Why do marinas seem to hate liveaboards?

[spencer53]

The thought that living aboard would be less expensive was there before I actually sold the house and moved aboard. Now, years later, I know it is not. My slip fees have gone up every year that I have been at my current location and are now at about the same amount as my former mortgage payment. The marinas around my location are all now "determining" their rate structure based on what they claim is "market value". I guess they figure it is a free market. Unfortunately, it isn't. If more marinas could be built to supply demand, I could agree with the market value concept.

[CAPT2B]

Hello fello Sailors,

I have been wanting to sell my house and all it contents including all my toys, and most my tools to move aboard but want to cruise the world and not stay in one place too long id rather be able to leave the docks easily with out having all the clutter that i see on alot of liveaboards in Boston all these USS NEVERSAIL boats. I do have a great job now but feel im lacking in what I really want for myself, Mabye I am a lil selfish but doing my side jobs for pennies now for friends and word of mouth I have It has been exhausting and really want to do somthing Ive always dreamed about I know It wont be easier but the satifaction you get while out in the WBY not knowing what is around the next corner seem like what I need. Dont get me wrong as I dont like helping others out. Every time I get down to the Yacht club I enjoy the envirment around me, Everyone is willing to give a hand if your haveing trouble. You sratch my back Ill sratch yours and everyone just gets along Most of the time. Im sorry if this a long post but it is my 1st one and I also have a lot of questions.

[S/V Elusive]

I believe that most liveaboards do not mind if the marinas are picky about who and what they allow to be liveaboards. Unfortunately, with the laws and litigious society we have now, marinas can't be overtly discriminatory. Therefore, most find it easier to limit the number of liveaboards. In California, the B & H Commission has RECOMMENDED that liveaboards be limited to ~10%. Too many have taken this to be gospel - it isn't. Most marinas set standards, and I do not find it amazing that some boats who have been on the waiting list for a long period of time find that they just never seem to move up.

Spenser53 is certainly right about the cost here in CA. It is NOT a fair market value, but more an ALL the market will bear. And, while we are a supply and demand society, some principles and original intents are suppose to be applied to our coastal and harbor areas. Many of the harbors that were created (back when they could be), were originally paid for by the taxpayers of the area and were promised (chartered to be) for public small boating and recreational usage. With this new paradigm of cranking up the fees and gouging the users of these areas, it has, and will continue to force out the middle class until all that remains are those that can afford it (and apparently don't worry about the cost) - the rich.

At MdR Harbor by Santa Monica, the mega-builders and rich have been running rough shod over the originally intended users of the area. Fortunately, only JUST recently, a group of boat owners and regular users of the harbor were able to band together and get a couple of government agencies to say 'Now WAIT a minute!'. We've yet to see how that might turn out.

One of the ironic sidebars to all of this; the harbors obtain public funds (grants) to build these lovely 'boating centers'. They promote this as a way to take our troubled and disadvantaged youth, and introduce them to boating - supposedly to give them goals to want to be able to achieve having a boat and enjoying our waters. And yet, who is going to be able to afford this? What are these kids going to think when they are shown what fun and enjoyment can be had with boating - oh... but so sorry, you can't have that ... you don't have enough money. Talk about creating class strife! Oye.

::shaking head::

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by S/V Elusive

... Many of the harbors that were created (back when they could be), were originally paid for by the taxpayers of the area and were promised (chartered to be) for public small boating and recreational usage. With this new paradigm of cranking up the fees and gouging the users of these areas, it has, and will continue to force out the middle class until all that remains are those that can afford it (and apparently don't worry about the cost) - the rich...
... One of the ironic sidebars to all of this; the harbors obtain public funds (grants) to build these lovely 'boating centers'. They promote this as a way to take our troubled and disadvantaged youth, and introduce them to boating - supposedly to give them goals to want to be able to achieve having a boat and enjoying our waters.

None of which really speaks to “Live-Aboard” rights and/or privileges.
Ie: I doubt that most of these small craft recreational areas are zoned for Residential use.

[S/V Elusive]

Originally Posted by GordMay

None of which really speaks to “Live-Aboard” rights and/or privileges.
Ie: I doubt that most of these small craft recreational areas are zoned for Residential use.

