Here we go again…a new Florida House bill would eliminate several popular anchorages

[Davy J]

ok so what action should we all take??

HB 1051, was authored by Caldwell. He is the chair for the State Affairs Committee. Most likely, the bill will have a hearing there first.

SB 1260, the senate companion bill, is authored by Simpson. He is on the Environmental Preservation Committee and that bill's first hearing will most likely be there.

The first step might be to call, send a letter, or email the members of those committee's. It would be helpful if those legislators are in your district, but contact them anyway. Tell them why you oppose the bill and that legislators supporting the bill will lose future support from you.

Here are the list of those committees:

Florida House of Representatives - State Affairs Committee


https://www.flsenate.gov/Committees/.../?Tab=Meetings

Also, I will be contacting BoatUS and asking for more support. Also join SSCA.

If anyone has additional helpful ideas please chime in.

[zboss]

Originally Posted by Hereweare

ok so what action should we all take??

You can start by donating to the SSCA:

https://www.gofundme.com/Right2Anchor

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by Captain Bill

SNIP

I would suggest that you have never worked in state government. If you did you would know

SNIP

BUZZZZZ Wrong answer.

I have a masters degree in urban and regional planning from Florida State University in Tallahassee, Florida and worked for FDOT part time as a student and later as a full time employee. Later I worked for an engineering firm doing work from the state. If the truth be known my duties were related to EIS production and review.

For those of you who skipped class the day they taught EIS, it is short for Environmental Impact Statement. Nothing gets build without both FDOT and FDEP, and sometimes other state agencies, approving the EIS. As a rule a big part of the acceptance process is negotiations over small, or sometimes not so small, details of the project. Things like the height of a bridge would be such a detail. I would also point out that local governments also have considerable leverage in the EIS process, not to mention local governments also have the ability to put up road blocks using things like zoning for starters.

When I worked for FDOT I was well aware that higher ups at FDOT, and other state agencies, who hired employees were appointed by pols; and more to the point made decisions about hiring guys like me. Private companies I worked hired folks to lobby pols. In both cases these pols were elected and the pols knew they could not do foolish things and keep getting elected.

Bottom line is it would cost more money to build a bridge with higher clearance and there are plenty of MSM flacks who would be more than happy to get street cred by broadcasting a story about govt officials who wasted tax dollars building bridges with higher clearance so rich 1%ers could drive their boats under them.

Not saying it is right, just that boaters are viewed as the idle rich and the general public is not likely to support spending additional tax money on a bridge to make life easier to them.

[Davy J]

Bottom line is it would cost more money to build a bridge with higher clearance

I would prefer the conversation to remain on anchoring restrictions and what can be done about it. And don't want to disparage your experience, but why is it that every other fixed bridge, that is built on the ICW 65' tall?

List of AICW bridges:
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway - Florida Route Segment

[WindwardPrinces]

Originally Posted by Davy J

I would prefer the conversation to remain on anchoring restrictions and what can be done about it. And don't want to disparage your experience, but why is it that every other fixed bridge, that is built on the ICW 65' tall?

List of AICW bridges:
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway - Florida Route Segment

Sure. Sounds like something that deserves it's own thread, or at least it probably did before it was built.

The anchoring legislation might be something that can be affected right now.

[crabcake]

Originally Posted by w1651

They work for us Blue crab we do not work for them. Maybe you should take that under consideration.

In my 6 plus decades of living in the US, I have learned one thing - and that's politicians don't work for those who elect them, they work for the lobbyists, corporations and individuals who contribute to their election and re-election campaigns. NOT the voter who sends them a letter or visits their office making threats.

Mark Twain said it best:
“If voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it.”

[tomfl]

Originally Posted by Davy J

I would prefer the conversation to remain on anchoring restrictions and what can be done about it. And don't want to disparage your experience, but why is it that every other fixed bridge, that is built on the ICW 65' tall?

List of AICW bridges:
Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway - Florida Route Segment

The 65 foot bridges were bid on and the companies that got the bid speced a 65 foot bridge.

The bridge in question was put up for bids and the company that got the bid speced a 56 foot bridge.

As to who awarded the winning company the contract and why they did so, that is well above my pay grade.

[tomrealest]

There is an IMPORTANT legislative hearing on February 17th. Google Florida Legislature and CALL at least one them and complain and tell to vote against it. If this passes, cruisers are going to really regret not making phone calls to complain. The bill passed the sub committee 16 for 0 against

Its easy to make the call but lots of people need to call

[tomrealest]

Awesome! !!Thanks

[Blue Crab]

Originally Posted by tomrealest

... The bill passed the sub committee 16 for 0 against ...

I emailed them but this really says it all. Money talks, everything else walks.

[tomrealest]

BOATUS. IS opposing the bill and they have their lobbyist on it.

They are not optimistic about defeating the bill. If we don't get me our friends and families to call house members we are probably doomed

[w1651]

Originally Posted by crabcake

In my 6 plus decades of living in the US, I have learned one thing - and that's politicians don't work for those who elect them, they work for the lobbyists, corporations and individuals who contribute to their election and re-election campaigns. NOT the voter who sends them a letter or visits their office making threats.

Mark Twain said it best:
“If voting made any difference they wouldn't let us do it.”

That's interesting because Marco Rubio isn't running for election in Florida again. In fact when the senate was out for re election he didn't even come to Florida but Stumped for McCain in Arizona. And I sent him a long letter too. And he probably won't get the nomination either. I'm not taking credit because my letter was timid compared to some of my friends letters.

[w1651]

Time to call and get in touch with your elected officials people. Donate as well.

[LEOCAT66]

Well, does not seem that we have much support from Fl businesses. If this, or any other law banning anchoring or free navigation in Fl. I will totally avoid it from provisioning
and will no longer support any Fl businesses in the state.

These businesses need to show their support for us, even if all is lost in the end, as they have a horse in this race.



Sent from my iPhone using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[captain mitch]

Here is the letter that we posted to several Fl. legislators.
Its not much, but if many of us modify it and send it to various members it will have an impact. The email addresses can be found at the fl. legislature web site.

Good Day,
Thank you for taking the time to read our opinion on recent bill HB 1051 to be presented to the Legislature
We, (my wife and I) are not only Florida residents, but boaters also. We travel on our 51' sailboat for much of the year and enjoy anchoring in many locations, both in and out of Florida.
HB 1051 seems to us to be a mis-guided attempt to eliminate the problem of derelict and unsightly boats that take up permanent residence in some areas.
I say mis-guided as HB 1051 is deleterious to those of us who maintain our boats as "Yachts" and take great pride in their appearance and our decorum. (It references not anchoring in "Recreational Boating Zones" after sunset and before sunrise, just when most recreational boating is NOT active!)
As we travel, we spend considerable monies with the local shops, and , for the most parts make friends where we visit.
I am aware of a very few un-happy home owners in the Miami and Ft. Lauderdale areas who, after buying a home on the waterfront, decide that they do not want to see boats in their neighborhood.
These are the same type people who buy homes near the airport, then complain about the planes flying over!
There are already laws in place, both local and state, to deal with the ugly and derelict boats, but they require the police to actually enforce them.
Bills such as HB1052 have created a considerable negative opinion of Florida within the cruising community and we now have many friends who skip past Florida and head to the Bahamas and the Caribbean instead.
All to satisfy a very few "locals" with the funds to influence the introduction of a bill to serve their needs.
We urge you to vote against HB 1051 when it comes up.
Very truly yours,
Robert & Maria Mitchell
Vero Beach and Sarasota, Fl.