to determine what resonates, and what does not.
No matter how you cut it, natural gas extraction has a high percentage of probability for contaminating water tables, from every drill site seeping just a little, to total destruction of an area’s drinking water.
This is an industry whose track record, to date, shows profit is far more important than the environment or its customers financial well being.
Much of the hype is based upon projections provided through a suspect and proprietary report written by an industry backed group. This report has stated that we have over “100 years’” supply, yet at the 2010 rate of consumption, only an 11-year supply of gas is currently proved. The rest is speculative.
Currently, operators need $8-9 per thousand cubic feet (mcf) to break even, but their own drilling frenzy has caused prices to sink well below that threshold with the price this week at $2.57.
Currently, a number of gas companies have applied for nine gas export applications with the federal government. These applications alone will account for approximately 19 percent, or almost one-fifth of total U.S. gas consumption today. If approved, this will impact domestic supply with studies showing the more gas we export, the higher prices go domestically.
Enstar is owned through a Michigan based holding company, owned by a Wall Street equity firm whose senior partner is a senior partner at Morgan Stanley. Will they make decisions based upon what’s best for Homer or their bottom line?
So what do we do? We can stick with the old, hoping that their promises and studies hold true. Or, we can take all of our energy, intelligence and money and focus it on moving to alternative and sustainable sources of energy now. Homer is not Philadelphia, and does not have the complexity of issues a major city has. We are small with an abundance of local, natural and sustainable resources. Others our size are doing this with positive results and we can use their knowledge and experience to help us. As for the bottom line of local businesses, although I understand your pain, short term relief that could turn into longer term disasters may not be so great. Maybe it’s time for us to raise the bar and look at Return On Life as the metric we hold our business performance to over Return On Investment.

Kevin Kreitz is a longtime Homer resident who believes “you must BE the change you wish to see in the world,” as taught by Mahatma Gandhi

By Brad Faulkner

Extending the gas line from Anchor Point to Homer is projected to cost $10.8 million. The savings for heating costs of government buildings alone is projected at $1 million per year.  It is hard to project the savings for the 7,000 area residents and private businesses. This depends on how many actually hook up and when, but it should exceed the $1 million a year savings for government entities by far.  This is a shovel-ready project that truly uses Alaska’s natural resource to benefit Alaskans.  It has one of the best returns on investment of any project in the state. The last two years, funding for this project was passed by the House and the Senate.  It was vetoed by Gov. Parnell. 
Homer’s senator is Senate President Gary Stevens who led the bi-partisan coalition that blocked Parnell’s oil tax giveaway in the Senate.  Homer’s representative is Paul Seaton, who voted against the oil tax giveaway in the House.  This project was vetoed in retaliation for Homer’s elected representatives standing up to Parnell giving away $2 billion annually to his former lobbying clients. (A $10 per barrel savings times the 5.4 billion barrels of  oil left at Prudhoe makes it a $54 billion tax giveaway at current prices. If you include the known heavy oil reserves of over 20 billion barrels, the total tax giveaway could exceed $250 billion over time.)
This year, a bill has been reintroduced to fund the gas line extension to Homer.  This bill has “traction” as capitol insiders are fond of saying.  Basically, it is already a done deal and will pass the House and Senate and survive the governor’s veto pen. There is one huge difference.  Homer rate payers will have to pay a surcharge of $1 per mcf for 10 years.  Parnell and Chenault and the rest of the coalition are laughing out loud. Every month, for 10 years, Homer area residents will pay extra on their heating bills in order to help finance one of the best projects in the state. If I were a cartoonist, I would draw a picture of Chenault and Parnell smoking stogies and clinking glasses with the caption, “Take that Homer.”  
Homer residents in favor of the gas line need to write Parnell, Stevens and Seaton.  We also need to write Sen. Tom Wagoner who is being redistricted into Homer.  We want the bill that passed last year, not the bill Seaton has introduced. 
“I support full funding of the gas line” is all you need to say. 
Everybody that hooks up to gas will enjoy large savings. Do it for the future cash in your pocket.
“The Legislature shall provide for utilization, development, and conservation of all natural resources belonging to the state, including land and waters, for the maximum benefit of the people.”
Article 8, Section 2 of the Alaska Constitution.
Jay Hammond, in “Diapering the Devil: A Lesson for Oil Rich Nations,” wrote:
“I do not blame the oil companies for opposing changes to ELF. (ACES) After all, it is the obligation of their CEOs to get the best possible deal for their shareholders.  When as governor, I was asked how much I would tax oil my response was: “For every cent we can possibly get.  After all, just as it is the obligation of the oil company CEOs to maximize benefits for their stockholders, so it is the obligation of the state’s CEO to do the same for his.”
We have been exporting Kenai gas to Japan for 40 years, but we can’t get full funding to move Anchor Point gas to Homer.  At the same time, our oil lobbyist governor is orchestrating a minimum $2 billion a year giveaway to big oil. Jay Hammond should be rolling over in his grave.