Good point Gord - All those water side condos/townhomes/lofts, trailer parks, and of course, us liveaboards need to get out! hummm maybe those zones are for LAND use, and don't apply to water or harbor areas.

""With this new paradigm of cranking up the fees and gouging the users of these areas, it has, and will continue to force out the middle class until all that remains are those that can afford it (and apparently don't worry about the cost) - the rich..."" Directly addresses the cost of liveaboard/marina usage - certainly germane to this discussion.

And, the last paragraph is prefaced by "One of the ironic sidebars to all of this" - meaning it is loosely tied to a part of the discussion. It is certainly a sore point with me and I felt like putting that in .. AS A SIDEBAR.

[TaoJones]

Originally Posted by S/V Elusive

<snip>

Spenser53 is certainly right about the cost here in CA. It is NOT a fair market value, but more an ALL the market will bear. And, while we are a supply and demand society, some principles and original intents are suppose to be applied to our coastal and harbor areas. Many of the harbors that were created (back when they could be), were originally paid for by the taxpayers of the area and were promised (chartered to be) for public small boating and recreational usage. With this new paradigm of cranking up the fees and gouging the users of these areas, it has, and will continue to force out the middle class until all that remains are those that can afford it (and apparently don't worry about the cost) - the rich.

At MdR Harbor by Santa Monica, the mega-builders and rich have been running rough shod over the originally intended users of the area.

<snip>

Welcome to the reality of dollar devaluation!

In a free market, balancing supply against demand sets the price. In an economic system that is currently inflating its supply of money and credit at ~15%/year, the purchasing power of each unit of the local currency shrinks constantly.

The operators of marinas have costs, too, that continue to climb, and their only way to recoup those costs is to raise their rates. That increasing rates prices some individuals out of the market may seem cruel, but it is the only mechanism capitalism provides for balancing supply and demand.

To artificially maintain lower rates to make it "fair" is the "unfairest" outcome, in my opinion. (See Soviet Union: Five Year Plan) Government interference in a free market most often will exacerbate the problem, rather than remedy it. And if the entity in question is government-owned - Marina del Rey is owned by Los Angeles County - then capping rates is taxpayer-subsidized relief for a favored group, in this case boaters.

With about 6100 slips in MdR, that may seem like a lot of voters who would support this as a good idea, but in a county of ~9,000,000 people, it's unlikely to generate much enthusiasm among the non-boating public. I've yet to meet the politician who can't do simple math, and the burden of counting votes isn't really demanding labor.

Southern California is a wonderful area for boating, to be sure. But the quantity of available facilities is a limited resource. Competition for those resources puts a great deal of pressure on the supply. Those who are charged with the almost impossible task of balancing supply and demand, public and private interests, and increasing costs and sources of income do the very best they can.

If that seems to some to add up to "favoring the rich," then I submit that you don't understand either economics or politics.

TaoJones

[spencer53]

TAOJONES- I think the problem stems from the fact that in my particular marina, the leasee has the ability to and does sign a long term contract to operate in the harbor. Being that the harbor is supposedly owned by the taxpayers, it becomes a matter of public record when their lease is negotiated. I have and do review this information on a monthly basis. The statement that the marina operators costs increase is probably sound, however, when you look at the actual numbers (again, public record), you find that the marina in my case has increased their rates at a substantially higher rate than the cost increases incurred by them. Up until recently, marina operators had to seek approval from our local harbor commission to raise their rates. The harbor commission takes a cut from the money the marina operator makes. Sooooo, you could say the fox has been let into the hen house. The reality that I see is there is really no one to stand up for those of us that use the harbor facilities and as you point out, it would appear that only those of us that actually use the harbor facilities really care about these issues. Your point that someone living on land and paying taxes is not going to really care about the issue can equally be stated on the part of those of us that do use the facilities. Lord knows all of us that are in my harbor pay healthy property taxes that go largely to developments related to the rest of the taxpayers you mention. That argument can be applied quite easily both ways. In the case of the supply and demand argument, the supply is capped. As it stands now, I just know that the profit margins for the marina operators in my harbor have jumped dramatically. Way more than the costs of their operation. The only way the free market forces would materialize would be to have all the boaters vacate (giving up on the ability to realize the benefits of a facility that was paid for by our taxes as well) or for more marinas to be built (something that various politics don't want to allow). In the meantime, the marina operators know they have a captive audience that the majority of taxpayers don't give a hoot about (as you so kindly pointed out). The way it's going now, as S/V Elusive stated, it's a matter of time before only the wealthy will be able to utilize our harbors that were built with our tax dollars and are used to make some very rich indeed.. One fact that I will point out is that the county I live in makes way more in property tax revenue per square foot of space from my dock alone than they would with the same sq foot space on land. What we need is a boaters Prop 13..

