First Day at ACA/ACV

I started my internship with Alaska Conservation Association/Alaska Conservation Voters today. As with all orientations I found myself overwhelmed with questions, answers, and general new information. But here's a couple of key things:

1. It's a 7-person staff, two based in Juneau - they're the only non-profit in Alaska with a full time hired lobbyist in Juneau (COOL). The three staffers I met today were very knowledgeable, upbeat, and welcoming. The view from their offices is, as I thought it might be, outstanding. Apparently on 'Denali Days' everyone gets called into Kate's office. (Also, apparently sometimes we will be taking 2-hour lunch breaks to go fishing because Andre says so).

2. What's with the two organizations, you ask? I did too. ACAssociation is what's known to the IRS as a C3 organization, while ACVoters is a C4. Every other non-profit in the state is a C3 - what this allows you to do is lobby (up to 20% of the time), get memberships, organize, educate, and the major bonus is that donations are tax write-offs so it encourages investment. C4, on the other hand, doesn't encourage donations as well - however, ACV can lobby as much as it pleases. I'm sure I am missing a few of the differences and perks, but the basic idea is that ACA and ACV are 'sister' organizations, functioning within a 'loop' as Caitlin, my supervisor, put it, to establish political clout and ensure accountability.

3. Organizations in Alaska can pay to become members of ACA. The major perk is that the research and organization within Alaska politics is all conducted from a central headquarters, and member organizations have access to a lobbyist.

4. Annually all of the members make a list of issues, bills, candidates etc. they want to focus on that year. ACA/ACV, with the help of the member organizations, draws three priority issues from this list and that's what they focus on for the year. A lot of the time ACA keeps quiet about what bills/candidates it supports...for instance, the major energy bill that was recently passed was pushed through due to no small effort from ACA, but since the association could potentially contribute a 'lefty' (synonym in AK='extreme') appearance to the bill, they kept a low profile.

5. Caitlin explained to me that much of what ACA does is strategize as to how to play center field within environmentalism. She says they research things they can say 'yes' to...for instance, recently they worked with an organization called Resource Development Team or something like that, and in Alaska that pretty much states your environmental agenda up front: drill it. What ACA was able to do was a) figure out ways resources could be developed with the least impact possible, and b) establish a relationship with this organization for the future so that, if needed, they could use their support. Additionally, Caitlin pointed out that in a recent survey 79% of Alaskans identified themselves as 'conservationists'. She thinks that by using language that is thought of as less 'extreme' than environmentalism or sustainability, they have a better shot at garnering support and doing some good. She said the organization gets a lot of criticism for not being radical enough, but she thinks they've been able to accomplish much of their goals because of this strategy. Furthermore, she said, member organizations have volunteered in the past to vote 'bad cop' on certain bills (read: crazy lefty liberal crack cases) so that ACA would appear as the comprimise instead of the extreme.

I am missing some vital explanation here. More about the organizations will come as the summer progresses for sure. In the meantime, I'm genuinely excited to be working with these people, at this time, in this place. They have some really cool projects lined up for me which I'll describe later - I officially start work tomorrow at 9am.