A property tax break for the long-proposed Alaska North Slope natural gas pipeline — which has become the dominant issue during the second half of the legislative session — is unlikely to pass by the May 20 adjournment deadline, possibly resulting in a special session, Senate President Gary Stevens said on May 5.

Gov. Mike Dunleavy is making an all-out push for the project before he departs office at the end of his second term in December. But there are vast differences between his proposal for a multibillion-dollar, long-term break on property taxes and what majority caucus legislators are considering.

“Honestly, I don’t see us coming to a conclusion in two weeks and a couple of days,” Stevens said during a press conference May 5. “That’s a lot to do for the House and the Senate to come together and to conclude this entire issue of a gas line. So what happens? Well, the governor has the opportunity to call us back into a special session immediately, or he can call us into a special session in August, or whenever he chooses.”

Other members of the Senate majority caucus at the press conference expressed similar thoughts, noting the pipeline has been discussed for decades and there is no reason to rush flawed legislation through this year.

“They don’t need this bill authorizing them to proceed,” said Senate Majority Leader Cathy Giessel. “They have the permits. They’ve got the (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) authorization.”

Dunleavy, who’s been absent from the Capitol most of the session, arrived in Juneau early last week to push for legislation after urging its passage during a press conference in Anchorage on May 4.

He indicated he’s likely to veto a bill if it includes a reduced property tax break than what he requested, and that a special session is possible. “It’s too important. It can’t be left to next year,” he said.

A bill introduced March 20 by Dunleavy would eliminate state and municipal property taxes on the project, last estimated at almost $47 billion, and instead collect a fee based on how much gas moves through the pipe. There would be no fee during construction and no fee for up to 10 years of operations.

The governor’s alternative payment plan would generate about $75 million in annual state and municipal revenues after the project goes into full operation. Under existing state law, the project owners could face property tax payments of more than $500 million a year.

Though North Slope gas would relieve the supply shortage for utilities in the state’s population center of Southcentral Alaska, most of the gas going through the line would be supercooled into a liquid at a large plant on the Kenai Peninsula and exported in giant thermos-bottle tankers to buyers in Asia.

The House and Senate are working on different versions of gas line bills, and both seek more revenue than the governor for the state and municipalities affected by the pipeline, particularly provisions to ensure that cities and boroughs are covered for the costs of added public services during construction.

Dunleavy argues the project is too costly for the developer without significant tax breaks, and there won’t be any revenue or jobs if the pipeline isn’t built.

Giessel, along with some other legislators, say the state has a responsibility to collect adequate revenue for its natural resources, and the project’s developer and proponents aren’t providing adequate data showing they need the type of tax break the governor is requesting.