Bar Harbor voters will have say on alternative cruise ship limits

BAR HARBOR, Maine — The fate of the town’s cruise ship disembarkation limits will be in the voters’ hands again this November.

In an Aug. 27 marathon meeting that was occasionally testy and where some councilors and others also occasionally appealed for kindness and civility and to focus on policy not people, the Bar Harbor Town Council voted 6-1 in favor of Chapter 50, a different way of creating cruise ship caps. Vice Chair Gary Friedmann voted against the changes.

Those changes do not go into immediate effect.

The proposed changes in Chapter 50 are contingent on a potential November repeal of the portion of the land use ordinance that is currently governing cruise ship disembarkations.

For those changes to go forward, the voters must first repeal the current 1,000-a-day caps based on permitting disembarkations on private property. Those changes to the town’s land use ordinance were voted on in November 2022 and brought via a citizens’ initiative led by Charles Sidman , a local resident. In the current iteration, there are no monthly caps other than 30,000 to 31,000, which would occur if the top limit of 1,000 passenger disembarkations happened each day.

The Town Council voted on Tuesday night to put that potential repeal on the November ballot for voters.

The potential alternative is a licensing situation developed through individual contracts with cruise lines and the disembarkation service owner. The current limits are meant to be achieved via permits and fines to the pier owner if more than 1,000 disembark. At least one notice of violation has been sent to those property owners (Golden Anchor, LC, owners of 55 West Street) this August.

The caps in Chapter 50 would have daily limits of 3,200 no matter what month. Each month has a separate limit. If the daily limits (determined by each ship’s lower berth capacity) are met, then the monthly cap would be reached next.

The year-round daily limit would be 3,200 people, and the town sets a monthly cap that varies by season.

Council Chair Valerie Peacock said that since the cruise ship changes began two years ago, she has felt that the Council has been put on the defensive, beginning with having to defend the ordinance in court.

“Even if it survives all the upcoming legal challenges,” she said, “The LUO gives the dock owners and cruise lines control over which ships visit and how many passengers come ashore. The town, watching from the sideline, hopes that big ships won’t come. The town hopes that no more than 1,000 passengers will disembark. And if they do, we watch and document and bring the dock owners to court, and have to prove our case, and hope a judge upholds our rule.”

Currently, the dock owners have not applied for a permit, which is part of the 1,000-a-day process. Arguments have been made that the use of the private land for cruise ship disembarkation was pre-existing and therefore allowed without the limits.

“Again, we have to take them to court and prove that they have to” get that permit, Peacock said.

While some have said they perceive the Town Council to be afraid of litigation, Peacock said it isn’t about fear. “We could continue to defend ourselves, to maintain our position. And, they can continue to bring challenges. We might win them all. But at what expense to our wallets and to our morale and our sense of community? And there’s always risk of losing.”

She believes Chapter 50 builds on the town’s position of strength because it cuts dock owners out of visitation issues, with the town instead dealing directly with cruise lines; that allows the town to regulate ships and disembarkations without on-site counting, and releases the town from future claims against it even if the town ends or reduces cruise ship visitation.

“This is not weak policy,” Peacock said. “This is our game. Our rules.”

Public Comment

Approximately 35 people spoke during public hearings on both amendments.

Many who objected to the change said that they did not think fines were high enough; wondered where the 3,200 limit came from; said that the number was not enough of a reduction; said the voters had already voted; said that any litigation should be paid via cruise ship fees and not the taxpayers; and said that the town is giving away its power. A couple attendees accused the councilors of being corrupt.

“I and many others do not trust this process,” Diane Vreeland said. “If our wishes are repealed, we have lost all of our rights and the Council and the cruise ship industry can do whatever they want to do.” The Council, she said, has no respect for the rule of law.

Others, like Doris Plummer, said Chapter 50 didn’t represent what the voters approved and wasn’t a significant reduction.

“There are so many parallels to the worst politics in the world, it ain’t funny,” Jim O’Connell, one of the initiative’s creators said. “By casting my vote for 1,000, I’m being told by Cruise Ship International and the Town Council that the initiative is somehow rigged and unless I accept 3,200, I’m required to surrender to the Bar Harbor Greed Education Camp run by the town council.”

