A small team is being formed, reporting directly to County CEO Tom Mauk, to look at slip rental rates at Dana Point Harbor.  Mike Killebrew from the City of Dana Point (19 years experience with Long Beach Harbor Department), Lisa Smith and Gross from OC DPH will also participate.  Boaters will be represented by DPBA.

 

The group is interested in adding a boater who is on the wait list but does not already have slip in the harbor.  If that's you, or you know someone, please drop us a line (click here) or call and leave us a message at (949) 485-5656.  
 
So what's afoot?  The team's over arching goal is to figure out what the proper slip fees for Dana Point Harbor should be and establish a time phased program to implement proper slip fees, across the board.   As you know, DPBA has been working diligently to convince the various levels of County Government involved with decision making to make the case that our slip fees are overpriced.   This initiative is demonstration that we have gained traction, especially as relates to smaller slips.
 
What does this mean to us boaters?  Slips rates will NOT go up.  Rates may (in fact should) go down, especially for the smaller slip sizes.
 
Discussion topics already on our agenda:
 
1. Figuring out a proper basis of comparison for DPH slip rates versus rates in other harbors.

 

We've been saying, and think it is now being heard, that DPH rates should be priced to be comparable to other municipally owned marinas.  Other words, since DPH marinas are non-profit, there should be no "profit" markup and DPH slip rates should not be compared to marinas where there is profit markup. 

 
2. Taking a serious look at square foot (instead of by linear foot) based slip pricing?

 

We've been demonstrating that smaller slip renters are paying more for the square footage they use than than the renters of the largest slips.  This is unfair and again, we think this is starting to resonate.
 
3. Assuring the slip rents recover all water side costs + water side reserves, but do not to unfairly burden boaters to recover land side costs + reserves.
 

Stay tuned. We will, as always keep our members informed as events unfold.

 

 

Here again, the issue is finding a fair method for recovering costs.  The Harbor Patrol is doing a great job in dangerous and difficult work and we greatly appreciate their service.  Their cost for providing service (except for pension fund contributions which is a whole different discussion) is very reasonable too. 
 
However, starting this year the Dana Point Harbor Patrol Station is now being funded (slightly more than 100% of costs) from the Dana Point Tidelands Trust.  That means boaters are ending up paying even more than otherwise, since the Tidelands Trust is primarily funded, in fact gains over 75% of its net revenues, from slip and dry storage rents.
 
It's certainly true that a portion of the services this department of the OC Sheriff provides are to and for our harbor.  However, they also maintain multiple heavily equipped, very expensive ocean going vessels and operate them 24/7/365 days a year.  These vessels, with crews of two, provide public safety and law enforcement services as well as various Department of Homeland Security services (drug enforcement, immigration enforcement, war-on-terror) on over 42 square miles of ocean.  Obviously these ocean services have little to do with the Harbor itself.  
 
To add insult to injury, the Sheriff Office gets significant federal funding from the Department of Homeland Security, but somehow the Sheriff thinks this money has nothing to do with the 42 square miles of ocean patrolled by the Dana Point "Harbor" Patrol.  Or maybe better said, the Sheriff thinks that we boaters have deep pockets?
 
One other thing.  The Dana Point Harbor Patrol is receiving what the State Lands Commission (SLC) thinks is a gift of public funds since they are not paying rent for the significant land, building and dock space they occupy in our harbor. 
 
Anyway, ranting aside, there's some good news here.  With the pressure we have been applying through the SLC, as well as the spirit of fairness and cooperation being demonstrated by County CEO Tom Mauk, Supervisor Pat Bates and her staff, we are making good headway.   The problem of the current Harbor Patrol scheme funding being unfair to Dana Point boaters, as well as being in violation of the law (Tidelands Trust agreement in particular), is pretty well understood now.  
 
