Richardson Bay liveaboards, heads up!

[Schooner Chandlery]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

I know of an old army vet who lives on his boat. he has multiple health issues. He was a 30 year vet (airborne) and was hoping to get in a vets home for his last year or two of life. No such luck. No room.

As the daugther of a disabled vet and wife of a military retiree, one thing I know a little about is the VA system. In the USA, veterans retire with fewer years of service than 30. He would have been eligible to retire and have a retirement stipend. 30 years is a lot. No one serves 30 years and doesn't retire. The stipend would be decent even if he never progressed beyond E1. Something about this one sounds fishy. Retirees have health insurance available and if they're really needy, they can be seen for free at VA and military facilities. Vets it is the VA only though, even then it is free. Disabled vets and retirees both are high on the list for VA nursing homes. He would not be turned away from them. You can call the VA on his behalf but there are probably other circumstances. For example, if the person has a drinking problem, they're not going to be able to drink while in a VA nursing home--that could be similar to that fellow's situation and he may not be willing to go into a facility where he cannot drink? There is more to the story.

[Island Time O25]

It is very frustrating that time and again some (many?) people in general lump together two totally separate issues. One is the derelicts and what to do with them. And the other is the "funny" people and their boats (not derelicts) which are just not visually appealing to some/many. Once we can get past this confusion I think some more effective solutions to the derelict issue may take shape. As to the second issue - I don't think there should be any add'l laws or regs since beauty is in the eye of the beholder. As long as these unappealing (to some) boats are verified as "seaworthy" that should be the end of the discussion. At least until the next annual inspection.

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by Schooner Chandlery

As the daugther of a disabled vet and wife of a military retiree, one thing I know a little about is the VA system. In the USA, veterans retire with fewer years of service than 30. He would have been eligible to retire and have a retirement stipend. 30 years is a lot. No one serves 30 years and doesn't retire. The stipend would be decent even if he never progressed beyond E1. Something about this one sounds fishy. Retirees have health insurance available and if they're really needy, they can be seen for free at VA and military facilities. Vets it is the VA only though, even then it is free. Disabled vets and retirees both are high on the list for VA nursing homes. He would not be turned away from them. You can call the VA on his behalf but there are probably other circumstances. For example, if the person has a drinking problem, they're not going to be able to drink while in a VA nursing home--that could be similar to that fellow's situation and he may not be willing to go into a facility where he cannot drink? There is more to the story.

I agree there is more to the story than just fullup vets homes. Btw there are programs nation wide that specificly address the homeless vets issue. He may just be unwilling to follow the rules of the programs.

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by Schooner Chandlery

As the daugther of a disabled vet and wife of a military retiree, one thing I know a little about is the VA system.

Oddly both my parents were vets and I was born on base. I oddly am the black sheep as I did not go military....

Just telling it as I was told. Oh, he gets va care, all he has to do is get a ride to the va 70 miles away. He's not suppose to drive any more though he still does.

[Schooner Chandlery]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Oddly both my parents were vets and I was born on base. I oddly am the black sheep as I did not go military....

Just telling it as I was told. Oh, he gets va care, all he has to do is get a ride to the va 70 miles away. He's not suppose to drive any more though he still does.

Fellow must not be in RB since there's several VA in the Bay area within a few miles of him if he's there. Glad he's not there. The Travis AFB VA is a great resource for Delta area vets as well. If I were a vet, I'd be sorely tempted to be in one of the numerous inexpensive marinas in the Delta. W/o paying a liveaboard fee you can travel between various marinas and anchorages indefinitely there and it really is lovely. If your mast is short enough, you can even get up into Sacramento and enjoy some places up there, too. All very inexpensive to boot. Of course, marinas for the winters or at least the lesser sloughs because of all the recent rains!

[Schooner Chandlery]

For sedate boaters on a budget who actually have a functional and safe boat, traveling between the Bay area and SoCal indefinitely would be my choice. While a boater cannot stay anywhere in SoCal for very long, there are loads of places they CAN stay short term for free as long as they're willing to actually move their boat and sail. If they are capable sailors and their boat the same, they could even extend the travels down into Mexico (Sea of Cortez and beyond) and up into Canada and Southeastern Alaska. All of it is accessible coastal cruising, contrary to what some will say. The west coast is lovely cruising grounds with many, many inexpensive digs for those who are retired or otherwise flexible about the location they may drop the hook.

RB becomes just a tiny bit of the overall scene for such boaters. In our travels, we've met several retirees who enjoy the west coast as much as us -- and many on a shoestring budget. RB just is NOT the place for that shoestring budget. Even when we've stayed there (once for a few weeks) we did note that the costs of nearby grocers or cafes were beyond our own taste. We cooked and ate aboard 99% of the time and shopped away from Marin. Great place to visit but not a good spot for the budget minded, IMO.

[Kenomac]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Snap is the official abbreviation for food stamps.

Gee Ken did not say you owned an apartment building, but don't you own commercial property with a few rental units above the first floor. So your saying you don't have time to volunteer? I thought you said everyone has time to volunteer. So working 80 hours a week for 1/2 a year is just like working full time. No wonder your grumpy.

The RB issue is a problem no question. Not sure where the folks should go. DO we spread them out around the bay and delta. OH wait, there are laws limiting anchor outs everywhere in the bay and delta. Where do they go. How do they get there.

The short answer is there is not enough resources (money) available to add enough housing. Mind you new low income hosuing is being planned and built but that takes years and years and is full up before type even open.

