Dear Editor: I admire the bravado of forcing concerned community members to engage in an economic impact consultancy as the FIRST step in raising a citizen initiated ballot proposal. Why? Because professional studies are very expensive, they require time, and in many situations the data they require may not actually exist.
To pick up on a talking point raised in the article, had the ordinance proposed by McGraw and Plank been in place at the time of the cruise passenger limits ballot initiative, the City would have had to devote time to dealing with FOIA requests, and then providing data.
The irony is that Chris McGraw and Jeremy Plank are the same people who felt it was an unreasonable burden to count passengers coming ashore, or provide updated passenger numbers BEFORE a ship docks. Simple things that would help the City to manage the impact and any benefits more effectively.
The McGraw/Plank proposition does not provide transparency, nor will it provide timely information for a community discussion. It simply imposes financial and administrative barriers to Sitkans who are concerned enough to put their time and energy into a ballot initiative. It reinforces the slide into a world where citizens must pay to play a role in our own government.
Leah Mason, Sitka