One way or another, we believe it will be solved over the next several months.  The end game is murky because of the current economic situation (3.75 million dollars per year is a lot of money even in "The OC") but the ball is in Tom Mauk's court and we have another meeting planed in about six weeks.   Later this summer we anticipate that we will be meeting in Dana Point with the SLC, OC DPH and others on this same topic.

 

Since then, OC DPH's technical design consultant team has been taking a serious look at it, as well as extensions on the theme.  We've seen some interim drawings lately (structural design approaches) that still have problems but very look promising.

 

It's not potage yet (thick soup) but it sure looks and smells like soup.  We'll let you know more soon.  As always, contact us if you would like more background.

 

 

DPBA testified during California Coastal Commission (CCC) hearings last fall regarding work we had been doing with OC DPH and others both on the land and water sides.  On the water side we wanted limited slip size remix (more slips in the 35-40 foot range) and at the same time a minimum number, ideally zero, lost slips under 30 feet.  The CCC supported our requested changes.  
 
On the land side last October we had issues with the surface square footage downsizing within the Embarcadero Marina and the reduced number of mast up dry storage spaces proposed.  CCC also supported these requested changes.  
 
The LCPA (Land Coastal Program Amendment), Land Use Plan (LUP) portion) which CCC approved contained corresponding stipulations for both the water and land sides.  

Our positions then on both land and water were no surprise to OC DPH of course because we had been working closely with them for many months beforehand.  Since last October, the collaboration between DPBA and OC DPH has continued and it will continue as we move forward.  
 
Simply put, our goal is no slip loss and no mast up dry storage space loss.  We believe the LUP that went before the CCC last Tuesday, June 9th provided the necessary language to achieve our goal.  Therefore we would have testified in support of its passage (agenda item 18A) were the LUP to have come to the floor for a vote.  However, it did not; as a technicality was raised in the revised language regarding one of the stipulations, heard first as agenda item 20A, prior to agenda item 18A.  
 

The revised language discussed as agenda item 20A was ultimately approved, but with one requirement for clarification.  We won't bore you with painful details of the discussion here but suffice to say that one word, "heights" will likely be added to a sentence about "buildings being compatible with the community".  
 
Unfortunately, the LUP revised language must come before Dana Point City Council again for approval before the LUP itself can be re-agendized at a future CCC hearing.  This represents another delay, perhaps 60 days.  However the Implementation Plan (IP) portion of the LCPA is sill targeted for hearing by the CCC in November.  So while it is likely that more public funds are being spent than would be otherwise, the overall schedule for downstream events remains the same.  Here's a look ahead:

 

The LCPA (made up of the approved LUP and IP portions) will replace the existing LCP once approved, perhaps in November.  Then the land side of the Revitalization Project can legally proceed with preparation / submission of Coastal Development Permits (CDPs) to the City of Dana Point, probably sometime next year.

 

The water side of the Revitalization project is further down the road.  The Subsequent Environmental Impact (SEIR) will be available for review probably sometime later this summer.  The SEIR must be reviewed by boaters and the general public and approved by various state and federal agencies, including the CCC.  Then CDPs can be prepared and heard, directly before the CCC (not the City of Dana Point).  Our crystal ball is still a little murky as to when this will be, but it's certainly not soon. 

 

 

We have two surveys open right now which are very important to Dana Point boaters.

 

The first survey, concerning the Parking Task Force should be of concern to any boater who parks at Dana Point Harbor.  Let's see now, who cares about boater parking?  This survey takes less than 5 minutes to complete.

 

The second survey is more comprehensive and should be of interest to all boaters who have been or think they might ever be interested in either: 1) trailer boating  or 2) using your boat by appointment.  It takes 15 minutes to complete but it's a smart investment!

 

To take either of these surveys click here.

 

We announced some very good news for boaters in our February 26th Boater Blast.  We're waiving dues for 2010, for three very good reasons.  This is a great opportunity for boaters and there are absolutely no strings attached!

 

To learn more click here.