After his first ballot initiative to limit cruise traffic was denied by the city, Sitkan Larry Edwards is trying again to put the question out to voters in a special election.
This summer, cruise ships brought more than half-a-million people to Sitka, breaking last year’s new record, and more than doubling any year before that.
“So what this initiative is about is giving citizens relief from the high numbers we’ve had and getting things back to the normal we had back in the period of 2001 to 2009, when we had a period of high tourism that was very controversial, but was stable. It was at a level that was good for business,” Edwards said. “So I think that’s a good place to start for looking at what the right size for cruise tourism is in Sitka.”
In September, Edwards and over 40 co-sponsors submitted a petition to establish a port district and limit cruise visitors to 240,000 next summer, with weekly and daily limits. If city’s Legal Department had found Edwards’ petition admissible, he would have then collected just over 800 signatures in order to get the question out to voters in a special election this winter. But in late September, his petition was denied. At the time, Municipal Attorney Brian Hanson said the rejection was based on a few things– establishing a port district through a voter referendum wouldn’t work, since the assembly has authority over allocating public assets, like land. He also said the description of how the visitor limits would be enforced was “confusing, misleading and incomplete.”
Edwards submitted his second petition to limit cruise traffic to the city clerk’s office on October 26 (10-26-23), and much is the same the second time around. It would also cap next summer’s visitors at 240,000 with weekly and daily limits, and it would still require city permits for boats to visit Sitka. But instead of creating a port district, the new petition establishes a “tourism” section of the Sitka General Code. The new ordinance also includes a more fleshed out enforcement section, with fines for boats that exceed their authorized “persons ashore.”
The city has two weeks to respond and to determine whether the petition is valid. So if it’s rejected a second time, what then?
“We’ll have to have a plan B,” Edwards said. “But as the city attorney said in his rejection letter, he said that the assembly could do what you’re trying to do here. So I think the next step is to put the pressure on the assembly and say, ‘Do something for us for next year.'”
Should the initiative win approval to move forward, Edwards will have to collect fewer than the 800 signatures that would have been required if the first petition was approved. The number of signatures is based on ⅓ of voters in the most recent municipal election. Voter turnout was lower this October, which means Edwards only needs to collect around 550 signatures to make his ballot initiative a reality.
