Alaska Marine Highway - "Elimination Budget could end state ferry sailing by October

Maritime News
45

On most routes, the Alaska ferries cannot begin to compete with airlines on price, convenience, or travel time. The transatlantic passenger liners ceased to exist for the same reason: they were much more expensive and required several days of travel time instead of several hours.

Most of Alaska has little or no ferry service anyway. Passengers travel by air (in some cases on cheap FAA subsidized tickets). The privately owned tug and barge operators (and air freight) provides the freight service. As much as I like the Alaska ferries, most of them are simply not necessary.

The IBU just made the ferry system decision for the Legislature. Most of the ferry routes were just permanently ELIMINATED by the IBU.

46

The HS part of AMHS means “highway system” and is funded to the tune of some $451 million dollars of Federal (our) money in 2019. That amount equals $6.80 for every $1 dollar Alaska contributed to the national treasury.

Alaska is the fattest welfare queen in America and yet the local hicks in Appalachia By The Sea bought their place at the trough by promising $3700 to every resident man, woman, and child.

Too bad there won’t be a way for pitchfork wielding taxpayers to get to Juneau. Oh, no reason to protest, they don’t pay any taxes and need the money to buy new snow machines every year. The political aristocracy in Juneau is telling the residents they don’t need to travel, we will give you cake instead.

3 Likes
47

Very entertaining commentary.

It’s true. Alaska is an enormous welfare queen. And like most welfare programs everywhere, most of the money is consumed by “administration” or is simply wasted.

2 Likes
48

I have no complaints about anyone who manages to get all of their forcibly extracted income back, or finds a way to have none extracted at all, though not very likely. Instead of complaining of the lucky few who escape the guise of legal theft, we all should strive to be able to get ourselves there as a nation. A country supposedly built on freedom, private property rights, and immigration, as a nation we don’t seem to care about any of them now. Our ancestors revolted against a couple cent tea tax, and now we allow ourselves to have 15-40% income extraction, 0-10% property tax extraction (the most disgusting, considering if it’s paid off in full, you still pay the state permanent rent for your private property), 0-10% sales extraction, and all the other hidden and indirect taxes we as middle class workers have to absorb and accept. It’s getting ridiculous that the main arguments are how many bullets your gun should be able to hold and which pronoun you have the right to call yourself. Just two cents from someone who is completely sick of the two party system and fat hog gubmint scum who “represent” us and give us the illusion of freedom by getting to choose which one gets to do it to us every few years.

6 Likes
49

It shouldn’t take the brightest of minds to determine that a state run and appropriated ferry system, crewed by a bureaucratic fat hog union, is the perfect recipe for destruction. It comes as a surprise that the prediction earlier in this thread didn’t come to fruition a whole lot sooner. I would imagine WSF is in a very similar… boat as well.

WSF is in much better financial shape than AMHS. Some routes at WSF (Seattle-Bainbridge Island, Edmonds-Kingston) actually turn a profit, covering at least their operating expenses. Capital expenses is a whole other issue…

Looking at the numbers posted by jbtam99, AMHS appears to have an overall farebox recovery rate of ~33%. That’s actually (unfortunately) right on par with many transit agencies here in the Seattle area (KC Metro, Link Light Rail, Sounder trains).

The lone outlier is WSF. Their farebox recovery rate is ~70-75%. The worst route (PD-Tahlequah) recovers only 44%. That’s better than AMHS as a whole.

It should be pointed out that there is quite a difference in the utilization of the two services. WSF is largely commuter based moving thousands of passengers on relatively short runs with 450 sailings system wide per day. AMHS is more akin to BC Ferries or even northern European service with limited departures taking a relatively smaller amount of people longer distances.

3 Likes
50

There are plenty of cargo shipping options already in place for the area that the Alaska state ferry system used to cover. Coastal Transportation Inc. has weekly service to the Alaskan Peninsula and Aleutian Islands. AML has extensive barge services. Planes fly people and cargo everywhere.

The loss of the ferry system simply means the costs of transporting goods and people in Alaska shifts from the taxpayer to the user. Alaska state revenues are in the toilet because of years of low oil prices.

3 Likes
51

Comparing AMH to WSF is like comparing apples to oranges.
WSF is high mostly volume short run.
BC Ferries has similarities to both operations, much with WSF. Most of BC ferries routes are busy high volume short runs.
BC ferries Northern service is similar to AMH. There is no way Revenue will ever come close to expenditure. It requires a government subsidy to operate.
Decisions about operations are heavily influenced by politics. Resulting in many poor decisions which are politically motivated.

The numbers for AMH probably aren’t far off from the numbers for BC Ferries Northern Service. One or the other system may be able to learn some efficiencies from the other.
The big difference is the relative sise of the operations. BC Ferries Northern service is much smaller. So the subsidy is smaller.

One difference. Which I don’t personally agree with, The right wing government of the day. Decided user pay was the way to go. And privatization. BC Ferries is now a fake private company owned by the government. Along with this all BC Ferries routes can be privatized.