I don't know what I need to say in order to prove to you that I don't own any rental apartments and never have owned any. I own an office building.... period, which has but one single apartment where my wife and I live. I really don't understand how my situation applies to the discussion at hand. But I do find a few hours each week to volunteer my time in order to help others.

You should try doing the same instead of poking at people who do. Who knows... you might even find it personally rewarding like us in more ways than one. Try it, you might even like it.

[lelievre12]

Originally Posted by lelievre12

A skiff overturned off Schoonmakers with 3 aboard in the SW gale last week. 3 helicopters spent 4 hours looking for one of the folks whom didn't make it ashore from the frigid water. Big $$$ in search costs to the dear taxpayers.

Yesterday a body floated up at Sausalito Yacht Harbor and the police spent all day pulling out the body.

During the storms 12 boats either sank or dragged ashore. Many had people or animals aboard at the time.

This really shouldn't be a discussion about whether it's Ok for homeless folks to live on boats. To me it's more a discussion on how the Richardson Bay Regional Authority could permit transient use of its anchorage during deadly gales. The RBRA has a duty of care to ensure safety for all boaters in the bay. The simple fact is that boats have no place in Richardson Bay during deadly winter gales. It's just too dangerous. Why the RBRA would relax its own 72 hour transient rule when people are dying out there is more than negligent.

RB death made the news this time:

Body pulled from Richardson Bay off Sausalito

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Oddly both my parents were vets and I was born on base. I oddly am the black sheep as I did not go military....

Just telling it as I was told. Oh, he gets va care, all he has to do is get a ride to the va 70 miles away. He's not suppose to drive any more though he still does.

SC this is just for info for you to lass along to any vets you may come across in the bay area
https://www.va.gov/directory/guide/facility.asp?id=152

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by Schooner Chandlery

If I were a vet, I'd be sorely tempted to be in one of the numerous inexpensive marinas in the Delta. W/o paying a liveaboard fee you can travel between various marinas and anchorages indefinitely there and it really is lovely.

Oh gee, there you go telling EVERYONE, my little secret. It is lovely and FAR nicer then the central bay.

[sailorchic34]

Originally Posted by Kenomac

You should try doing the same instead of poking at people who do. Who knows... you might even find it personally rewarding like us in more ways than one. Try it, you might even like it.

HA, I am a massive introvert, so crowds (more then 2 people) and... shudder, talking to strange people face to face is so not in my comfort zone. So So lucky the internet came along and I can do work for people and moderate without ever actually meeting anyone. Lovely. Not even the folks that employ my services have met me face to face.

So, No I not a "People" person, I'm an engineer, which lays at the other end of the bell curve. Meet people and interact, Sorry I don't go there. Not going to happen.

I do however take care of stray cats. Somebody has too.

[Schooner Chandlery]

Originally Posted by sailorchic34

Oh gee, there you go telling EVERYONE, my little secret. It is lovely and FAR nicer then the central bay.

Well, not so much of a secret but I do think any boater can easily wander around the Delta and enjoy it very inexpensively. There are many retirees who do so. Popping down into the Bay for various reasons is a viable thing and should be enjoyable as well. However, this is not the lifestyle for someone who needs to get to work at point x at certain time y. Then, marina-based liveaboard or even better yet shore-based housing is really a necessity.

As much as people talk about lack of affordable housing, there are people renting rooms (e.g. I know a former cruiser who has a small house in Brisbane, CA who rents a room to another person) or sharing houses or apartments. I am speaking about non-boaters here. For every non-boater somehow squatting on an unseaworthy hunk of junk, there are 100 non-boaters who are sharing housing affordably in the Bay area. And thousands of people living elsewhere in places with lower costs of living than coastal cities in California.

Want to hear about the fellow I know who built a tiny yurt village on little bit of land he rented-to-own in northern CA? Where there's a will there's a way.

[Gadagirl]

When I read this article I immediately thought of this thread.

Greg Gopman is a technology entrepreneur with a solution for San Francisco’s homelessness crisis. It is not your usual shelter or affordable housing. It is a cruise ship.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-san-francisco

Of course the article says "off shore" and I think it might better work docked. It is a creative idea!

[Schooner Chandlery]

Originally Posted by Gadagirl

When I read this article I immediately thought of this thread.

Greg Gopman is a technology entrepreneur with a solution for San Francisco’s homelessness crisis. It is not your usual shelter or affordable housing. It is a cruise ship.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-san-francisco

Of course the article says "off shore" and I think it might better work docked. It is a creative idea!

OK that sounds no better than something like a prison -- round them all up and put 'em on a cruise ship to rot? Used to round them all up and send them to the colonies. To bad, no more colonies?

The real problem I'm seeing is that the land-based folks are actually thinking, figuratively, of discarding of people into the ocean much as they used to discard trash to the ocean. People are not trash. The homeless don't deserve to be stuck on floating heaps in RB nor do they deserve to be plunked into a prison of a cruise ship.

Don't you remember the cruise ship that came to New Orleans for Katrina and literally nobody would use it? They were afraid to go there, aboard, and there were many problems with the people who DID use it. Bad situation all the way around.

If the local zoning authorities would get realistic about minimum lot size, minimum apartment size and the rest, it might be possible for people to live more affordably on land rather than being offloaded to the sea. Of course, there's always the option of moving inland to more affordable digs, too.

[Gadagirl]

I didn't say I agreed with sending them off shore! Attached to a dock it becomes water front property. Did you read the entire article? They'd like to offer clinics and different services in common areas. No different than squeezing people into apartment buildings, shared housing (group homes) etc.. And they can accommodate a lot of people for the sq. footage.