Nearly 100 days and more than $1.2 million beyond its original finish line, the 34th Alaska Legislature has finally run out of gas.

Months of political wrangling over a long-proposed natural gas pipeline from Alaska’s North Slope is set to carry over into next year, when there will be a new governor and new legislators.

Nearly all legislators were absent from Juneau throughout the latest of three 30-day special sessions called this summer by Gov. Mike Dunleavy, who wanted to sign legislation advancing a gas pipeline before leaving office in December because he is term-limited.

However, the governor waited until the 17th day of the final 30-day special session to introduce a bill, which was swiftly rejected by legislators and industry stakeholders alike.

The session ended on Aug. 25.

“We’ll see if a new governor changes the dynamics,” said Juneau Sen. Jesse Kiehl.

Dunleavy sought to largely exempt the project from all state and municipal property taxes and instead collect a much lower amount based on the volume of gas flowing through the pipeline each year, arguing the tax relief is needed to make the project economically viable.

Skeptical lawmakers said they didn’t have enough information from the administration and project developers to know its true costs and potential profits. They also expressed concern the state could both give up a large amount of tax revenue and be stuck paying out more incentives to ensure pipeline completion.

Of the top four primary election vote-getters for governor, headed to the November general election to decide the winner, the two Democratic candidates Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins and Tom Begich favor compromise legislation crafted by a joint House-Senate committee earlier in the summer, while the two Republicans Bernadette Wilson and Dave Bronson have generally sided with Dunleavy’s approach.

Legislative races will also play a role in the fate of any gas pipeline legislation. The House currently works under a 21-19 split between the Democrat-led majority and the Republican minority; a change in the majority could affect the outcome of any legislation.

Another key sticking point in the gas project bill was a provision that would make privately owned oil and gas companies subject to the state’s corporate income tax. Currently, the tax only applies to publicly traded corporations, such as Exxon Mobil and ConocoPhillips, which are listed on stock exchanges.

The Legislature’s compromise bill included the tax.

Dunleavy, after adamantly opposing the tax provision for months, introduced a last-minute bill that would tax privately held oil producers at a rate about 80% lower than publicly held producers.

Majority caucus legislators in the House and Senate rejected the governor’s offer as unacceptably low. In addition, a coalition of industry groups rejected the imposition of the new tax at all.

The North Slope gas project’s primary developer, Glenfarne Group, said this year the project would cost $44.5 billion to $54.5 billion. However, the state Department of Revenue told legislators that cost overruns could result in a price tag exceeding $90 billion for the pipeline and plant on the Kenai Peninsula that would superchill the gas into a liquid for loading aboard tankers for delivery to buyers in Asia.

The entire project would take several years to build after the developer commits to construction.

The lack of property tax legislation this year “will cause schedule delay and cost increase on the gas line,” Glenfarne said in a prepared statement. “We are evaluating alternative paths forward while continuing to advance the commercial, engineering and financing work required to deliver the full Alaska LNG project.”

The first two special sessions called by Dunleavy this year cost $749,729 and $434,442, with the less-attended third session costing $75,783 as of Aug. 24, according to Legislative Affairs Agency Executive Director Jessica Geary.