Brad Faulkner is a Homer business owner and has served on the Homer Economic Commission.

By Jan O’Meara

This is a letter to all those folks out there – men and women – who tend to be stoic about their aches and pains. My message to them is simple: Don’t underestimate your pain.
Many of us live with some pain every day, day in and day out, and we tend to take it for granted and to ascribe all our aches and pains – however new or different – to whatever causes our every day pain. That can be a big mistake.
I am one of those. When dealing with pain, I take a low dose pain killer and try to wait it out. I figure if it continues for more than a week, I will see a doctor about it. That tendency almost cost me my life. And you could find yourself in the same position.
On Dec. 16, I awoke just after midnight with severe back pain. It was worse than normal, but I figured it was the same old back problem, only a little worse. It hurt so bad, it hurt clear through to the front. It hurt so bad, my teeth hurt. I noticed a little ache in my left arm, but wasn’t too concerned since left-arm pain isn’t necessarily an indicator of heart problems in women. So I took my two Tylenol and a Benadryl and sat up for two to three hours until the pain subsided. By 3 a.m. I was feeling better, so I went back to bed.
Got up at the usual time and the pain was still there, not as bad, but noticeable. Two more Tylenol. The pain kept ebbing and flowing, but still I thought it was the same old, same old. However, since my sister had a doctor’s appointment in the afternoon, I figured it wouldn’t hurt to go with her and have someone check me over. Finally, a good decision.
Susan Parrish, the physician assistant at Homer Medical Clinic, had an electrocardiogram administered, checked my symptoms and sent me straight up to South Peninsula Hospital’s emergency room. By the time I got up there, the pain in my chest was a good deal stronger – to a level of 8, I told the nurse. They hooked me up to everything, took a blood sample, gave me aspirin and nitroglycerin. Once again, the pain ebbed. They decided to keep me overnight for observation, just in case, but before they even finished the paperwork, my heart went into fibrillation.
All I remember about that is that I felt very dizzy. I said so to my sister, and immediately passed out. They tried compression first, unsuccessfully, and then resorted to the paddles to administer a shock. It took them two tries to bring me back. (I owe a sincere debt of gratitude to Susie Parrish, Dr. Hahn, and the entire emergency room staff for their efforts to keep me alive.) And here’s the thing: if I had stayed at home as I originally intended, I would have died that night of a blood clot to the base of my aorta. But because I was where I needed to be, I survived.
Here’s the other thing: my experience isn’t all that unusual. Back pain is often an indicator of a heart problem, especially in women.
So, even though you may have pain on a regular basis, if it feels at all different from the usual, don’t wait. Get someone to check it out immediately. It might save your life, or the life of someone you love.

Jan O’Meara has been active with the Homer Rotary, helping organize the annual Health Fair.

