A third proposed ballot initiative to limit cruise traffic in Sitka was denied by the city on Tuesday (7-2-24).
Organizers from the group Small Town SOUL submitted an application in June to put a cruise limit question out to voters in this year’s municipal election. The group wanted to set an annual limit of 300,000 cruise visitors, with a daily limit of 4500 passengers.
The city clerk’s office had ten working days to review the document and respond. It was also reviewed by attorneys from Jermain Dunnagan Owens law firm in Anchorage. The city is currently contracting with JDO to provide legal services in the absence of a full-time municipal attorney.
In a memo on July 2, attorneys Michael Gatti and Taylor McMahon said the ballot initiative is legally unenforceable for two reasons– it has “misleading, confusing and incomplete” terms, and the section requiring permits for cruise ships violates the “tonnage clause” of the United States Constitution, which prohibits charging vessels fees for using navigable waterways. Gatti writes that states and cities can only charge fees if they’re providing a service to a vessel. On those grounds, the municipal clerk’s office denied Small Town Soul’s application.
JDO’s legal opinion also references several letters from attorneys representing cruise lines– The Sitka Dock Company, Royal Caribbean, and Allen Marine each submitted letters to the city opposing the application. Several argue that the initiative violates federal law, including the right to travel and the “commerce clause” in the US Constitution. Gatti says it’s premature to consider those arguments at this stage.
The letters also call into question how many times organizers have submitted petitions to limit cruise traffic. City code states that when a petition is denied for any reason other than the signature count, the petitioners must wait a full year to resubmit the same petition. But so far, all attempts to generate a ballot initiative to limit cruise traffic have been denied at the application phase. Gatti writes that the one year rule only applies to the petition itself, not the application for a petition.
KCAW has reached out to petition organizers for comment.
Read the full decision here
Editor’s Note: This is a developing story and may be updated.
