Opponents of Proposition No. 2 — Ship-Free Saturday make many bold, reference-free claims on the purported impacts of the initiative. According to them Prop. 2 would decrease city revenues by up to $4 million, “potentially lead to higher taxes…or cuts to essential city services,” put “thousands of jobs at risk,” and potentially “force younger residents to relocate in search of other opportunities.” Let’s put these claims to the test using reproducible data and a healthy dose of perspective.
The number of cruise ship passengers increased by 28% from 2019 to 2023 (and a projected 20% from 2019 to 2025). The maximum visitor decrease in 2025 from implementing Prop. 2 would be 8%. Using the maximum capacity of ships scheduled to visit Juneau in 2025, the number of Saturday visitors is 125,054 of about 1.6 million passengers (8.1%). This is likely an overestimate because it assumes all ships would be full, and the cruise industry would not take action to reroute these passengers. Even if Prop. 2 passes, the number of cruise visitors in 2025 would be 15% higher than in 2019. Hardly an economic crisis.
Cruise tourism was estimated to contribute $17.7 million in sales taxes in 2023 when there were 1.7 million visitors. A total of 8% of that amount is $1.4 million in foregone taxes — less than half of the $4 million being claimed by Prop. 2 opponents. For perspective, this is less than 2% of the $71.5 million in estimated sales tax revenue for 2025. Furthermore, the CBJ estimates sales taxes will increase by 10% in 2025 due to online sales. Even if Prop. 2 passes, sales tax revenue will increase by 8% ($5.1 million) over 2024. Claims of “slashed” revenues and “cuts to essential city services” are unfounded.
Notwithstanding a 28% increase in cruise ship passengers, there was zero growth in visitor sector employment or wages between 2019 and 2023. According to the Alaska Department of Labor, the state is in an acute worker shortage with “two job openings for every unemployed person seeking work.” Despite a professed concern about jobs for “young residents,” years of double-digit cruise passenger increases have done nothing to stem the decline in working-age residents or provide year-round jobs to retain them. The Juneau population of 25–34-year-olds decreased 10% between 2019 and 2023 with a 17% decrease in the 25-29 age group. The decrease in 25– to 34-year-olds between 2022 to 2023 was 5.5%. Yet the Prop. 2 opponents would have us believe that “thousands of jobs (are) at risk” if the initiative passes. In 2022, roughly 33% of visitor industry employees were non-residents. Would these hypothetical job losses be local jobs? The opponents don’t say.
It is widely believed that cruise tourism is an economic engine for Juneau, but the costs of this engine have not been assessed. The CBJ-commissioned report on the impacts of Juneau’s cruise industry only looks at revenues. It does not examine costs to municipal services (sewer, EMS, etc.), housing availability, cost of living, or provision of private sector services like cell phones and internet. It does not address economic leakage of wages and revenues, as would be assessed in a regional economic input-output study, to say nothing of the less easily monetized impacts that prompted Prop. 2. At what stage of unchecked growth are we in a situation of diminishing returns? Unanimous opposition to Prop. 2 with dubious analysis of the facts suggests the CBJ Assembly doesn’t care to know.
Don’t buy the industry’s scare tactics. The economic impact of Prop. 2 on CBJ revenues is very small. Cruise tourism in 2025 would be still 15% higher than in 2019; a more than reasonable amount of growth when compared to other Alaska economic sectors. The economy of Juneau is at no risk of catastrophic failure. Let’s take a piece of our community back. Vote “Yes” on Prop. 2.
• Katharine Miller is a Juneau resident of more than 20 years who lives near the glacier and enjoys spending time in the outdoors.
