I don't know if the article in the link changed since it was posted -- but it looks like it was only a proposal. And, it was a proposal that failed, although it was a tied vote.
I'll have to do some research on this, yet I dug up the language for the 2006 Cruise Ship Ballot Initiative
proposal, and it seems doubtful that this would have allowed to proceed. It seems pretty clear that the funds were to be used toward improving facilities at the port to "properly provide" for ship visits, safety, and infrastructure. (Of course, "properly provide" is open to interpretation.) There's also a provision that does not allow additional levies to be assessed by municipalities.
I'm still searching for the final language.
I do agree it's rather silly.