A long-debated ordinance to add provisions for temporary retail structures to Homer City Code was finally voted down by a majority of the city council on Monday, Oct. 13.

A move sponsored by Homer City Council members Jason Davis and Donna Aderhold as a way to potentially invigorate Homer’s Central Business District and provide opportunity to aspiring entrepreneurs who can’t yet afford to establish a brick-and-mortar storefront, Ordinance 25-54 was initially set to be introduced on Aug. 11, but was postponed for referral to the Planning Commission and Economic Development and Advisory Commission. The ordinance was postponed again on Sept. 22, and finally came back to the dais on Monday.

Part of the impetus behind the ordinance stemmed from multiple inquiries to city staff this year by “would-be entrepreneurs,” according to an Aug. 5 memorandum, who expressed a desire to “engage in temporary retail services.” Homer City Code Chapter 8.11 already provides for operation of food trucks in the city — code which Ordinance 25-54 would have sought to emulate in the creation of Chapter 8.13 — but the path for other temporary retail activities such as vendors selling clothing or crafts remained a “gray area.”

Homer City Code also includes regulation on Itinerant Merchant’s Licenses, but staff and some council members have called HCC Chapter 8.08 “outdated” and said that it does not address mobile structures.

By creating regulation for a new category of movable retail structures under city code, the ordinance’s sponsors hoped to continue expanding the city’s tax base and provide greater flexibility for small business entrepreneurs with limited resources. Ordinance 25-54 would have regulated small, self-contained commercial buildings — no larger than 150 square feet — designed to be readily movable and not permanently connected to city water or sewer utilities.

Upon the ordinance’s referral to the Planning Commission and EDC, both commissions failed to recommend its adoption. The EDC also stated during their Sept. 9 meeting that they felt the proposed ordinance did not solve “a variety of problems,” and they instead supported a review of the city’s itinerant merchant code.

During Monday’s council meeting, council members discussed whether to send the ordinance back to the Planning Commission and EDC for a second review, this time with a request for specific, actionable recommendations to improve and address potential concerns in the ordinance.

“Our intent, as I understood it, had not been to ask for a recommendation (of approval), but rather to seek their input on how to make it better and stronger if we were to pass it,” Davis said. “We, the co-sponsors, were maybe remiss in not explaining to them what we were looking for, and maybe it came to them thinking that we just wanted an opinion on whether it should happen at all.”

Several of the council members felt that the ordinance should not be referred back to the commissions a second time.

“A denial is a denial,” council member Caroline Venuti said.

Council member Shelly Erickson said that, while she appreciated what the ordinance’s co-sponsors were trying to do, she would rather push further consideration out to spring, since the city is still undergoing the rewrite process for the comprehensive plan and Title 21 zoning and planning code.

Aderhold, who withdrew her support of the ordinance by the end of the council’s discussion and consideration, said that she would ultimately prefer a larger review of the city’s itinerant merchant code and “look at everything more comprehensively.”

“What we really do need is the broader code revision, and my understanding is that EDC is planning on taking that up this winter,” she said.

Mayor Rachel Lord also raised a concern about the burden that sending the ordinance back to the commissions for review over the winter might create. According to city manager Melissa Jacobsen, the EDC and Community Development Director are currently working on the comp plan, Title 21, updates to the Homer Accelerated Roads and Trails Policy — for which a proposition is scheduled to appear on next year’s ballot — and the ongoing community recreation center project.

“I think it’s an important topic. I think the holistic look at the itinerant title is an important topic,” Lord said. “I think this winter, right now … and continuing in the near future, is the busiest I have experienced in nine years at this table, and this would be adding another thing to that list. I’m concerned about our ability to do it justice.”

Council members Davis, Storm Hansen and Bradley Parsons voted in favor of introducing Ordinance 25-54. Council members Venuti, Aderhold and Erickson voted against, resulting in a tie. Mayor Lord used her tiebreaker vote to vote no, resulting in the ordinance’s failure.

“I’m a big, big believer in title revisions and improving code, so I do fully support that, in addition to a couple of other titles we have,” she said. “But Title 21, I think, needs to come first.”

Find Ordinance 25-54 and supplemental materials, as well as the Oct. 13 meeting recording, in full at www.cityofhomer-ak.gov/citycouncil/city-council-regular-meeting-345.

The next Homer City Council meeting will be held on Monday, Oct. 27 at 6 p.m. in the Homer City Hall Cowles Council Chambers and via Zoom.