He also called Councilor Matthew Hochman “vulgar and deplorable” for comments earlier this year which used an expletive with Charles Sidman’s name. In multiple venues since then, Hochman has apologized for his profanity. He apologized again Tuesday night.

Peacock reiterated her statements at the meeting’s beginning that personal attacks were not helpful and that they were gathered to discuss potential policy changes.

Hochman was also defended by Valerie King, a local server who moved here in second grade. King called him “unpretentious and kind.”

Carol Chappell, chair of the Warrant Committee’s subcommittee on government, spoke about various ways to initiate change in the town’s land use ordinance. Her worry was that if Chapter 50 prevails, only the Town Council would be able to change to it.

Ellen Dohmen said she was tremendously impressed by how many cared about the issue and attended. She also said that cruise ships are not the only factor in troubles that the town faces.

”I’m under no illusions that the repeal of the LUO will not be placed on the ballot,” said Charles Sidman. He’s OK with that, he said, because he thinks the citizen should have the final say. Calling Chapter 50 “an unmitigated disaster,” he expressed his view that the citizens will reject the elimination of the LUO ordinance in November. Prior to the meeting, he sent a sheet of his arguments to members of the press and also provided them as a hand-out to attendees in the overflowing Town Council chambers.

Those who were more supportive of the compromise said that it gives the town protection because of multiple parties (cruise lines, tenders, pier owners) filing releases of claims. A release of claims is essentially when one party gives up the right to sue another. This usually happens in exchange for something else.

Many small business owners and workers who spoke said that they worried for their employees with the current 1,000 system. While 3,200 wasn’t ideal for them, they said they understood the need for compromise and that a steady number made it easier to negotiate and for their businesses to survive.

“Tonight I’m speaking about reality. And the reality is Bar Harbor is developing a reputation as unfriendly and unwelcoming,” Darrin Stavnesli said. “When you make your town unwelcoming to one group of people, it affects your image across the board …. Now that is our image, we are the beautiful, hateful Coastal Maine town.”

Cruisers have to hide that they are cruisers as they go through town, he said.

“Real Mainers welcome everyone. We don’t cherry pick who we think is good or bad.” Both tracks, he said, are designed to sink cruise ship visits and appease people who won’t be here when the full negative effects are realized. “Bar Harbor is not an HOA. It is not a gated senior retirement village.”

Bo Jennings, director of operations at Side Street properties, said that at the current 1,000-daily disembarkation level, he will not be able to hire four employees back next year. Four people will lose their jobs.

Greg Savage said this week he had one $363 lunch day when cruise ships weren’t in. The next day, his restaurant made $2,000 for lunch “That’s an impact on me and my family. That’s an impact on everyone else here too. There’s a happy medium here someplace. I hope you find it.”

One young man who serves ice cream said that he earned $2,000 last summer. This year he’s only earned $750. “It’s not good for the community or businesses around.”

Often, Ruth Eveland said, the town’s land use ordinance is iterative, changes are made and it gets better over time. The concept, she said, has merit, but is not manageable because of how it was placed in the town’s land use ordinance. The purpose of that ordinance, she said, is different than what the town is trying to achieve. It’s focused on buildings, not on the management of people.

“Either it will pass or it won’t,” she said. She felt it was appropriate for the town as a whole to have a second say.

Tom Testa, whose family has had a business in Bar Harbor for 90 years agreed. He, and others, talked about shortened seasons, the struggles for businesses to stay open in slow months, and cited the 2021 town survey about cruise ships where people said that they did not want to ban cruise ships but reduce the numbers of visits, he said. He asked what people were voting for with the 1,000 caps: a ban or a reduction?

Others, like King, said they were a bit emotional.

“I’m here to speak for the servers and all the other workers in town,” King said.  Servers, she said, aren’t making as much money now that the caps have begun. Her son lost a shift at his work. Now, she said, they have to try to figure out how to pay for things like insurance.

It wasn’t just her fears about her income and her son’s income that made her emotional, but the way some people were treating others.

“This town — what is happening here — is not OK,” King said. “We who don’t have time to spend hours at these meetings listening to people rant and insult people we love, we should have a say, too. And that’s in voting.” She appealed for the councilors to move the orders forward.

This story was originally published by The Bar Harbor Story . To receive regular coverage from the Bar Harbor Story, sign up for a free subscription here .