Homeless Anchor out

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

The example given in that Fox article was an employed plumber who could not afford the $9000.00/month cost of owning a land house.

If those numbers are real (i dont live in the US)......Seems to me the municipality could encourage foreshore lease developments with all the utilities and sewage tratment services for floating communities at a much reduced cost.

If we are talking about unemployed homeless living on the streets, that is a much deeper problem with mental issues. Those people should not be near the water but in centers focussed on their rehabilitation.

Problem is this is largely a govt created problem.Those in the middle are the ones paying the price.
- The rich can pay whatever the price is.
- The poor don't pay and fining them does nothing because they have no money to take.
- The middle class have to pay their own way.

Worse, the govt implements rent control which applies to the poor...but this discourages more building which drives up non-rent controlled property prices...the result being middle class workers see higher rents (or purchase prices). They also implement a host of regulations which drives up prices (recently for example, california is pushing to make rooftop solar mandatory on new construction). And all this property price increase benefits the wealthy who see their property values rise, so they don't fight it (as long as a homeless person isn't living on the sidewalk in front of their home)

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by NorthernMac

Also let’s define homeless

Most real homeless after feeding their demons (drugs, booze, etc) and eating something, can’t even get enough together for first and last, I highly doubt boat ownership is highly common.

Go to southern florida...it's not as uncommon as you think.

You can pick up an old monohull with nonfunctional engine/rigging...often just for the cost of getting it out of the marina. It costs more to dispose of it than give it away...even if that includes the prior owner paying the cost of towing it out to an anchorage.

[Pelagic]

Apparently there will soon be a glut of housing on the market as the Baby Boomers die off.

So good news for the homeless!

[Seymore]

Originally Posted by Discovery 15797

Can you articulate a specific conflict between admiralty law and a local, or state regulation regarding anchoring restrictions?

Thank you for your response. No, I can't, I'm not professional in this area.

How about it, guys, can anyone bring up an article in the US Code that says navigation is not to be interfered with by States?

[Poche]

Originally Posted by Seymore

How about it, guys, can anyone bring up an article in the US Code that says navigation is not to be interfered with by States?

Here is a link that might have helpful information.

https://www.law.ufl.edu/_pdf/academi...s/anchaway.pdf

One sentence seems to say it all: "The state maintained that it had au‐
thority to regulate anchoring because the water and the land underneath the wa‐
ter had been passed on to the state by the federal government in the Submerged
Lands Act.

[Discovery 15797]

[QUOTE=Seymore;3026230
How about it, guys, can anyone bring up an article in the US Code that says navigation is not to be interfered with by States?[/QUOTE]

Based on previous court rulings I think any article or opinion would be conjecture.

Originally Posted by Poche

Here is a link that might have helpful information.
https://www.law.ufl.edu/_pdf/academi...s/anchaway.pdf

I think the 2 key statements in this paper are...

In Murphy v. Department of Natural Resources, the Coast Guardʹs position was accepted to mean that “no Federal law exists in the area of anchorage and mooring."

and....

State authority to regulate anchorages was upheld by the 9th Circuit Court against a preemption challenge in Barber v. State of Hawaii.

As much as we may not like it....I think we're likely to come out on the losing end of any argument involving a state's ability to regulate anchoring within 3 miles for other than emergencies.

[GordMay]

U.S. Code Title 33. NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS
☞ https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/33

[a64pilot]

Originally Posted by Pelagic

Apparently there will soon be a glut of housing on the market as the Baby Boomers die off.

So good news for the homeless!

However the glut will be the McMansions that younger people don’t seem to be as enamored with as their parents were.
The glut will also most probably be in interior Cities and not in Coastal Cities, particularly down South, but supposedly you will be able to get a very good deal in the Rust belt.
I figure I’m seven to ten years from buying another house so I’ve been watching the market forecasts just a little.
My belief is first that it’s not going to be as big an issue as forecasted, it never is, but it could possibly start another housing crisis if you will similar to 08. It may not take much, or it may not.

[Poche]

Originally Posted by GordMay

U.S. Code Title 33. NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS
☞ https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/33

"The Secretary of Homeland Security is authorized, empowered, and directed to define and establish anchorage grounds for vessels in all harbors, rivers, bays, and other navigable waters of the United States whenever it is manifest to the said Secretary that the maritime or commercial interests of the United States require such anchorage grounds for safe navigation and the establishment of such anchorage grounds shall have been recommended by the Chief of Engineers, and to adopt suitable rules and regulations in relation thereto; and such rules and regulations shall be enforced by the Coast Guard under the direction of the Secretary of Transportation: Provided, That at ports or places where there is no Coast Guard vessel available such rules and regulations may be enforced by the Chief of Engineers under the direction of the Secretary of Homeland Security."

This does not say whether they can defer authority to states and or municipalities but they probably can.

[Poche]

Originally Posted by Discovery 15797

Based on previous court rulings I think any article or opinion would be conjecture.

Agree to that!

As much as we may not like it....I think we're likely to come out on the losing end of any argument involving a state's ability to regulate anchoring within 3 miles for other than emergencies.

Most likely your efforts to get an equitable situation in your area would be best at a city council level.

We have a very accessible council woman in our district. That would be a good shot.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

U.S. Code Title 33. NAVIGATION AND NAVIGABLE WATERS
☞ https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/33

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...10_main_02.tpl
Just need to find your specific area

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by newhaul

https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...10_main_02.tpl
Just need to find your specific area

SUPERLATIVE!I meant STUPENDOUS!

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by GordMay

SUPERLATIVE!I meant STUPENDOUS!

Was wondering because superlative can be used either as compliment or as a sarcastic adjective.

[Cool Hand Luke]

After reading a few posts... I can't believe how controlling these municipalities are and how ridiculous these laws are getting. I could understand moorings balls, but legal anchoring???

There was a fiasco a year or two ago when some Russian billionaire anchored his huge megayacht by the State of Liberty in New York City and New Jersey. People were getting upset because he was blocking the view of the Statue for the tourist boats. But honestly... I'm all for anchoring legally and not getting kicked out.

I know I'd like to be able to anchor my 40-foot mini yacht (compared to the 140-foot mega yacht) anywhere I'd like as long as it's legal and not in anyone's way. And I shouldn't be kicked out after a day, week, or month.

[Poche]

Originally Posted by Cool Hand Luke

After reading a few posts... I can't believe how controlling these municipalities are and how ridiculous these laws are getting. I could understand moorings balls, but legal anchoring???

As usual, a few spoil it for everybody.
The municipalities do over reach. Do you really blame them? Why would they risk being nice to even the responsible cruisers unless they are forced? They don't want to deal with a huge mess of the few derelict boats.
Also, the decision makers in the local governments may not be boaters and don't understand. I'm sure they sit in their offices and think "but we have marinas for the boats, what is the problem?".
So, that's why I'm thinking pressure from your district council person might be the best way to deal with it.