Sitka Assembly postpones vote on petition for additional restaurant beer-and-wine licenses until October

The Sitka City and Borough Assembly on Aug. 12 voted 6–0 to postpone consideration of a resolution petitioning the Alaska Alcoholic Beverage Control board for additional restaurant/eating-place (REPL) beer-and-wine licenses until the assembly's second meeting in October (Oct. 28). The postponement followed lengthy public comment, an amendment reducing the number of licenses sought from six to three, and questions about outreach and economic impacts.

The resolution, introduced by assembly member Tor, originally asked the state to allow up to six additional REPLs under state statute 04.11.0405. Tor described the measure as an effort "to try and help out some of our local businesses," citing Campfire Pizza's efforts to open a downtown restaurant and theater pairing. Assembly member Chris seconded the original motion and supported the intent to assist entrepreneurs.

Supporters who testified said more REPLs would help year-round businesses survive and expand. Cambria, co-owner of Campfire Kitchen, said, "Beer and wine sales are a crucial part of making operations more sustainable," and argued licenses would "create new jobs, keep employees throughout the winter, and ensure more visitor spending stays local." Christian Litton of Wildflower Cafe said adding beer and wine would let his year-round cafe grow and hire more staff.

Opponents and some longtime license holders urged more study and broader outreach. Mary Magnuson, owner of the Mean Queen, said there was "no economic impact statement" and warned that newly issued licenses could devalue licenses existing businesses had purchased. Patricia McPike, representing Sitka Char (hospitality industry interests), said the petition appeared to rely on visitor counts and seasonal patterns and argued the tourism commission process had not engaged some stakeholders.

Amy Ainsley, Planning and Community Development director, explained technical aspects of state licensing: there are special seasonal REPLs that count under a different quota, and the state's formula uses total visitor counts divided by 182 days (six months) to calculate how many seasonal licenses a community may qualify for. Ainsley said she had done the math and "I think that we qualify for probably 3, and we currently have 2 issued." She also noted that other communities had petitioned the state recently; some requests were reduced by the state (Homer and Haines each received fewer licenses than they requested).

After public comment, the assembly amended the resolution to request three additional REPLs instead of six; the amendment passed on roll call (5–1). Several members expressed concern, however, that outreach to current license holders and other stakeholders had been uneven. Assembly member Kevin (Deputy Mayor) urged more outreach and suggested referring the matter to a commission for further study.

Assembly member Mosher moved to postpone the amended resolution to the second meeting in October to allow additional public outreach and stakeholder engagement; that motion passed 6–0. During debate members cited competing priorities for summer business owners, the complexity of state rules on seasonal permits, and the need for clearer economic-impact information before the assembly submits a petition to the state.

The assembly did not make or deny any allocation of licenses at the meeting; the postponement means the assembly will revisit the amended petition and any further outreach or analysis at or before its Oct. 28 meeting. Individual businesses would still need to file separate petitions to the state if and when the assembly submits a request.

Votes at a glance - Amendment to reduce requested REPLs from six to three: passed 5–1 (amendment unclear on individual second). - Motion to postpone the amended resolution to Oct. 28: passed 6–0.

Clarifying details and next steps The assembly asked staff to undertake additional outreach to current license holders and other stakeholders and suggested sending the issue either back to the tourism commission or to the planning commission for further community review. Administration staff will also provide clarifications on the mechanics of seasonal licenses, the state quota formula, and opportunities for public comment on individual petitions when they are eventually filed with the state.