Richardson Bay liveaboards, heads up!

[Wrong]

It's possible the RBRA and City Council are mailing notices of the Spinnaker event to ensure the audience consists of Sausalito residents. There may not be any other public notice.

From the RBRA October, 01 'packet' downloadable from the RBRA site:

"This year’s proposed anchorage program is still on hold, but Staff will be presenting the rationale behind the RBRA Board’s adopted anchorage program to Sausalito residents and their Council at a meeting at the Spinnaker restaurant on the evening of Thursday November 12. I will be making the case to Sausalito for funding of our adopted program."

"Sausalito is underwriting an RBRA-led public discussion of the anchorage program at Sausalito’s Spinnaker restaurant the evening of Thursday, November 12. Towards that aim, a working group comprised of RBRA Staff, Leslie Alden of Supervisor Sears’ office, RBRA Anchorage Sub-Committee members Marty Winter and Herb Weiner, the Sausalito Council Sub-Committee on the anchorage (Councilmembers Jill Hoffman and Weiner), and Sausalito City Manager Adam Politzer, are continuing to meet. Staff will report the outcome of the discussions and the presentation."

[fstbttms]

I can't see the city council or RBRA actively trying to quash knowledge of the meeting. The number of people who would be opposed to their mooring program is likely very small, and likely to be made up primarily of those anchor-outs who are trying to live under the radar and for free on one of the most expensive waterfronts on the planet. Hardly a politically powerful group. I suspect you are part of an extremely small minority and have a steep uphill battle on your hands. I'd wish you luck, but I'd like that sh*thole of an anchorage cleaned up as much as the next guy.

[Nicholson58]

The elephant in the room here is that the public generally assumes its OK for the nearest village or the state to "Own" the sea bed. Beyond public safety issues, this is nuts. Do they claim a 200 mile limit? Public safety as it relates to sea-worthiness should be all that is needed to clear out the junk. Same as the locals leaning on home owners. This is all about money. I don't live there but I plan to visit this and many other places like it. I sure don't want to worry about the local heat sticking us up every time I drop the hook. There must be a reasonable designated anchorage. The British Crown owns their sea bed but the courts there have even upheld the right of the Master to anchor, even in national parks. This makes life pretty nice in the North Channel - Lake Huron.

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Nicholson58

The elephant in the room here is that the public generally assumes its OK for the nearest village or the state to "Own" the sea bed. Beyond public safety issues, this is nuts. Do they claim a 200 mile limit? Public safety as it relates to sea-worthiness should be all that is needed to clear out the junk. Same as the locals leaning on home owners. This is all about money. I don't live there but I plan to visit this and many other places like it. I sure don't want to worry about the local heat sticking us up every time I drop the hook. There must be a reasonable designated anchorage. The British Crown owns their sea bed but the courts there have even upheld the right of the Master to anchor, even in national parks. This makes life pretty nice in the North Channel - Lake Huron.

Thanks for refocusing the conversation on the central issue. A mooring field with no anchorage is the plan that will go forward if Sausalito agrees to fund their portion of the $650,000 cost. Anyone who reads this thread from the top will realize the issue is not only about 'the boats' and cleaning up Richardson Bay. Matter of fact, the driving force behind all of this, if it comes to fruition is the Audubon Society. This group has given legs to the idea damage to sea grass from anchored boats has got to end. There's a simple answer to how to prevent the damage, but the RBRA and Audubon Society really just want to get rid of the people on the boats. So, stringing lines of inexpensive floats along the margins of growth to warn away boaters planning to anchor won't happen.

[fstbttms]

Wrong, I don't see how, in the scenario you propose (a municipal mooring field combined with unrestricted free anchorage), the anchroage doesn't immediately become completely occupied by the POS derelicts and floating junkpiles that will displaced by the mooring field.

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

Wrong, I don't see how, in the scenario you propose (a municipal mooring field combined with unrestricted free anchorage), the anchroage doesn't immediately become completely occupied by the POS derelicts and floating junkpiles that will displaced by the mooring field.

Who said anything about '...unrestricted free anchorage'? Where there are clearly marked and managed anchorages that require proof of ownership, current registration, a boat safety inspection and the presence of adequately sized anchors and all chain it's unlikely the POS you talk about is going to pass muster and receive a permit to use the anchorage.