Any route changes have to go to public tender process.
Which it turns out is just a huge PIA.
With the exception of one water taxi route. Every time the most cost efficient service has been the current service.
There have been no successful bids.
Why? Other than the main high volume routes. The small remote routes will never be self sustaining.

Many politicians from inland areas complain about the costs of BCFS.
At the same time demanding New highways. New Bridges, New public Transit.

AMH is essential service to Alaska. It needs to be adequately funded,
The various levels of Government need to figure it out and accept it’s an essential part of Government expenditure.

It’s not the workers fault the government has dropped the ball on this.

52

I don’t want to needlessly argue with you over this point. But I would like to debate it. Why do you believe it is essential? If it disappears the capability to move people and freight still exists.

3 Likes
53

And at a market determined price which will be inherently lower, and more efficiency in the operation.

1 Like
54

Many years ago it was a lot cheaper and shorter travel time to take the ferry, rather than to drive over very rough roads to Alaska. Now the ferry is much more expensive for a vehicle and the roads are good. It makes more sense to drive. Some ferry routes (E.g. Whitter to Valdez) duplicate road service.

Most of the state population lives in Anchorage. Close to another quarter of the population is connected to the Anchorage road system and the rail belt.

The ferry probably serves somewhere between an 1/8th and 1/4 of the state population.

Passengers might be better off if the state instead of running the ferry, subsidized airfare for locals with “commuter fares” on some routes (e.g. Anchorage to Kodiak, and Sitka, Juneau, and Ketchikan to Anchorage or Seattle).

The ferries mostly just duplicate existing freight services. As ferry routes are cut, new freight services would appear, if they are needed.

Some ferry routes should be kept. Some could be cut.

1 Like
55

I don’t know very much about Alaska or AMH. I live on a small Island in a small community on the BC Coast. My opinion is based on living in a ferry dependent community. Which may be similar to some of the communities in Alaska.

For us the Ferry is the Highway. Anything I by has come here by ferry. First to Vancouver Island then on to the smaller islands.
Without the ferry most of our small island economy would wither and die. Most local business is sustained by tourists dollars. Which requires summer visitors. The money they spend keeps our community viable.
They support the local hospital, grocery store, hardware and building supplies. The people who work here provide kids for the schools. People commute to the island to work in all of these.
This island I live on has a good ferry connection it has a good economy. Other nearby islands with no ferry service have tiny communities. And are often owned by some super rich absentee land owner.
Some have nice water access only cabins for holiday retreats.

If people live there they need transportation. The only viable transportation is a ferry service. Air will be to expensive and limits what you can carry.
Where I live is probably much more like the San Juan’s than Alaska.

Haida Gwai and the North Coast is more like Alaska. Service may be only once a week up to three times a week. It’s a 7 or 16 hour trip.
The North South Runs are predominately tourist in summer and connection for local 1st nation communities the rest of the year.
Without the federal subsidy these services wouldn’t exist.

Without them the economy of Haida Gwaii would be hit hard.

Many tax payers in BC or the rest of Canada rarely or never travel by ferry. They wonder why tax dollars are spent on them.
I rarely or never travel by transit, or drive across new bridges or drive through remote highways to small towns or communities in the interior of BC.
Those small communities depend on the highway, for there economy.
Without it they would cease to exist.

So in my opinion a ferry service is part of the essential infrastructure the country as a whole entity needs.
Much if not all the public money spent on the ferry service, will return to the public purse.
Wages for ferry system employees are one of the biggest cost items.
The Ferry employees pay tax on thier wages. Returning the money to the public purse.
They spend thier wages in the community. At the Grocery store the hardware store. Possibly even on snow mobiles.
There kids go to the schools.
They use the hospitals.
Most of the money they earn goes around again.
Some goes to Hawaii.
Some to Mexico or where ever they go on vacation but most stays in the US the greater proportion probably in Alaska.
Keeping other business going in Alaska.
Fuel cost is huge and just goes up the funnel. But I guess they bought the fuel from an Alaskan oil supplier.
The ferry also is supported by all kinds of other suppliers and business based locally which will be hard hit.
So indirect employment will be hit hard.

There are many things I do not know about Alaska and it’s smaller communities.
I do see Alaska plates passing through BC. So I guess without a ferry connection it is still possible to get in your truck and drive all the way down,
Which will benefit BC and the Yuckon.
It’s a heck of a long way.
Cost you about 3 Tanks of Gas to get from WA to Prince Rupert.
Or 1+tank of Gas and ferry fares to Vancouver Island and Prince Rupert. I don’t think you will have much spare change out of a 1000 dollars.
You will still have to get a AMH ferry from Prince Rupert. If it is cut then I guess it’s the Alaska highway or bust.

Can everything come by barge?

I don’t know for sure. It appears to me barge traffic is way down along with less FV. Transiting the inside.

2 Likes
56

A good reply. The Alaska state ferry service is an extension of the highways. Highways are not meant to make a profit. They exist to promote trade.

Alaska is in a unique position. The “taxpayers” are oil corporations. In the conventional sense, the taxpayers have no say in how the taxes are spent. The citizens decide how the corporate taxes are spent, but they have no skin in the game. Spend wisely, spend poorly: as long as the corporate taxes kept rolling in the citizens were OK.

