"Evicted": Marina Won't Renew Contract for Next Year to maximize Profit

[seandepagnier]

Originally Posted by thinwater

There are markets where most of us can't (or should not) afford sailing as a hobby. It's just not worth it.

Sure true.

It is just wrong that people think they can go sailing without being rich. Why don't they learn to do card tricks instead? No reason to go sailing. I can get a pack of cards at the dollar store.

As prices increase it will get more expensive to do everything. People won't be able to afford to buy food need to accept that they should just starve. The rest of us are tired of hearing people complain.

Once we are all buying bottled air and those who can't afford it suffocate they sure better not complain good thing complaining uses more air, so save your breaths and keep quiet: "it's just not worth it."

[Trekka]

This is a timely thread. I am fortunate to be an owner in a Co Op marina. This summer we have a lot of cruisers staying for awhile before moving on. They have stories about how many Safe Harbors they encounter while going north, or south. They really appreciate their time with us.

We had a scare last month when it came out an approach was made on a buyout. It lead to a big meeting, packed clubhouse and over a hundred on Zoom. Details were presented and question placed whether to ac

[Trekka]

Rats - twitch of the thumb and the post goes up...

We owners were to respond on whether to accept further details on offer and dialog with prospectors. Or turn it down. While some were open, even eager, the intense pushback from the majority erupted. When our Board met on the offer they voted unanimously not only to reject the approach, but to reject any and all subsequent offers to consider selling out.

We in effect hung a “NOT for Sale” sign out front.

FWIW the offer was a buyout by slip size, and a “promise” to hold the new rates for two years. The rate for me would have been triple what I pay now in co-op fees, and would have eaten my buyout in 3 years. That’s before all the new charges that would surely be imposed on everything that could have a price tag applied.

I am relieved to be maintaining my part ownership in this co-op where we elect our leaders and have a say in everything. We need to pay they expenses of maintaining and operating our facility, plus a cushion. But we are not bottom line driven to maximize profits for external entities.

[ixnax]

Originally Posted by seandepagnier

Sure true.

It is just wrong that people think they can go sailing without being rich. Why don't they learn to do card tricks instead? No reason to go sailing. I can get a pack of cards at the dollar store.

As prices increase it will get more expensive to do everything. People won't be able to afford to buy food need to accept that they should just starve. The rest of us are tired of hearing people complain.

Once we are all buying bottled air and those who can't afford it suffocate they sure better not complain good thing complaining uses more air, so save your breaths and keep quiet: "it's just not worth it."

Silly sour grapes. Maybe they should do a go fund me page or just get a clue.

[Pelagic]

Wise decision Trekka as cost will only go up.

The only caveat is that the co-op Group continue to maintain the docks and property.

Having said that.... ...A couple of times we have bought waterfront property, decided not to develop and sold for a significant profit

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by S/V Illusion

Why do you think everything should be shared? Lts of old jokes pointing to how frivolous that concept is, e.g., two college roommates - one studies hard and gets all As and a great job, is successful and becomes affluent; the other does neither. Do you think that's unfair somehow?

You are seeking a solution to a problem which, if it exists at all, is largely self-inflicted.

S/V Illusion, as usual you apparently have a reading problem. I did not say "everything should be shared". Of course if you are trying to make your argument stronger, and lacking anything better to say, distort. Think that works? Not really.

What I said was that shorelines are a public resource and they are not simply treasure to be exploited by the rich. There are other public resources, like the airwaves, like bridges and roads, like schools systems, like public parks. Those things we all benefit from and share.

Other things we produce ourselves and those things we own, but we had a wise president who pointed out that we don't do it by ourselves. It takes a village. Your factory does not run without the power we all pitched in to provide. You don't have workers without the education system. You don't have roads on which your product can be be transported unless we as a community paid to have them built.

You may think it's all through your clever wonderfulness that you acquired the money to buy out that bit of shoreline you covet, but we all contributed to your success and we deserve to use the public resources as much as you do.

[Pelagic]

Accidental post

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by wingssail

S/V Illusion, as usual you apparently have a reading problem. I did not say "everything should be shared". Of course if you are trying to make your argument stronger, and lacking anything better to say, distort. Think that works? Not really.



What I said was that shorelines are a public resource and they are not simply treasure to be exploited by the rich. There are other public resources, like the airwaves, like bridges and roads, like schools systems, like public parks. Those things we all benefit from and share.



Other things we produce ourselves and those things we own, but we had a wise president who pointed out that we don't do it by ourselves. It takes a village. Your factory does not run without the power we all pitched in to provide. You don't have workers without the education system. You don't have roads on which your product can be be transported unless we as a community paid to have them built.



You may think it's all through your clever wonderfulness that you acquired the money to buy out that bit of shoreline you covet, but we all contributed to your success and we deserve to use the public resources as much as you do.

I find this argument both naive and selective

I agree, that territorial waters and public lands are to be shared, but once a piece of waterfront and foreshore lease is privately purchased with government sanction it is no longer public.

Why is that different to buying a a home and making it a rental unit?

Most of us contribute to the economy, but the majority take no risk of ownership in it. Quite satisfied to take a salary without risk unless they do a poor job and are fired, their life choices often resolve around the maximum return for the least effort, so they can focus on other things... (or nothing)

It is the difference between being a wedding guest as opposed to being the bride or groom!..... only those two have a vested interest in the success of that arrangement.

Nothing wrong with being an employee. But you made a deal to receive a guaranteed salary, without risk.
So what gives you the right to now claim ownership, because you did your job?

[CaptTom]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

Nothing wrong with being an employee. But you made a deal to receive a guaranteed salary, without risk.
So what gives you the right to now claim ownership, because you did your job?

