Alaska Permanent Fund Corp. board members, staff and advisors meet Oct. 30 at the corporation’s headquarters in Juneau to discuss a proposal to raise the fund’s rate of return by making riskier investments. The idea stalled when advisors suggested the strategy and timing are ill-advised. (Mark Sabbatini / Juneau Empire File).

Alaska Permanent Fund Corp. board members, staff and advisors meet Oct. 30 at the corporation’s headquarters in Juneau to discuss a proposal to raise the fund’s rate of return by making riskier investments. The idea stalled when advisors suggested the strategy and timing are ill-advised. (Mark Sabbatini / Juneau Empire File).

My Turn: Need for accounting and legislative oversight of the Permanent Fund

The governor or Legislature or both need to conduct an audit format available to the public or engage in serious oversight of the Alaska Permanent Fund’s recent erratic decisions that risk fund money.

There is a growing threat to the Permanent Fund and it is coming from the trustees themselves. Their plan included opening satellite offices to expand the fund’s national and international presence. The trustees moved ahead this summer with an Anchorage office, spending money the Legislature approved for other purposes, despite being unable to show any benefit to the fund from doing so. Rather the fund CEO pointed out that new hires and outside experts prefer to work remotely from home. Further, there is a growing concern of the possibility of conflict of interest.

The latest idea is the riskiest yet — borrow vast amounts of money to invest in high-risk investments to produce a $100 billion fund in five years. This is the same scheme that caused the 1929 stock market crash and had its ruined practitioners jumping from upper-story windows.

Luckily, fund advisors at the most recent trustees’ meeting unanimously warned against this proposal saying such a plan was too risky in this uncertain investment climate. Moreover, it would require significant fund money to manage the loans and risky investments and to offset any potential reduction of the fund’s credit rating from making such loans for high-risk investments.

There is a need for accounting and legislative oversight of the Permanent Fund as well as the special Alaska investment portion which are under the current trustees authority.

There are two functioning investment portions of the Permanent Fund. The major portion is currently valued at about $73.8 billion (as of Sept. 30). As a comparison, the value is down from $81.8 billion in 2021, and $76 billion in 2022. This portion of the fund is managed by professional and recognized investment firms who depend upon generating earnings and growth by their professional expertise. The professional oversight provides a performance check and balance on their decision-making process. I believe Alaskans should feel secure in their track record, although the fund’s current return is minus 0.53% (as of Sept 2023).

A few years ago, the Permanent Fund trustees voted to take $200 million from the fund and set up a separate program for in-state Alaska investments. Most of the $200 million has been invested, but in several cases, one could question whether the intent was to invest in Alaska’s domicile resident companies rather than just have subsidiary investments doing business in Alaska but headquartered outside, as appears to be the case in several of the investments.

Unlike the principal Permanent Fund, which as I have indicated has competitive comparison aspects, the Alaska investment portion has no real detailed information available, including terms of loans, interest rates, re-payment and collateral — all remain confidential. While the Permanent Fund does monthly performance reporting for their asset class external managers, including state private equity managers — McKinley Capital Management Company, LLC and Barings, LLC, given market confidentiality terms, the PF does not publish performance on the Alaska segment portfolio.

So, in fact, the Alaska-intended $200 million investment is not benefited by a competitive comparison, nor is there a release to the public of the investment intended to be for Alaska companies. In order for the public to have some idea of the disposition of the $200 million in funds there would have to be a release of the performance confidentiality clause — a legislative directive to release ordered by the governor or the Legislature for the internal Permanent Fund staff audit.

Perhaps a better solution to enhance objectivity would be for a CPA being retained to do an annual report, so that Alaskans can evaluate the condition of the special portion of the Permanent Fund, that is under the sole discretion of the trustees. The Alaska portion of the Permanent Fund should not be sheltered by a confidential mandate. These funds belong to the public and accountability must pass down from the governor to the trustees to all Alaskans.

• Frank Murkowski is a former U.S. senator and governor of Alaska.

More in Opinion

Web
Have something to say?

Here’s how to add your voice to the conversation.

The author and her husband carry an American flag during the Fourth of July parade, Friday, July 4, 2025, in Juneau, Alaska. (Photo courtesy Kate Troll)
My Turn: Claiming the flag on the Fourth of July

Now, here cheering the flag were other immigrants with an uncertain future. What were they cheering about?

Doug Mills/The New York Times file photo 
President Donald Trump and President Vladimir Putin of Russia at a joint news conference in Helsinki, Finland, July 16, 2018.
Opinion: Mistaking flattery for respect

Last Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu nominated President Donald Trump for… Continue reading

Win Gruening (courtesy)
My Turn: The millions add up. CBJ, get a grip on spending.

Ignoring essential basic services while spending money on projects and services that few want or need doesn’t make Juneau more affordable

(Juneau Empire file photo)
My Turn: Murkowski bought time for a new governor to do better

The senator said she added a provision that delays new federal penalties on Alaska for its high error rate in processing SNAP benefits.

Alexander B. Dolitsky
My Turn: When a writer’s courage against antisemitism shook a nation

Courage is doing what is necessary even when it’s difficult or scary.

Juneau Empire file photo
My Turn: At least you feel bad about the bill

Sen. Murkowski, you cannot say you voted with Alaskans in mind.

Cynthia Fancyboy (Courtesy photo)
My Turn: Cutting Medicaid hurts Alaska’s small villages and our children

Without Medicaid, I couldn’t afford the doctor visits, surgeries, medications, and hospital stays that have kept me healthy and working for Alaska’s kids over the years.

From left, Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) head to the Senate chamber at the Capitol in Washington on Tuesday morning, July 1, 2025. Senate Republicans were racing on Tuesday morning to lock down the votes to pass their sweeping tax and domestic police bill, after an all-night session of voting and negotiating with holdouts left Trump’s agenda hanging in the balance. (Tierney L. Cross/The New York Times)
My Turn: Murkowski’s moment of shame

She has no excuse for not following the model Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., set when he killed Joe Biden’s biggest initiative in 2021.

Most Read