The Haines City Council on Wednesday introduced an ordinance establishing a system of city tour permits, but more work is expected before it’s adopted. Hearings will be March 21 and April 4.

Residents, councilors, and members of the city tourism planning committee that drafted it expressed concerns about the ordinance on the same day it went to the council. City officials hoped to have the new law in place by May 1.

At the Feb. 21 tourism planning committee meeting, major players in the local industry successfully lobbied for loosening several proposed regulations that would be imposed through the permit system.

The draft regulations have been discussed for two months without generating significant objections, but as a proposed ordinance they drew tour company owners who took exception with several key proposals and challenged the scope of the planning group’s work.

Backed by a letter of support from the Haines Chamber of Commerce, owners Bart Henderson, Karen Hess, and Ned Rozbicki and tour company president and committee member Bill Fletcher prevailed on the committee to delete language that would limit the number of tours within the city and require a public hearing for expanded tours.

Language for limiting the number of tour permits and permits for using the Port Chilkoot Dock was changed from “shall” to “may.” Wording requiring a public hearing for revoked or new tours was kept, but tour operators asked for a definition of “new.”

Owners also impressed upon the committee that its role was one of addressing concerns within city limits, not in outlying areas where many tours take place.

Kayak tour operator Ned Rozbicki said the planning effort was “incredibly overreaching” and that it should focus on parking and traffic questions inside city limits. “The city has to limit itself to impacts on the city proper…”

(The point — reiterated several times during recent meetings — hit at a jurisdictional question never fully resolved when the city-led tourism committee was appointed by Mayor Don Otis last March.

By including a Haines Borough representative, the city mayor envisioned an areawide effort. “I see this group as coming up with a plan for the whole area. Obviously, recommendations outside the city can’t be backed up by ordinance. Compliance outside city limits would have to be voluntary,” Otis said March 30, 2000.)

Fletcher and Hess challenged the hearing requirement, charging that “expanded tours” was poorly defined and unworkable.

Committee chair Chip Lende said he envisioned the hearing requirement for new tours would be of benefit to existing tours, which could bring to a hearing information about crowding that could help decide whether to permit new tours. He described a hearing process “as an attempt to figure out what tour operators are doing in the valley so the general public knows what’s going on.”

Member Patricia Blank said expanded tours were inherently different than expansion of other businesses. “What we’re talking about is increased use of public land. That’s why we feel there’s a need to know beforehand… because it affects so many people.”

Hess and Rozbicki argued that other agencies already regulate tours outside the city and expressed apprehension about opposition to their operations. “How do we know that five years from now there isn’t going to be a different body on this committee that will be totally against expansion of any tours,” Hess asked.

Lende acknowledged that “expanded” needed a more specific definition, and finally agreed to drop the language after Hess declined to help formulate one.

Fletcher spoke against limiting permits on the Port Chilkoot Dock, saying that parking could be managed through traffic control and that adding regulations would send a conflicting message to cruise companies wooed on a recent trip by Haines’ two mayors.

“Limiting the number of operators in the valley has no direct relation to any specific impact inside the city. It flies directly in the face of a community that has just represented itself to all the major cruise lines as a community that supports and encourages diversity of tourism infrastructure in the valley,” Fletcher said.

Lende, however, held his ground on dock permits, saying space there could become limited.

At the urging of operators, vehicle permits were combined with tour permits. In place of permits, operators would be required to get “stickers” certifying proof of inspection and other requirements.

Instead of limiting permits, the city should “codify concerns as they arise,” Fletcher said, using the example of limiting the number of tour vehicles that can be in one area at a time.

Doug Olerud, one of three city councilors reviewing the proposed ordinance, endorsed the idea. “Say you can’t have more than three buses at Picture Point at one time. If there are three buses there, you have to go to a different area.”

The letter from the Chamber of Commerce board, written by Henderson, called the hearing process “cumbersome” and “wide open to legal challenges.” Limiting permits would create a “limited entry system” that should be adopted only as a last resort, Henderson wrote.

The committee also agreed to delete an inspection requirement and permit fee for courtesy vehicles operated by motels, inns, airlines, and charter services.

At Wednesday’s tourism planning meeting, lodge owner Debra Schnabel pushed for reinsertion of hearing language for expanded tours, and her husband Greg Brask suggested a hearing trigger of 25 percent growth. “The hearing process was the only place where there’s even the smallest amount of control,” Schnabel said.

In a statement to fellow city councilors Wednesday, Lende said the ordinance — patterned after a similar one in Sitka — hasn’t gotten much public scrutiny. “Does the council want it more or less restrictive? When we sit in those meetings, we’ve got a house full of tour operators and we have tour operators on the planning committee.”