Now the taxes have diminished, and the citizens will have to decide whether to tax themselves to keep up the same level of services they had before, or go without. Then it will become a matter for the legislature to wrangle over, just as the provincial government of BC and the state government of Washington does.

The people of urban Western Washington state agree to fund the roads in rural Eastern Washington, as long as rural Eastern Washington agrees to fund the Washington state ferry system, just as you explained is the case in your province.

But will the possibly newly-taxpaying citizens of Anchorage and Fairbanks have the deep pockets to pay for highways and ferries through a state 1/5 the size of the lower 48 states combined? The ferry run from Anchorage to Dutch Harbor is almost the same distance as from Los Angeles to Denver, and yet there are less than 8,000 people in the entire region. Chignik, a present ferry stop, has less than a 100 people.

2 Likes
57

That’s the key, a government service like a highway or ferry shouldn’t be asked to turn a profit, but it has to be useful for something. Even explicitly duplicating commercial or road service can be a reasonable task for a government operation, but with so few people it’s hard to say what’s worth it.

58

The State of Alaska has been unsuccessful at introducing a new personal income tax to fund government services. The vast majority of people are against it. Many people see it as a large tax on hard working productive people to enable the state to continue paying a large Permanent Fund Dividend check to every man, woman, and child (many of whom are already being supported by state and federal programs).

While I would like to see the most feasible ferry routes continue, state Government is broke and a lot of things are being cut. Alaska has a significant union labor force, but I fear that the IBU strike is driving the ferries towards a drastic reduction in service.

1 Like
59

I would have to agree with the hard working people in Alaska. If you read the article previously posted, the Gov’ wants to ensure that the Permanent Fund pays even more per year. That is the reason that they have to cut back on the woefully inefficient ferry. But an income tax only hurts those that are willing to pull their own weight.

Alaska residents do not pay state taxes, so the cost savings would not reduce their tax burden. However, it could help to increase their state oil revenue dividends: The governor ran for office on a proposal to pay extra dividends of about $3,700 per person, which would require $2.3 billion in additional spending from the state’s Permanent Fund. These payments would be in addition to the normal annual payout of about $2,000-3,000 per resident.

1 Like
60

I am against a state personal income tax, and I support the PFD. The PFD is not based on oil revenue; it’s based on the five year average investment (stocks, bonds, real estate, etc.) returns of the Permanent Fund. It was created and continues to grow on oil revenue.

Alaska does have a corporate income tax. Oil severance taxes, etc. There is no state sales tax, but a few cities or boroughs have a sales tax. Property taxes are fairly high.

Alaska has been losing productive citizens due to the oil recession and the loss of good paying jobs. The last thing Alaska should do is drive out more productive citizens with high taxes.

If the PFD were stopped, the spendthrift state politicians would just waste the money on more corrupt boondoggle nonsense and social programs. It’s best to let the people continue spending their PFDs on airline tickets, big screen TVs, guns, snowmachines, etc. Not to mention booze and drugs.

However, the PFD should not be too big. A spike in overdoses and deaths occurs after the PFD is paid out. The must be a reasonable limit on “free money” from the state. The PFD is already a welfare magnet for large families from outside that think they are going to get paid to hunt and fish while making big money under the table and collecting welfare. Some of Children’s PFD money should be held back for college, or a first time home purchase. Some of the adult PFD money should be put into trust accounts like IRAs or HSAs.

In terms of transportation spending, the ferry money would be better spent on state subsidized airline tickets that most people in Alaska would directly benefit from.

And yes, barges (and air freight) do supply all the freight needs of most communities in Alaska. The ferries only provide regular service to a few communities, mostly in Southeast, plus Cordova and Kodiak. As much as I would prefer to see something else other than the ferries cut, a ferry cut seems unavoidable, especially after this shortsighted strikes

1 Like
61

How efficient is the highway near your house?

The State of Alaska published a document a couple of years ago that states in no uncertain terms just how much economic benefits are provided by the AMHS.

A review of the document that describes exactly how much money comes from the State vs you and me, look at the STIP: 2018-2021 STIP, Department of Transportation & Public Facilities, State of Alaska

This whole affair is nothing but a low rent welfare queen slumlord attempt to buy votes from the ignorant PF recipients who still believe they are the last of the independent pioneers on the wild Alaskan frontier.
It’s a tossup whether Alaska is more Appalachia or East Germany.

Having worked for the AMHS as a non-resident I can confirm that there are serious issues with how the system is managed but Alaska needs that system to grow if Alaska is to grow to the point where it is no longer the premier welfare state.

1 Like
62

The Alaska Legislature voted today to cap the PFD at $1600 this year, and to override $421 million of the Governor’s budget vetos. This includes $5 million for the ferry system. But this veto override still isn’t final.

1 Like
63

https://www.workboat.com/news/coastal-inland-waterways/alaskas-amhs-unfair-to-ferry-workers-union-claims/

Boats tied up. What a mess. Just take away the dividend already.

65

A petition is underway to hold an election to recall the Alaska Governor because of his veto $444 million in state spending. It won’t succeed