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by TaoJones

... If that seems to some to add up to "favoring the rich," then I submit that you don't understand either economics or politics.

TaoJones

FWIW*:
If it doesn't seem that economics and politics, by their very nature, favour the rich, then I submit that one of us doesn't understand either.
I wonder, in fact, where the rich don't have an advantage?

* About what you've paid for it.

[Thermal]

Originally Posted by GordMay

I wonder, in fact, where the rich don't have an advantage?

Enjoying their life! It seems most rich never have enough and are obsessed with acquiring "more", but they can never finish acquiring "more" , including what you have, until they own the universe... and the somebody says there's another universe! Of course, this doesn't apply to all rich, some have figured out how to use that money to enjoy life. They truly have the advantage. Ironically some of these rich have a net worth of only a few dollars... (Canadian dollars fo course)

[TaoJones]

Originally Posted by GordMay

FWIW*:
If it doesn't seem that economics and politics, by their very nature, favour the rich, then I submit that one of us doesn't understand either.
I wonder, in fact, where the rich don't have an advantage?

* About what you've paid for it.

Selectively extracting the last line of my post, and completely ignoring the preceding paragraph to which it refers, is disingenuous, Gord, and it surprises me that you would stoop to such pettiness for the sake of making your unrelated point. Destroying context is right down there with plagiarism when it comes to communicating original thoughts, in my opinion.

But perhaps I was unsuccessful in making my point that the unrelenting devaluation of the American currency is what is really behind the increase in the price of most everything. So, I'll let Keynes say it for me:

Lenin was surely right. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million is able to diagnose. John Maynard Keynes

It is the destruction of the American dollar that is driving prices higher and higher, not a conspiracy of the wealthy and politically connected to deprive someone of a place to park his boat.

TaoJones

[GordMay]

Dockominium conversions rising, says marina survey:
Over one-third (38%) of respondents to a survey of marina managers by Applied Technology & Management, Inc. (ATM) currently have at least some dockominiums at their marina. In addition, survey findings indicate that dockominium conversions are likely to increase ...
Goto: http://www.appliedtm.com/resources/p...rina-study.pdf

[badenoch]

I'm not living aboard today, but I just bought my first boat and am moving rapidly in that direction. The marina she's at is not officially allowing new liveaboards, but they're not specifically prohibited in the lease agreement.

Anyway, I've been invited to attend the upcoming board meeting at which they will be officially reviewing the policy and are considering officially re-opening the marina to liveaboards.

I've already scoped out a backup marina in case the political process turns against liveaboards there, so I'm in no immediate peril. I've read through this thread and have a general conception of the stakeholders' interests and potential objections. That said, can anyone offer specific suggestions or points of argument that may be persuasive to the decision makers?

[S/V Elusive]

bad - the arguements FOR liveaboards:
1) They KNOW who and what belongs on "Their" docks - built in security

2) They know the conditions of the docks and will let management/facilities know of any problems before they become BIG problems.

3) They are around to lend a hand - both for the other folk on the dock, but also for management/facilities when there are problems - typically, in my experience, major wind storm causes lines to part and maintenence needs help securing a boat. For absent boaters (most), things happen, and the liveaboards about, know when something isn't right - can notify dock mates at home, or notify staff so they can notify owner.

4) Real boaters, that are liveaboards, help keep the area clean and orderly. Most of us do NOT like living in or around a run down pig sty. Peer pressure can often work better than a word from management.

Should be 'enogh' (sic) to get ya going.

[timinfla2]

I hope I'm not being redundant by asking this but is there a listing of clubs and/or marinas that allow liveaboards? I'm specifically interested in the Boca Raton area.

Thank you!

-Tim

[seafox]

It is becoming a cheap accommodation option in some of our marinas. Some of them have no interest at all in boats and boating.