By Mike O’Meara

Homer Electric Association members like renewable energy.  That’s one reason they raised a ruckus over the Healy coal plant deal in 2009. They wanted clean energy from renewable technology instead. Most folks I hear from still do. The Grant Lake/Grant Creek small hydro project is HEA’s first serious effort to provide it.
So why do some HEA members think that’s a terrible idea?
Hydroelectric projects have a well earned reputation for destroying fisheries, wrecking established economies, and even displacing communities. Grant Lake is near Moose Pass and within the Kenai River watershed. Some residents oppose the project, raising questions over potential destructive impacts — locally and to the Kenai River. The Alaska Center for the Environment, Resurrection Bay Conservation Alliance, and Kenai Watershed Forum have expressed concerns too. Moose Pass critics also object to HEA imposing itself on their community which lies outside the HEA service area.  Recent letters to newspapers from two HEA members echoed most of these sentiments.
How does HEA respond?
HEA Directors cite Bradley Lake as proof the Grant Lake hydroelectric project can be developed responsibly. Community meetings were held in Moose Pass to take local input. Project engineers are examining ways to avoid building a dam and minimize road construction.  In a September newspaper opinion piece HEA General Manager Brad Janorschke wrote, “If the studies show that there would be a serious impact to the overall health of the Kenai River watershed, HEA will not proceed with the project.” Still, with field studies yet to be completed, HEA submitted a grant request to the Alaska Energy Authority for construction funding.
Is HEA ignoring the real problems associated with hydroelectric projects and dismissing legitimate public concerns?  The coop is supposed to be responsive to members. A lot of you said you wanted renewable energy so they’ve proposed Grant Lake.
Are critics an unreasonable minority whose concerns are based upon myths and misconceptions? The problems associated with hydroelectric power are real and significant. People everywhere have a right and responsibility to be concerned about what happens in their communities and how that might affect the wider world.
Alaskans want energy. No matter how we make energy there will be negative impacts.  Grant Lake and Grant Creek aren’t the Columbia River or Bradley Lake. Comparisons with either are not useful. Each hydroelectric project is unique and needs to be evaluated in terms of its potential environmental, social, and economic impacts. Will the intended benefits justify the inevitable costs?  Will those most affected reap a fair share of the rewards? Are there better options?    
Why should you care about any of this?
If you buy power from HEA you’re part owner. The Directors and management serve at your discretion. As a member/owner you’re responsible for everything our coop does. Don’t know enough to have an opinion? Why not take time to learn more? Then let your HEA Directors know how you feel.

Mike O’Meara is the spokesman for the Homer Electric Association Membership Forum

By Diana Jeska

With the holidays, the generosity of our community only becomes more apparent and real to us at the Homer Community Food Pantry.  We want to thank everyone for their generous and faithful support this past holiday season.  Teaming with Kachemak Lions and Share the Spirit again this year was a blessing.  Working together is a beautiful thing.   Just a reminder:  We are on the  Pick, Click and Give list this year.
The USCG Hickory Halloween food drive started off a number of other food drives too numerous to report.  To mention a few: Redden Marine, Glacierview Youth Group, Homer Elementary School, Kim Faust’s students at KPC, Stay Tan and Snowmads.
Other donors are Alaska-USA Credit Union’s Cash for Cans, Safeway’s $10 food bags, Subway, HEA, McNeil Canyon Meats processed a pig donated by the Mitchels in Anchor Point, Rick Sweening stored our turkeys for Christmas and Chris Story picked up turkeys at Thanksgiving.  The churches who faithfully donate food and dollars are Catholic Women’s Guild, HUMC, Christian Community Church, St. Augustine Episcopal, All Saints of America and Church on the Rock.   We are pleased that Smokey Bay Air has joined Homer Air in helping to fly client food boxes across the bay at no charge.
Local donors recently created a Community Chest Fund administered through the Homer Foundation which will be dispersed by the Food Pantry.  This resource comes at a very good time when our major federal grant has ceased to be available.  The main thrust of the Community Chest Fund is to support families with children in times of need.  The Pantry will serve as the bridge – connecting those in need with those who have given so generously.  Thanks to the Homer Foundation for their oversight.   “Every dime and every dollar” given to the Pantry directly benefits those in need in the Homer area.
Our quilt raffle winner was Shirley Fedora, who works with many service organizations in Homer and volunteers at the Pantry.  We are pleased that she has won the beautiful quilt that Bonnie Morawitz created.
Many thanks to those of you who bring in food each Monday.  Whether it’s from cleaning cupboards, the bounty from your garden, garage sale items or purchasing fresh fruit and vegetables- like Mr. Potato Man, we are most grateful.  Remember, we will take opened food, clothing or anything really.  We do need water bottles, small jars and 8-16 ounce tubs.
Our “all volunteer army” at the Pantry is grateful to our generous community.  Homer is a community of “helpers.”  When we give to others, we strengthen and weave together the broken places in our community.  Thanks, Homer for helping us to succeed.

Diana Jeska and the HCFP Board wrote this to the community.

