Anchorage Assembly Work Session on STR Tax Charter Amendment (2025-10-16)
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Anchorage Assembly Work Session: Short-Term Rental Tax Charter Amendment (2025-10-16)
The Anchorage Assembly convened for a work session on agenda item AO 2025-97, focusing on a proposed charter amendment to authorize a 5% tax on short-term rentals (STRs). Sponsors, including Members Rolland and Constant, presented the initiative as a targeted measure to generate $4-5 million annually for housing development and infrastructure, explicitly stating that the proposal is not designed to reduce the number of existing short-term rentals. The session featured deliberation on the tax's economic impact compared to resort communities, flexibility in fund administration, and the scope of excluded uses.
Consent Calendar
- No consent calendar items were discussed or reported in the transcript.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No formal public testimony was recorded during this specific work session; however, Member Voland referenced questions previously submitted via the Clerk's office by Member Brawley, which were addressed as part of the agenda presentation.
Discussion Items
- Economic Projections & Comparisons: Sponsor Member Rolland presented data comparing Anchorage's proposed 5% STR tax (on top of the existing 12% lodging tax) to other resort towns. Comparisons included Carbondale, Colorado (aggregate 16.4%), Reno, Nevada (aggregate 13.5%), and Napa, California (aggregate 20.75%). The sponsors projected annual revenues of $4-5 million, though Member Constant noted that excluding owner-occupied units might lower initial estimates closer to $3 million.
- Intent and Impact: Members emphasized that the tax is not intended to discourage short-term rentals. Member Voland and Member Constant argued that unlike hotels operating in commercial zones, STRs in residential zones directly reduce the availability of housing stock. The primary goal is to capture revenue from this specific zoning impact to fund housing solutions, rather than to suppress the market.
- Funding Flexibility vs. Guardrails: Members Brawley, Kriger, and Rivera expressed concerns about future implementation constraints.
- Member Brawley questioned whether the charter should be overly prescriptive, citing past issues with the ACE fund and CASA process where specific language limited flexibility.
- Member Kriger worried about the "opportunity cost" of potentially capping the lodging tax at the current 12% for hotels while STRs sit at 17%, making future legislative changes difficult.
- In response, Sponsors and Member Martinez supported a broad charter framework (limited to "housing and related infrastructure") to avoid tying the hands of future assemblies, preferring to handle specific exclusions, allocation formulas, and advisory structures via implementing city code.
- Segregation of Funds (Amendment Discussion): Member Johnson proposed an amendment to segregate tax revenues and expenditures by region (Anchor Point, Girdwood, and Eagle River). Member Brawley questioned the administrative feasibility of segregating collections. Administration confirmed that with the parallel proposed mandatory registration ordinance for STRs, property identification would allow for revenue tracking by region, though it would be challenging while non-compliance persists.
- Budget Amendment Context: Member Brawley asked Members Martinez and Voland about their previous proposal to create a Housing Trust Fund ($500k-$1.5M). Member Martinez replied that while the form may differ, the objective of "getting shit done" regarding housing supply aligns with this tax proposal.
Key Outcomes
- No Vote Taken: As this was a work session, no binding vote or ordinance adoption occurred. The Assembly agreed to circulate the written responses to Member Brawley's questions to the record in a memorandum or AIM (Agenda Item Memorandum).
- Agreement on Process: The Assembly largely agreed that the charter amendment should remain broad, leaving the creation of advisory boards, specific fund allocations, and exclusions (such as owner-occupied exemptions) to be determined by future ordinances and code amendments.
- Next Steps: The item is scheduled to proceed to further council readings and public hearings, with the target submission to the qualified voters occurring before the January ballot deadline. A special meeting was announced for the following day regarding civil emergencies in Western Alaska.
Meeting Transcript
We're getting started. Good afternoon, everybody. Welcome. Um, today we're gathered for work session on AO 2025-97, an ordinance of the Anchorage Assembly submitting to the qualified voters of municipality vancage ballot proposition amending the homework charter to authorize tax on short-term rentals. We'll start with that's 2025-97. We'll start with introductions. Mr. Gricker. Jared Gerker. Anna Browning. Christopher Constant. Daniel Bulland. On the phone, we have uh Mr. Martinez. President, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Myers. Yes, thanks, Chair. Thank you. Anyone else on the phone? No. Okay. Joined by council. Quiet City Hall. We might see some other folks wander in. Parking is a bit of a trick with AFN. So today again we're here for work session to discuss a charter amendment proposal drafted by myself and Mr. Vaughn. Mr. Rollin, you want to start? Sure. Yeah. So we have two documents that members may find helpful. One is that some summary of economic effects. And so folks can see some of the projections made by the administration. And in particular, looking at years 27 through 30, about four to five million dollars would be the annual projected revenue via this 5% short-term rental tax. So take a look at that and you have a moment if you haven't already. So we looked at some of the sort of resort communities because you know similarities to Girdwood, for instance. And so you you can see that they have their underlying room or lodging tax. Some of them have an additional short-term rental tax, and then some of them also have sales taxes. And then the aggregate is in that right column. So you know, looking at a a place like Carbondale, Colorado, for instance, um, that has a population of 6,000. That's uh sort of a Colorado resort town. They have a lodging tax of 2%, which is less than our 12%. However, they also have a 6% um an additional tax equal to 6% of the gross rental price paid by any customer of any short-term rental. Um and then they also have an 8.4% minimum combined sales tax rate, um, bringing their aggregate tax rate to 16.4%. Um you could also look further down at a place like um, let's see. Let's look at maybe Reno, Nevada. Um they have a 13% um or 13.5%, depending on which tax tax district you are in, based on their on their room or lodging tax. Um, they don't have a short-term rental tax, um, but however, they do have a permit that's required.
openpublica.com