Liveaboards at the gate

[CaptJPMcGuire]

Originally Posted by Elleroo

Live aboards don't have sewers, don't have garbage collection, don't have any utilities.


So, should they pay property taxes?

Ah got your point --but we "Should" use sewers --not flush into the sea.
Ah got your point --but we "do have trash" we should not dump into the sea

As So --is there a fair and equitable 'tax' for the limited services cruisers do use? (USCG--DEM--Local Police-etc)

Sorry but I don't like having my freedoms taken away but when I'm using services you provide(with your landlubber taxes) am I taking some of your your paid for freedoms? Just asking

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Leighpilot

Now that’s truly freeloading. You might not have kids but you’re benefiting from having an educated population. You might not have a car but all you own was delivered by road. Every food item you have arrived by road. You might not be hooked up to the grid but you depend on lighthouses , swing bridges , fuel pumps etc that are hooked to the grid. If you’re benefiting from tax payer funded infrastructure, you need to pay taxes.

Yes, I'm sure I'm benefiting greatly from the barista with a phd in gender studies who will default on their 6 figure student loans.

Again, not suggesting education be cut off entirely but the burden should fall more heavily on those who use it most.

Just like your example of roads where the road users pay for the bulk of the road maintenance costs thru gas taxes and vehicle fees, while those who don't use the roads pay very little towards the roads (really just some pass thru costs for goods delivered by road).

The grid is generally not paid for by the govt, so if you don't have a connection, you don't pay for it.

[berniekatchor]

During our 22 yrs of cruising we spent about 4 years enjoying USA heading up every river we could find until power lines or lack of depth stopped us
Our first step on the river bank bought folk running down telling us to go away. I most countries their is accredited along a river bank for public. We explained this and we were. Australians as politely as Australians are capable. On at least 50 or 60 such occasions we were welcomed getting at the least a beer I say head for shore to meet these folk and be humble in front of them and this problem is solved. Yelling back st them does not help

[seamaiden]

Responding to the original issue (much has taken off from there to ancillary issues): Bad Behavior is found everywhere, in every situation, by people on both sides of the dispute. As far as I am concerned, anyone who behaves in a selfish, disrespectful, inconsiderate manner is at fault. I haven't included the obvious: acts that constitute crimes; violations of racial justice, land grabs, environmental destruction, wildlife eradication...including poaching, physical, mental and emotional abuses perpetrated against any human or animal....I don't think I need to continue, the list is endless.

Bottom line: be kind, be considerate, be generous and take responsibility for your actions or failure to act.

Originally Posted by sailjumanji

Hmmm, our property taxes don't support sewage treatment plants or garbage collection. We are billed for those monthly, by those utility entities.

The overwhelming majority of our property taxes goes to schools, which I guess live aboards don't have school age kids? Oh, but wait, neither do we.

The issue is always someone wants to anchor wherever they want, have shore access wherever - including the ability to tie up their dinghy for as long as they want. A place to dispose of their trash, unless live aboards don't generate any? Pump out sewage is generally "free". Oh, and some want to have a place to park their car for free. And all with no time limit imposed.

Liveaboards in marinas or mooring fields pay for all of these services via their monthly lease. Certainly no property owner has an issue with that, nor for transient anchoring for short to moderate lengths of time. It's the "I want to put my floating apartment here forever, and you need to provide me services for free" that gets the liveaboard a bad name.

[Krogen42]

This a tale of multiple problems that get run together for the benefit of property owners who buy the land and think that the get all of the adjacent natural resources for free. Mostly a media blitz a simple one sided view of a complicated problem. The 3 principle interests include:
1. Waterfront homeowners who don’t want derelicts squatting in front of there property just like any other homeowner does not want homeless squatters in a National Park that may be adjacent to their property.
2. Squatters on boats that move into an area and take up permanent residence anchored in a public area.
3. Legitimate boaters, most of whom own homes and pay taxes, that may anchor for a day or week to visit an area and then move on. Thee legitimate boaters don’t want the squatters either. They are a blight and many times a security risk.

This homeowners and boaters are both powerful groups that are fighting each other and not accomplishing anything. Why can’t the boaters and the homeowners recognize the real issue and solve the problem rather that fighting each other?

