Kodiak Borough advances marijuana excise tax to public hearing on 4-1 vote

The Kodiak Island Borough Assembly voted 4-1 Thursday to advance a proposed 3% marijuana excise tax ordinance to public hearing at its next regular meeting. The ordinance would levy an area-wide marijuana excise tax and direct revenue to a new Community Well-Being Fund for programs, services, projects, and grants that support the community as a whole. Assemblymember Jeremiah Gardner voted no.

Dispensary Owner Pushes Back

Janice Stevens, owner of Wildflower dispensary, testified in opposition. She argued the borough is taxing the wrong product. "I am continually perplexed by our local government's proclivity to choose marijuana as a sin of choice when brainstorming ways to raise revenue, when there are other vices on the island outselling marijuana tenfold," Stevens said. "Both alcohol and tobacco outsell marijuana and have a much higher price tag, draining our island's public safety and health resources."

Stevens, who identified herself as a certified public accountant, raised two additional objections. "The state of Alaska already has the highest marijuana tax in the nation. I pay my fair share. By continuing to overtax, you are rewarding non-regulated markets," she said. She also flagged a privacy concern: "There are only two of us who have a marijuana business in this community, so when you pull those records and you publish them, you're publishing two people's income figures."

On the drafting, Stevens was direct: "Whoever drafted this ordinance lacks the basic knowledge of marijuana and its components to efficiently implement it. CBD has marijuana in it, though a small percentage. Where is the cutoff percentage and what is and isn't taxed?"

Assembly Flags Definition Gap

The assembly acknowledged the concern. Assemblymember Woods noted the ordinance's definition of "any marijuana product" was broad enough to capture hemp textiles and food items. Mayor Jared Griffin suggested inserting the relevant Alaska statute citation as a parenthetical to tighten the definition before the public hearing vote. "I think that is a good idea to specify, especially since that was brought up in citizens' comments," Griffin said.

Several assembly members framed the proposal as a way to diversify borough revenue and reduce pressure on property taxes, and some said they supported advancing the ordinance to let voters decide even if they had personal reservations about the tax. The assembly is scheduled to hold the public hearing at its next regular meeting, after which it would vote on whether to send the ordinance to the ballot.