Some will complain that requiring all chain is an onerous burden and variations of chain and rope should be allowed. You won't find me arguing that other setups are inadequate to the job of keeping a boat from dragging. But, where there's rope in the mix there's always the hazard of chafe and a boat let loose to end up damaging someone's dock in Belvedere. Not so with properly snubbed all chain. I have recommended 'snag lines' be placed around the anchorage perimeter, capable of stopping a dragging boat with all chain. Will the RBRA endorse the idea? Were an effort made now, in advance of the approaching storm season to herd anchored boats into an organized group - upwind of strategically placed drag lines - it would head off the carnage ahead. But, so doing would rob the RBRA of one of their more persuasive arguments as to why anchoring should be banned. Can't have that..

[ASD]

Originally Posted by fstbttms

I can't see the city council or RBRA actively trying to quash knowledge of the meeting. The number of people who would be opposed to their mooring program is likely very small, and likely to be made up primarily of those anchor-outs who are trying to live under the radar and for free on one of the most expensive waterfronts on the planet. Hardly a politically powerful group. I suspect you are part of an extremely small minority and have a steep uphill battle on your hands. I'd wish you luck, but I'd like that sh*thole of an anchorage cleaned up as much as the next guy.

I don't live in the area, so I have no dog in the fight, but as I have mentioned before, the one and only experience we had was not a good one when visiting Richardson Bay. The Marina we tied up to was great, but I would have to agree with FST. Richardson Bay is a mess and can be equated to a rundown home that needs to be dealt with. I sorry, but it does need to be cleaned up and the anchorage organized. I found it very hard to navigate around all the trash boats trying to get into the marina. Nothing is free and it is time the freeloaders start paying their way.

[Wrong]

So far, I have seen the Nov. 12 Spinnaker event advertised in only one place. 'The Marin Scope', a newsletter published by none other than Sausalito City Hall. It's by subscription only to Sausalito residents and the final decision with what's included in the Scope rests with the City Manager. Depending on the Scopes source of funding, if nothing but City business and plugs by the RBRA reciting their condemnatory mantra over and over again toward folks on boats in Richardson Bay are allowed, the newsletter may be illegal. I gave an article to the City Manager's assistant yesterday challenging him to print another side to the story. Wanna bet it don't get published?

Anyway, the RBRA and City of Sausalito are apparently trying to make the Spinnaker event a residents only thing. We need to turn up in force and demand our voices be heard.

Spinnaker Restaurant, November 12, 2015 18:00.

Don't forget the 'tentative RBRA meeting on November, 10th in the Council Chambers, 6.00 p.m.?

[fstbttms]

Originally Posted by Wrong

We need to turn up in force and demand our voices be heard.

Who is this "we", Kemo Sabe?

[Stu Jackson]

Originally Posted by Wrong

Some will complain that requiring all chain is an onerous burden and variations of chain and rope should be allowed. You won't find me arguing that other setups are inadequate to the job of keeping a boat from dragging. But, where there's rope in the mix there's always the hazard of chafe and a boat let loose to end up damaging someone's dock in Belvedere. Not so with properly snubbed all chain.

Now you're becoming the anchoring Nazi.

This really is over the top.

You & I have had discussions about RB and anchorages on The Bay before and became, after some time, in general agreement.

This one is a crock. I've been anchoring here, all over The Bay and The Delta and the coast for 35 years, combined chain & rode.

Are you really telling me some arbitrary land/dirt dweller type of "police" are gonna tell me what anchoring equipment to use? What's next? Gotta have a Rocna? Oops, I have one already.

Slippery slope here, buddy.

And you mentioned "a boat safety inspection." I've had them for years. In many cases, I knew more than the CG Aux. "inspectors" and always was, and remain to this day, up to snuff with the checklist.

A sticker ain't gonna make me safer.

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Stu Jackson

Now you're becoming the anchoring Nazi.

This really is over the top.

You & I have had discussions about RB and anchorages on The Bay before and became, after some time, in general agreement.

This one is a crock. I've been anchoring here, all over The Bay and The Delta and the coast for 35 years, combined chain & rode.

Are you really telling me some arbitrary land/dirt dweller type of "police" are gonna tell me what anchoring equipment to use? What's next? Gotta have a Rocna? Oops, I have one already.

Slippery slope here, buddy.

