For most Alaskans, the Mat-Su Borough is synonymous with growth. New subdivisions sprawl across the valley floor. Road projects multiply. Schools expand. The machinery of local government hums along, fueled by a budget that has swelled past $300 million annually.
But beneath the surface of that growth lies a question that the Borough Assembly has been reluctant to answer: Who is getting the contracts, and why?
An Alaska Frontier Report investigation — based on six months of public records requests, interviews with current and former borough employees, and analysis of procurement data from 2023 through 2025 — found that the borough has awarded more than $47 million in contracts through processes that bypassed competitive bidding entirely.
The Pattern
Borough procurement rules allow the administration to use sole-source contracts under specific circumstances — typically emergencies, situations where only one vendor can provide a service, or when the contract value falls below a threshold requiring formal bids.
Our review found those exceptions have become routine.
In fiscal year 2024 alone, the borough issued 127 sole-source contracts totaling $18.3 million. That represents a 40% increase from 2022, even after adjusting for inflation and the borough's larger overall budget.
"When the exception becomes the rule, the public should start asking questions." — Dr. Lisa Brennan, Government Accountability Project
More than half of the sole-source contracts went to just 15 vendors — companies that, in many cases, have received borough work year after year without ever facing a competitive bid process.
Missing Documentation
Under borough code, every sole-source contract requires a written justification explaining why competitive bidding was impractical. Those justifications are public records.
When we requested justification memos for the 50 largest sole-source contracts since 2023, the borough produced complete documentation for fewer than half. For 12 contracts worth a combined $6.8 million, the borough said no written justification existed in their files.
Borough Manager Tom Hendricks declined repeated interview requests. A spokesperson said the borough "follows all applicable procurement regulations and takes its fiduciary responsibility seriously."
Who Benefits
The concentration of contracts among a small group of vendors raises its own set of questions.
Three companies — which we are not naming pending further reporting — received a combined $14.2 million in sole-source work over the three-year period. Public campaign finance records show that principals of all three companies have made contributions to sitting Assembly members.
We want to be clear: campaign contributions are legal and, by themselves, prove nothing improper. But the pattern — repeat vendors, missing documentation, political connections — warrants scrutiny that the borough's own oversight mechanisms have not provided.
What Happens Next
The Borough Assembly's Finance Committee has not conducted a procurement audit since 2019. Assembly Member Sarah Park, who sits on the committee, told us she was "troubled" by our findings and would push for an independent review.
We'll be following up.
This is the first installment of an ongoing investigation. If you have information about Mat-Su Borough contracting practices, contact us at tips@alaskafrontierreport.com. We protect the identity of confidential sources.