Since you accused others of setting up straw man arguments, I have to call you out here.

I'm not a proponent of communism. Nor do I want anarchy. I don't think anyone on here is arguing either position, so let's stop putting words in each others' mouths and find middle ground.

To me, this is a Tragedy of the Commons situation. We already agree that the waters are held in trust by our government for the common good. I think the disagreement lies in extending this concept to shoreline property.

There's a limited supply of shoreline, and we all want to use it. It's up to us, as a society, to establish rules about that. Which areas can be set aside for private use, and which can be used by anyone?

It's not easy to strike a balance everyone sees as "fair." Although my marina leases the submerged lands beneath our facility from the state, there are local fishermen who feel that they should be allowed to cast over and around our boats, often damaging canvas. Whose rights should prevail?

Everyone likes waterfront activities, be it fishing, boating, visiting a restaurant with a great view or just walking the beach. Each of these impedes or excludes the other uses.

I think we can agree that no-one wants a totally inaccessible waterfront lined with massive condo complexes. Nor is it practical to prohibit all development. We need regulation of some kind. Zoning laws, public parks, wildlife refuges, "working waterfront" restrictions, etc. These rules must factor in more than just each prospective user's ability to out-bid all the others.

[LittleWing77]

Originally Posted by ixnax

Silly sour grapes. Maybe they should do a go fund me page or just get a clue.

Hey, hey!!! Play nice, ixnax.

Sean is a active, participating Forum Member who offers an informed alternative perspective on almost every subject you could name.

He is a circumnavigator as well as an inventor of (Sean correct me please if I've got this wrong) an open-source autopilot.

Sorry to say, but in this instance, ixnax, you are the one who needs to get a clue.

LW77

[LittleWing77]

Originally Posted by Trekka

I am relieved to be maintaining my part ownership in this co-op where we elect our leaders and have a say in everything. We need to pay they expenses of maintaining and operating our facility, plus a cushion. But we are not bottom-line driven to maximize profits for external entities.

Very cool story and endorsement for Co-op Marinas.

Thanks for posting, Trekka!

[malbert73]

Originally Posted by ixnax

All of that and we get just one side of the story. Of course from his story, except that he did all of his own work he was faultless. Maybe he truly was a jewel day in and day out, we don't know. But as someone who has needed to be paid monthly by tenants I can attest that forgetfulness is not uncommon and nothing sucks worse than asking for the money. Nor is taking advantage of things and not always following every rule. Then there is also complaining about crap that no one else is complaining about that you need to deal with anyway. So when I hear these stories I always wonder.......

Exactly. I am sure there are instances of loyal customers being evicted but exponentially more due to nuisance reasons (failure to pay on time, complaining, and eyesore boats)

In the same vein, some marinas phase out live aboards - but usually not out of sheer principle but because liveaboards often (not always) are older more poorly maintained boats that create a distinctly different ambiance than marinas generally prefer to attract paying customers.

I agree maintaining water access is a priority - and generally feel that if conglomerates like Safe Harbor help smaller marinas NOT sell to condo developers, so be it. Lesser of two evils. No one who owns a business is going to lose money out of principle.

[Maldwin]

In general, there are two models of allocation for dockage or mooring balls: Price or waiting lists. In Maine, I know of some harbors where a person retiring to the area in their 60s would have no reasonable expectation of getting a mooring ball within their sailing lifetime, and I believe that is a condition in much of the Northeast. Also in Maine there are very few marinas East of Boothbay so that is often not an option. In Florida, there are almost always marinas available if one is willing to pay the price, or move farther North.

The problem seems to be that marina construction and mooring ball availability has not kept pace with increased boat sales. Some of this is due to condo construction, but I suspect at least as much of it has to do with vast areas of coastline being taken off line for environmental reasons. Both of these are legitimate uses, but they conspire to make dockage more scarce.

Solutions might include building more municipal marinas, but that is forcing people who may have no interest in boating to pay for dockage for boat owners either directly, or through reduced tax revenue on land which might produce more tax revenue if used privately. As dockage rates go up, the incentive to build increases and supply should grow assuming regulations allow.

The other solution is to move one’s boat to another country because there are still vast areas of beautiful coastline around the world with plentiful anchorages, mooring ball availability and some dockage. This is obviously not practical for a boat owner who is still working in San Francisco, but is a solution for others.

Best,
Maldwin

[S/V Illusion]

Originally Posted by wingssail

S/V Illusion, as usual you apparently have a reading problem. I did not say "everything should be shared". Of course if you are trying to make your argument stronger, and lacking anything better to say, distort. .

Childish personal attack noted.

Actually, you did say that. Your exact words were:


“Well I certainly don't know the best solution but it starts with recognition that the shorelines are a limited resource and should be shared by all to the extent possible, not just those wealthy enough to buy out the remainder.”

I await your apology.

[Pelagic]

Originally Posted by CaptTom

.



I think we can agree that no-one wants a totally inaccessible waterfront lined with massive condo complexes. Nor is it practical to prohibit all development. We need regulation of some kind. Zoning laws, public parks, wildlife refuges, "working waterfront" restrictions, etc. These rules must factor in more than just each prospective user's ability to out-bid all the others.

I agree with the above and am dismayed when municipalities rezone recreational land for commercial properties.

But I don't begrudge the buyer who legally develops a marina their success.

Where we disagree is in assigning guilt to those who raise their heads above the crowd, see an opportunity and takes the risk in investing themselves into making it happen.

Instead of sour grapes and trying to rewrite the rules of capitalism, my recommendation is to simply move away to less developed places.