By Judith James
By now most of us are vaguely aware that things are not right with the good ol’ American body. Leaving aside the “body politic” for a much later discussion, we’re talkin’ your body here. Despite collectively spending gazillions on what some may call the world’s greatest medical system, we are sicker than ever. Heart disease and stroke – UP. Obesity – UP and OUT! Type 2 diabetes – UP, even among young kids! Cancer – UP. So maybe we need a change here.
Is it time for a change in perspective? Maybe my doc doesn’t have final responsibility for keeping me healthy. Maybe what I eat and how I move (or don’t) and stress and sleep…. Maybe my own choices are really the world’s greatest healthcare system.
Lately I’ve decided that change requires three components – information, motivation, and practical “How To.”
Information can be had from a movie like “Forks Over Knives,” or a book like “The China Study.” Motivation? Well, how about your healthcare provider saying, “You have a choice. Change your lifestyle or we crack open your chest?” Or maybe you just wake up one morning sick of feeling like a slug. Or maybe you finally get angry at “them” for selling you a bill of goods labeled “this pill-gadget-machine-implant will make you healthy.”
You want your skin stretched over a healthier body, but how? First step, check out some of the websites below (no, I don’t own stock). Second step, just take one…or ten! Third step, consider a local supportive group; one based on science and proven results – you know I’m gonna recommend CHIP.
Ready for a change? Try these options: CHIPhealth.org; forksoverknives.com; pcrm.org; thecancerproject.org

Creole Over Rice
Recipe from CHIP Chef Sally, Rocky Mount Lifestyle Health Center
• 1 large onion, diced

• 2 15-oz. cans garbanzos (chickpeas)

• 1 29-oz. can tomato sauce

• 1 bay leaf

• 1/2 cup peanut butter

• 6 cups cooked brown rice
Sauté onion in the juice from the garbanzos. Add garbanzos, tomato sauce and bay leaf and simmer together for 20 minutes. Add peanut butter and simmer for additional 5 minutes. Discard bay leaf and serve over bed of hot, cooked brown rice.
Serves 6-8 adults. (Also great as a leftover.)

Judith James is volunteer and director of Homer Complete Health Improvement Project: 235.2574 HomerCHIP@acsalaska.net

By Janet Trautwein

Officials recently released 244 pages’ worth of regulations governing the health-insurance exchanges established by the federal health reform law.
The rules envision a big role for “navigators” — entities or people expected to help consumers evaluate their health insurance options in the exchanges. Some groups intend for navigators to replace the folks who currently help consumers with their insurance needs — licensed, professional health insurance agents.
That would be a disaster. Although it will take many different voices to let people who are uninsured today know about the health insurance options available in 2014, expanding the role of navigators from promoting program availability to enrolling and advising people about specific plans is a consumer hazard. These navigators will lack not only the expertise, training, and licensing that agents possess but also sufficiently strong incentives to serve in an advisory capacity.
So who will these navigators be? That’s not yet apparent — and will vary from state to state.
The law specifically lists agents and brokers as groups that may be navigators. But the law’s financial requirements would force most agents and brokers to disrupt their business models and could prevent them from serving current clients who might be ineligible to purchase coverage through the exchanges. So it’s doubtful that many will participate in the navigator program. They may instead try to work with the exchanges in more traditional ways.
The proposed exchange rules also specify that at least some of the navigators must be “consumer-focused” or “community-based.” In other words, they’ll need to demonstrate an existing relationship to consumers.
Observers believe that trade, industry, and professional organizations; unions; chambers of commerce; and small-business development centers could be among the groups that serve as navigators. That makes sense. Their relationships will be important in educating the public about new insurance opportunities in 2014.
Many are likely to have expertise with outreach to specific populations. But it’s safe to assume that most will not be qualified to perform the work of agents and brokers, who have been linking consumers to appropriate health insurance policies for decades. Agents and brokers must already comply with state licensing and continuing education requirements in order to advise consumers about health insurance options. This important consumer protection is expected to continue.
How would navigators be paid? Although states must have navigator programs, no federal funds can be used for their payments, which are described as grants. It’s unclear whether states must come up with this grant funding, how much these grants would be, or how they would work.
With some 42 states and the District of Columbia facing budget shortfalls in 2012, most states won’t have the money to support the sort of robust navigator program the drafters of the law  envisioned.
And what exactly will navigators do? The law says they will focus on public education, outreach to special populations, and facilitating health-plan enrollment. But the navigator program’s goals do not include providing plan-year-to-plan-year assistance to consumers regarding the functionality of their health coverage. By contrast, that’s an integral part of private health insurance agents’ jobs and business models.
Every day, agents go above and beyond the call of duty. Their livelihood depends on it.
Consider the case of Idaho resident Anne Marie G., who publicly lauded the efforts of her agent Brooks Mathern to handle “indecipherable” paperwork and claims in the wake of the birth of her child.
Or take Maryland broker Marcia Friedman, who through diligent research found a way to get additional coverage for a 10-year-old autistic girl who had exhausted her family’s mental health coverage.
These are the sorts of problems that agents and brokers have solved for years — and that navigators will be poorly equipped to deal with.
Millions of consumers depend on insurance agents to help them secure high-quality coverage for their families — and to advocate on their behalf even after they pay their premiums. Navigators may try to imitate agents, but they’ll never be able to duplicate them.

