| Boaters Question Planned Newport Mooring Policy Changes |
| By: Ambrosia Sarabia | Monday, January 26, 2009 12:50:00 PM |
| Last updated: Monday, January 26, 2009 12:50:00 PM |
Proposed city ordinance would raise transfer fees, curtail yacht club- and broker-held moorings.
 | | | | | Changes Ahead -- Proposed changes to Newport Harbor mooring transfer policies are aimed at addressing a waiting list for moorings that never seems to end. | | |
|
NEWPORT BEACH – During a Jan. 14 meeting, many mooring holders and other Newport Harbor boaters expressed disapproval of a proposed city ordinance that would affect the mooring transferability process that has remained unchanged for decades. Under the proposed regulations, the public would be limited to holding no more than two moorings, and no one -- including a yacht club -- would be allowed to hold a mooring and lend it to someone else (such as a club member) for more than 60 days.
The city’s management of the moorings was criticized in 2007 when the Orange County Grand Jury issued a report entitled “Newport Moorings: Are They Held in the Public Trust or for Private Profit?” The 13-page report expressed concern about a legal loophole that many residents have used to “sell” their moorings when transferring them to a boat buyer. It called on the city to tighten the permit procedure, create an effective mooring waiting list and establish a regularly scheduled independent appraisal to determine fair market values for mooring permit fees.
After months of reviewing recommendations and rewriting a drafted reply, the city’s final response was turned over to the Grand Jury on Aug. 9, 2007.
There are 1,220 moorings in Newport Harbor, 750 offshore and 470 inshore moorings. Each year, the city receives $700,000 in revenue from moorings, creating one of the largest sources of income for the city.
Newport Beach officials and the Mooring Master Plan Subcommittee were busy working on issues in the harbor before the report was published. Since the report, the group focused on specific areas of the Grand Jury’s investigation, including the waiting list, transferability of moorings and pricing of moorings.
The proposed 12-page ordinance is the culmination of three years of hard work, numerous hours and years spent addressing the issues, said Newport Beach Harbor Resources manager Chris Miller.
“It is hard to change something that has been so much a part of our community and how things are done – so, rather than eliminate the system and start from scratch, we really wanted to try and improve upon the already existing system,” Miller explained.
He emphasized that the new regulations will not affect mooring transfers when boats are sold by an owner, as transferability will still be allowed.
Major concerns raised by boaters who attended the Jan. 14 meeting included the planned increase in the mooring transfer fee -- currently a nominal charge. If approved, the mooring transfer fee would be based on the annual mooring permit fee. A new fee schedule is still to be approved by the city council.
“I feel that in today’s economy, it’s best to adjust (city) expenses and cut back like everyone else, rather than kicking around the little guy,” said Peter Carol, a boat owner in the harbor.
Speakers also disagreed with the proposed rule that the mooring permit holder must not have not transferred more than one offshore or onshore mooring to another permit during the previous 12 months. Boaters also raised concerns about requirements that proposed mooring transferees not currently hold more than two other mooring permits; and that moorings may be “loaned” to another boater for no more than 30 days.
Under the proposal, a mooring permit holder allowing another boater to use a mooring may not have “loaned” it for more than 60 days in previous year. The mooring “borrower” may not have been the recipient of a mooring loan for more than 90 days in the previous year.
“What I see here is some special interest,” said Jim Bentson, a mooring holder. “Yacht clubs are no different than an individual: They should not be allowed to hold more moorings and expand when a single person can only own two.”
Harbor Commissioner Seymour Beek questioned the regulation that would require all moorings in the harbor (aside from those owned by Newport Harbor Yacht Club, Lido Isle Community Association and Balboa Yacht Club) to be held by “a single, natural person.” The rule will not allow other entities, such as yacht brokers or fishing clubs, to own moorings.
“I can’t think of a particular reason why they can’t hold a mooring,” Beek said. “I can see why we don’t want corporations owning moorings, but perhaps (we should) exempt bona fide sailing or boating clubs.”
A major component of the proposed ordinance is the development of a long-term mooring rental program, as moorings that are deemed vacant can be rented to boaters from one to 12 months. Those on the “stagnant” wait list would finally have the ability to rent a mooring, Miller said. “That gives boaters a solution to their storage needs.”
While commissioners responded positively to the promise of more long-term mooring rental availabilities, they asked that the concerns by boaters at the meeting be addressed.
Commissioners advised the city staff to re-evaluate the ordinance with the Mooring Master Plan Subcommittee and present it at the Feb. 11 meeting. The document will also be reviewed by the new city attorney.
This article first appeared in the January 2009 issue of The Log Newspaper. All or parts of the information contained in this article might be outdated. |