[fred4936]

We had a similar issue in a particular cove on Great South Bay. A small private community told us ( we were in a group of boats from our sailing club) that we were not allowed to anchor overnight there. This happened several times, with some rep from there rowing or paddle boarding out to inform us of our "indiscretion", with varying degrees of civility. My wife called the harbormaster of the town responsible for the waterways, and told us they are incorrect in their assertion. The waterways, at least here, are public domain.

[lestersails]

Originally Posted by sailjumanji

Hmmm, our property taxes don't support sewage treatment plants or garbage collection. We are billed for those monthly, by those utility entities.

This may be true for you, but not for all. Our property taxes pay for municipal trash collection and a gigantic 'waste transfer station' where county residents can (after showing a driver's license with a county address) can get rid of just about anything free of charge (up to about 1,000 pounds or so), including hazardous waste, electronics, metal for recycling, glass, paper, yard waste, building materials, it goes on and on.
I recognize that there are different philosophies about whether this should be a public or private enterprise activity. I previously lived in a place where it was private and everywhere we drove we could see trash and other refuse dumped in ravines and gullies - by those who didn't want to pay.
I'll avoid saying which approach I think is best - but either way you go there are consequences to the larger public.

[edlepera]

While I a, not a liveaboard yet. I do own a boat and pay yearly state and local taxes on it. The person who freeloaded and abused the hospitality is known in the south as a Idget An I hope was a extreme minority I hope, of live aboards On a separate note while in Sarasota recently. Having been invited to lunch at the local yacht club. I noticed there were quite a few boats on moorings that were not live aboard but rather neglected by members of the local yacht club. Covered in bird excrement with Tattered sale covers marine growth on Mooring cables. When I asked about sad states of those boats. I was told that it was acceptable. But when I inquire about live aboards renting a mooring. I was told that two weeks was permitted but the vessels must maintain a presentable appearance. Which sounded like double standards to me.

[KenSmithPEng]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

I'm all for user fees instead of general (and less than transparent) taxation. Those with school aged children should be paying for schools. Those with vehicles should be paying for road maintenance. And those with boats should be paying for marine based services. No one should be paying for services or goods they are not using. At least directly.

While it does make sense for those directly using services support those services, it is also fair that those indirectly using services to support them as well. For example, if I am not a driver, but I still buy goods on-line, I should be required to 'chip-in' for road construction and maintenance as I am indirectly using the roads. Similarly, I do not use the penal system. But I want one to exist, so I need to do my part to support a well functioning humane system. And the list of things I do not directly use but want to exist goes on and on including Policing, legal system, democratic voting, etc., etc. etc.



Unfortunately, we are living in a time when we have extremes between opinions on how society should best tax and spend our citizens. Worse, the problem is compounded by politicians that are more interested in their paycheque versus actual best for society decisions.


I cannot say that I have the solution, but I do know that I am willing to work with anyone on making our cities and towns the best-in-class at a global standard.


Fair skies and following seas to all.

[edlepera]

While I a, not a liveaboard yet. I do own a boat and pay yearly state and local taxes on it. The person or as in the south we would refer to as a Idget was a extreme minority I hope, of live aboards On a separate note while in Sarasota recently. Having been invited to lunch at the local yacht club. I noticed there were quite a few boats on moorings that were not live aboard but rather neglected by members of the local yacht club. Covered in bird excrement with Tattered sale covers marine growth on Mooring cables. When I asked about sad states of those boats. I was told that it was acceptable. But when I inquire about live aboards renting a mooring. I was told that two weeks was permitted but the vessels must maintain a presentable appearance. Which sounded like double standards to me.

[kurtis king]

i once lived at anchor in Monterey Bay, until i found a mooring to purchase. i owned no car at the time but rode a bicycle. while i had no "landlubbers" yelling from the shore the city harbor office waged a secret battle to oust me. no one said anything as at that time there was no rule against it. they did confiscate my dinghy, even though there was no sign advising the dock i used under the pier was off limits. Workers ran a cable underwater , purpose unknown, they ran it right over my stern anchor. i obviously had to dive on the anchor to find what it was snagged on. no coincidence i would say. later the city did pass an ordinance forbidding anchoring liveaboards but after i was on a mooring inside the breakwater ( i apologize for my one handed typing, broken right wrist, so 5 finger hunt and peck is my best.