Janet Trautwein is CEO of the National Association of Health Underwriters.

By Catriona Lowe

There’s a good chance you’ve seen me riding around town on my bike, even more so during the past year.
The first week of 2011 was relatively snow-free and mild. On Jan. 7, I realized I had ridden my bike three out of the first five work days of the year. My Facebook status from that day reads, “Here’s my bike-to-work-year goal: to average three out of five days, 60 percent of my commutes.”
I thought that goal would be a tough challenge, but reachable if I persevered. I imagined days when it would be hard to motivate, days when it would be too wet, days when I had too many parental taxi obligations and days when starting the car would just be more appealing.
Yet, I am happy to report that I had a remarkably easy time getting motivated for my daily commute and achieved a final score of 78.4 percent. Meanwhile, though this benefit was anticipated, I enjoyed the satisfying side effect that I have driven my car a total of 3,800 miles in 12 months. The 315 miles a month in my rather inefficient Isuzu Rodeo equates to about one tank of gas per month.
Many people have commented on noticing me biking, and invariably they mention how “hardcore” or “dedicated” I am. I thought I’d try to dispel those myths, because it’s really pretty easy and comfortable. Also, I’d like to see more people joining me in experiencing one of the consistently enjoyable parts of my day.
I only live about one and a half miles from work, which makes a daily commute much more achievable. Studies show that up to a four mile ride is realistic for frequent commuting. Of course, when I get to work there’s still the town errands which need to happen, so I often get the treat of a mid-day ride to do a post office run or a bank deposit. Then there are the days when we need more milk or other staples at home, so 1.5 becomes 3.5 when I swing by Safeway to stock up. Other mornings I start the day volunteering at West Homer Elementary, so I start off with a four-mile ride.
Usually biking to work takes about the same amount of time as driving, and on really cold days it’s actually even quicker because I don’t have to wait while the car warms up and the windshield defrosts. Granted, I have invested in winter gear that staves off the cold, and I would not enjoy the winter months anywhere near as much without the studded tires, pogies, clear sunglasses (to keep the wind from my eyes in low light) and bright, rechargeable lights. I have capacious waterproof panniers, too, but those are the only extra purchases I’ve had to make outside my basic Alaska winter outdoor gear. I just wear my regular work clothes under snow pants, jacket and winter boots, not all that much different than if I were driving.
My biking project has resulted in even better teamwork within our family. Ian and Dexter have been involuntary, yet uncomplaining (mostly), participants along with me. In order for me to be able to leave the car at home, they have also had to get around town by bike. On days Dexter had baseball after school, he stuffed his gear in with his school books and biked to school and biking home after practice. He soon figured out that if he biked to school, he left the house at the same time as when he went by bus, but covered the 4 miles more quickly, earning him an extra 20 minutes of outside playtime before school started. He then started coordinating with friends along the way, so that they could meet up and bike to school together.
Better planning to achieve maximum efficiency of trips has crossed over to when I drive, too. I think this is another reason why my driving mileage decreased.
Another benefit of spending so much time out in the elements has been that I’ve had the opportunity to notice how friendly Homer’s weather is most of the time. It’s rare that I had to set off in rain, and many days were pretty comfortable T-shirt weather. This definitely was a windy year, though, and I’m still trying to figure out how it’s possible to have to battle a head wind in both directions.
On the whole, other road users have been courteous, considerate and friendly. On the occasions I encounter road rage, and other unpleasantness, I try to keep in mind the majority of drivers that treat cyclists as legitimate traffic. I thank you for all the times you have passed carefully and given me a little extra space.
Meanwhile, I continue to be perplexed by the ire cycling provokes for some people. I’ve been told that I don’t have a right to use the road, because I don’t pay taxes to do so. That’s silly reasoning on two counts: First, bicycles are defined as traffic in the Alaska driver’s manual, giving cyclists the same legal “right” to be there as any other vehicle. Second, I, along with most adult cyclists, also own a motorized vehicle, which means I pay the same taxes for roads while causing much less wear and tear to the pavement.
Of course, riding on the road comes with the same responsibilities for all road users. I do my best to follow the rules of the road and to create as little delay as possible for faster vehicles. If ever I seem to be getting in your way or slowing you down, I apologize. Please know I am attempting to be as out of harm’s way as much as possible.
Rather than being a chore in any way, my bike to work year was a real treat. I became reluctant to drive at all, and enjoyed figuring out ways to maximize bike time. I imagine I’m going to bike a similar amount in 2012, I just won’t be as pedantic about tracking my stats.