And you mentioned "a boat safety inspection." I've had them for years. In many cases, I knew more than the CG Aux. "inspectors" and always was, and remain to this day, up to snuff with the checklist.

A sticker ain't gonna make me safer.

As usual your tone is abrasive and position reflects the fact you don't get it. It's a matter of finding a compromise position between the RBRA that will give you 3 days a week with a permit to anchor, maybe twice a month; or proposing a well marked, organized and managed anchorage requiring safety/vessel inspections, all chain/properly sized anchors and a permit showing you've passed muster. You've got a drivers licence, don't ya? Safeway membership card? I.D. entitling you to social welfare payment of some type?

Your attention to detail ain't very good either, buddy. If you'd quoted my post you're referring to, buddy, you'd have provided the context and precisely what I said, buddy. To paraphrase, I said I'll be the last to argue there aren't other combinations of anchor chain and rode setups that'll keep a boat from dragging, but where there's rope there's always a danger of chafe. That cause for a boat getting away is not going to facilitate stopping the boat with a snag line from ending up causing damage to some guy's dock in Tiburon or Belvedere.

And "us", includes anyone who realizes the door into a reality where your only choice will be to rent a mooring or be a "short term visitor" is the mooring field. Once in, or maybe even before, the 3 day in a week and no liveaboard ordinances will be enforced. This is because funds for enforcement are included in the Scenario #3 package awaiting a final vote from the Sausalito City Council. You choose. Either join the effort to stop the mooring field for as long as there'll be no cruiser/locals anchorage included, and or seek a workable compromise with the RBRA or STFU.

You won't be missed on account of you ain't going to have a land/dirt dweller type of "police" are gonna tell me what anchoring equipment to use. And any idiot knows a 'sticker' won't make them safer, but you either play by the book or don't play. You're choice, buddy.

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Wrong

So far, I have seen the Nov. 12 Spinnaker event advertised in only one place. 'The Marin Scope', a newsletter published by none other than Sausalito City Hall. It's by subscription only to Sausalito residents and the final decision with what's included in the Scope rests with the City Manager. Depending on the Scopes source of funding, if nothing but City business and plugs by the RBRA reciting their condemnatory mantra over and over again toward folks on boats in Richardson Bay are allowed, the newsletter may be illegal. I gave an article to the City Manager's assistant yesterday challenging him to print another side to the story. Wanna bet it don't get published?

A correction is in order. The City of Sausalito's newsletter is the 'Sausalito Currents' not the 'Marin Scope'.

Anyway, the RBRA and City of Sausalito are apparently trying to make the Spinnaker event a residents only thing. We need to turn up in force and demand our voices be heard.

Spinnaker Restaurant, November 12, 2015 18:00.

Don't forget the 'tentative RBRA meeting on November, 10th in the Council Chambers, 6.00 p.m.?

[Wrong]

Originally Posted by Wrong

A correction is in order. The City of Sausalito's newsletter is the 'Sausalito Currents' not the 'Marin Scope'.

So, the head librarian here in Sausalito tells me postcards are being mailed to Sausalito City residents.

Clearly, the objective here is to minimize attendance by non-residents who may offer a different viewpoint from the RBRA's. Although some folks living aboard boats in Richardson Bay have been there for upwards of 30 years, they ain't gonna get invited. Only house dwellers.

Wonder if you have to present proof your a Sausalito resident to get into the Spinnaker event? What a crock of S----!

Anyway, nothing short of being arrested for distributing my informational handouts outside the event will stop me from doing so.

[Wrong]

For those of you who aren't sure what comprises the federal anchorage in Sausalito. Coordinates taken from RBRA ordinances, 87-1.

[Wrong]

There's been some subtle changes in the way scenario #3 is described in the Sausalito Currents news: Mooring field: A mooring field requires that all boats be attached to a secure, designated mooring ball, much like having a “home address”. This creates an effective, long-term solution to managing the bay "and an orderly and welcoming environment for visiting sailors". A mooring field would also produce a cost-recovering funding stream. Moorings are safer and more environmentally friendly than anchors. Sausalito Currents - October 30, 2015

So, there y'are. They're answer to a cruiser's anchorage. A mooring. No matter that most 'visiting sailors' will avoid destinations with no anchorage. In my experience, most prefer anchoring over paying for a marina slip or a mooring.

Get involved, or...