[jahnje]

Originally Posted by dwedeking2

In key west we just shoot the poor, much easier.

https://thebluepaper.com/key-west-fw...his-houseboat/

Thanks for that link/story, I think that probably puts the widest perspective on things I've seen so far.

[mcon12000]

I would like to see more municipalities install mooring fields. It’s my preferred way to utilize trash, pump out and other services vs an actual slip. My hands down first choice is dropping the hook but after listening to both sides of this argument for years it seems like a way that both sides can be satisfied.

But

My boat was recently hit by a “Wet Storage” boat that broke off its mooring in Key West. The scene in KW is an example of why it’s difficult to solve this issue. Many of the boats in the area are rented like apartments and can’t move under their own power. It’s about as bad as it gets for anyone who doesn’t like anything other than a perfectly detailed yacht in their view. My boats not an eyesore or a magazine cover and I’m not saying get rid of anyone but I do think that the city could be more proactive when it comes to mooring and anchoring around KW. Anyway as a sailboat guy who pretty much lives on the hook I don’t like looking at a naked guy with a bucket anymore than the landlubbers but I can solve the issue by moving. Since I’ve never been asked to leave or gotten a stare down I’m guessing my natural tendency for privacy keeps me from being a problem.

Anyway this is a messy subject that both sides have to push around because adopting an attitude of “this won’t effect me” doesn’t work. We all know that this problem is fueled by homeowners staring at what they assume is a homeless person living on an ugly boat pooping in the water. We have to be proactive or we all get banned so whether you spend the weekends on your Hinkley or you live on a 30’ sailboat pay attention and participate in local debates. One boater at an homeowners association meeting can change minds and help improve our image.

[Nicholson58]

Originally Posted by Elleroo

Live aboards don't have sewers, don't have garbage collection, don't have any utilities.


So, should they pay property taxes?

Don’t have cars. We pay for pump out, fuel, cruising tags, moorings, dockage, insurance, food, restaurants etc. Fund the marine infrastructure, jobs. We do pay state and federal taxes and enable local businesses to pay theirs. My yacht’s value is probably 1/20 th or less than his McMansion. Just how much should I pay for a 15 X 58 chunk of bottom I cannot own each time I drop the hook? Additionally, the taxable time I ‘reside’ there is typically 4/365 of a year. N

Does the home owner own the land under the water? If he claims so his taxable estate just grew by a few acres. Will he be maintaining the navigation marks, dredging?

We consumed 150 gallons of diesel and 40 gallons of gasoline last year. We are mostly solar powered. What was the environmental insult the home owner inflicted?

My beautiful classic yacht temporarily improves his view.

The only real issue is abandoned or non functional derelict vessels.

[SaltireJock]

Originally Posted by Island Time O25

I'm all for user fees instead of general (and less than transparent) taxation. Those with school aged children should be paying for schools. Those with vehicles should be paying for road maintenance. And those with boats should be paying for marine based services. No one should be paying for services or goods they are not using. At least directly.

It benefits EVERYONE in society to have our kids given a rudimentary education, lest we want to see our economies collapse and general chaos reign! Since we liveaboards benefitted from education also, as well as the provision of the road transport infrastructure that facilities the movement of the goods and services we enjoy, and the hospitals we attend when ill or injured, then it makes sense that we ALL contribute towards the construction and upkeep of these universally-beneficial infrastructures.

In paying our marina or mooring fees we are, through the property and other taxes paid by the marinas, making that contribution. This is the same when renting an apartment- we contribute through the taxes paid by the property company.

But when anchored, we are freeloading (if then using the infrastructure and services without contribution)- just as we would be if camping in the woods and then expecting free use of the roads and hospitals and expecting young adults not to mug us in the street!

It makes absolutely NO SENSE for marinas to refuse liveaboards, unless of course they are a niusance. In doing so, the marinas are the ones denying our contribution to society as they will not be receiving our fees!

The whole argument is bogus.