Catriona Lowe is a Homer resident who enjoys the many aspects of her life in the Kachemak Bay community. When she’s not on her bike, you’ll find her working at Kachemak Bay Family Planning Clinic, hanging out with Homer Cycling Club, playing broomball with Alice’s Scoundrels, skiing, snowshoeing or sledding with her kids.

By Alan Boraas
In 1843 Charles Dickens, 67 years after Adam Smith published the definitive work on pre-corporate capitalism, “The Wealth of Nations,” wrote a brilliant critique of its social evils in “A Christmas Carol.” Smith defined capitalism as efficiently providing goods and services, not as making money for its own sake. Not everyone listened.
By Dickens’ time the British rich were getting richer and the poor were being horribly exploited, working long hours, (10-12-hour days were not uncommon and that was child labor) paid low wages, and living in abysmally unsanitary conditions. Meanwhile, men of privilege were making fortunes and many became consumed by greed, the second of the seven deadly sins. Dickens personified the human dimension of greed in Ebenezer Scrooge: Oh! But he was a tight-fisted hand at the grind-stone, Scrooge! A squeezing, wrenching, grasping, scraping, clutching, covetous, old sinner! … The cold within him froze his old features, nipped his pointed nose, shriveled his cheek, stiffened his gait; made his eyes red, his thin lips blue and spoke out shrewdly in his grating voice. Scrooge’s disdain for the less fortunate is contemptible, his self-indulgence reprehensible. Scrooge’s materialist obsession nearly destroyed him. One wonders how Dickens might describe modern corporate capitalism and how Smith might analyze it. Few corporations boast of providing a good product at a fair price. Few boast of paying good wages and embracing environmentally responsible policies — other than co-opting green rhetoric for the sake of sales. The purpose of corporations is earning returns for shareholders who are, themselves, largely divorced from accountability. Through mutual funds and entitlement investments — like the Permanent Fund — many may not even know they are invested in a company. They only know if they are making money; the driving force of corporate decision-making are policies and practices that promote consumption and generate short-term gain.
We have made the dominant institution of our time persons. According to a remarkable documentary “The Corporation,” the U.S. Supreme Court’s extension of personhood to corporations has been developing since the passage of the 1868 Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. Its intent was a post-slavery clarification of individual rights to life, liberty and property. Nineteen of the first 307 Fourteenth Amendment Supreme Court cases involved those rights for African-Americans; 288 involved corporations obtaining rights of personhood. Now a corporation can own another corporation; act as a person in court; have limited liability for CEOs and directors; pay limited damages (the Exxon Valdez case); buy, sell, borrow and sue; and exercise the rights of personhood to donate to political campaigns. Materialism is reaching epidemic proportions and, thanks to corporatism, once again the disparity between rich and poor is widening and the middle class is disappearing. Dickens’ description of Scrooge as “A squeezing, wrenching, grasping, scraping, clutching, covetous, old sinner!” could well apply to Exxon, Wells Fargo, or many of the other placeless corporations that dominate the stock market and effectively manipulate public opinion for their own ends. Afraid he would have to, like his friend Jacob Marley, drag the chains he forged by greed in the afterlife, Scrooge willfully accepted the transformative power of three spirits. Through the spirit of the past he understood his roots, through the spirit of the present he understood his current situation, and through the spirit of the future he understood where he would end up if he continued on his present course. The spirits thawed Scrooge’s cold heart, pried open the door to his soul, and he changed. Would that corporations could understand and respond to history, be able to analyze the present, and project to the future what the state of the world will be if their practices continue on their present course. But they cannot respond and understand that the wealth is not in materialist hegemony, narcissism, and environmental exploitation. They cannot understand emotionally or intellectually that meaning in life is not in the things we have but in the things we do together to perpetuate our traditions, remain connected, and live in such a way as to provide a hopeful future for our grandchildren and our place. They do not care if they drag the chains they forged through greed forever, because corporations are not persons and have no heart and have no soul and therefore are incapable of the epiphany that transformed Scrooge. We must heed the Occupy movement and take back the corporation. We can start by reversing the personhood the Supreme Court has bestowed on corporations.

Alan Boraas is a professor of anthropology at the Kenai Peninsula College.