Item I05
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY
Meeting Date: 19 Julv 2006
Division:
Growth Management
Bulk Item: Yes --X- No
Department:
Marine Resources
Staff Contact:
George Garrett
AGENDA ITEM \VORDING:
Approval of a Resolution requesting the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission and the Florida
Boating Advisory Council oppose the suggested legislation of a requirement to register non-motorized vessels
ITEM BACKGROUND:
On several occasions the Florida Boating Advisory Council has discussed the issue of potentially requiring the
registration of non-motorized vessels. Such vessels include kayaks and canoes. In general, it is felt that the
impact of such vessels on infrastructure, the need to fund infrastructural improvements, or on law enforcement
is minimal. The attached resolution would provide needed input to both the Florida Boating Advisory Council
and Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission indicating that the Monroe County Board of County
Commissioners does not believe that non-motorized vessels should be required to be registered.
PREVIOUS RELEVANT BOCC ACTION:
None
CONTRACT/AGREEMENT CHANGES:
None
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS;
Approval
TOTAL COST:
None
COST TO COUNTY:
None
BUDGETED: Yes
SOURCE OF FUNDS:
No
REVENUE PRODUCING: Yes
No --X- AMOUNT Per Month
Year
APPROVED BY: County Atty --X- o MB!Purchasing NA
DIVISION DIRECTOR APPROVAL:
DOCUMENTATION:
roski, Director of Growth Manag ment
. /
Included --X- Not ReqUired t
DISPOSITION:
AGENDA ITEM NO.:
13C060750 Non.Rcgislercd AIS.doc
6/26/20068:30:00 AM
Marine Resources
RESOLUTION NO. 2006
A RESOLUTION BY THE MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS REQUESTING THE FLORIDA
FISH AND WILDLIFE CONSERVATION COMMISSION AND
THE STATE BOATING ADVISORY COUNCIL TO OPPOSE
THE SUGGESTED LEGISLATION OF A REQUIREMENT TO
REGISTER NON-lVIOTORIZED VESSELS.
WHEREAS, the waters of the Florida Keys are enjoyed by numerous
manually propelled and wind driven vessel operators; and
WHEREAS, Monroe County recognizes that non-powered vessels provide a
passive, low impact, non-invasive, environmentally friendly form of boating; and
WHEREAS, Monroe County is supportive of canoeing and kayaking and
has been instrumental in the development of the Florida Keys Overseas Paddling
Trail; and
WHEREAS, non-motorized vessels typically reqUire little if any
infrastructure, facilities or public funded services; and
\VHEREAS, non-motorized vessel owners should not be burdened with
unnecessary fees or taxes; and
WHEREAS, the Monroe County Marine and Port Advisory Committee has
recommended opposition to the registration of non-motorized vessels.
NO\V THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMl\HSSIONERS OF lVIONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA THAT:
Section 1. The Board of County Commissioners wishes to convey to the Florida
Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, the State Boating Advisory Council,
and the Florida Legislature by this Resolution opposition to any proposed
legislation requiring registration of non -motorized vessels in the State of Florida.
BC060751 Resol Regis Non~l11ot(lr vessels
6/28/20066:02 PM
Marine Resources
Section 2. This Resolution is presented to appropriate representatives of the
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, the State Boating Advisory
Council, and the County's State legislative representatives.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners, Monroe
County, Florida at a regular meeting of said Board held on the 19th day of July,
A.D., 2006.
Mayor Charles ltSonnyltMcCoy
Mayor Pro Tern Dixie Spehar
Commissioner George Neugent
Commissioner David Rice
Commissioner Glenn Patton
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY:
MA YORlCHAIR PERSON
(SEAL)
ATTEST:
DANNY 1. KOLHAGE, CLERK
DEPUTY CLERK
BY:
[3C060751 Rcsol Regis NOll-molor vessels
6/28/20066:02 I'M
Information Sheet
for
Non-Motorized Vessel Registration Resolution
Background:
Currently there is no move by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Commission (FWC) to seek
legislation to register non-motorized vessels. However, FWC has been asked by the
Marine Industry Association of Florida (MIAF) to consider legislation for registering
non-motorized vessels. Conversations regarding whether non-motorized vessels used on
the waters of the State could justify paying into some sort of waterway impact fee has
been the subject of discussion for several years. The FWC, preferring to remain neutral
on the subject, tasked the State Boating Advisory Council (BAC) in 2005 with reviewing
the issues and considering the efficacy of registration of non-motorized vessels.
The BAC discussed the issue at its November 2005 meeting in Key Largo, and due to
much debate created a sub-committee to further review the issue. That sub-committee
met twice this year and members have been presented with information both for and
against the registration proposaL Much of the discussion had been based on funding
additional enforcement. CoL Julie Jones, Director of the FWC Division of Law
Enforcement and chair of the BAC, instructed the sub-committee to look at the needs of
non-motorized vessel operators (i.e. resources and services) rather than whether or not
funds generated by that user group could be utilized to provide additional enforcement.
Regarding what types of non-motorized vessels should be considered for registration, the
sub-committee did determine that water toys (surfboards, inner tubes, etc.) should not be
included in any registration considerations. The sub-committee is also considering
alternatives to registration such as one time tax, so as to minimize administrative costs,
feasibility issues (affixing a sticker), etc.
At the April 2006 BAC sub-committee meeting in Tallahassee numerous citizens (many
representing kayak and canoeing interests) indicated that paddlers neither want nor need
any infrastructure (i.e. ramps, markers, etc.) and that a registration fee would create an
undue burden on a user group that creates little to no impact on the environment or staff
resources unlike motorized vessels (i.e. seagrass scarring, manatee deaths, high speed
collisions, etc.). In addition, FWC and members of the sub-committee have received
close to a hundred letters, phone calls and other communications from around the state
strongly opposed to the consideration of registration (only one or two have been in
support). The sub-committee will meet again 15 September 2006 in St. Pete and may
make a final decision with a recommendation to the BAC. The sub-committee has heard
very little support for the registration concept. This issue was also in the local
newspapers in the Keys in the last several months. Articles and corresponding comments
from the community have indicated overwhelming opposition to registration.
Data Presented to the Non-Motorized Vessel Registration Sub-committee
Because the consideration of registration is only conceptual, it is impossible to anticipate
the amount of revenue that could be generated. The dollars generated would of course be
dependent upon the actual fees collected minus administrative costs. These details would
be developed by FWC and/or the Florida Legislature at some point in the future. The
Florida Bureau of Titles and Registration acknowledges that administrative costs are a
much higher percentage of the fees assessed when those fees are smaller (which would be
the case for small non-motorized vessels). Most states currently do not require paddle
craft or small sailboats to be registered, in part due to high administration costs and an
ineffective ability to return services to the public.
Arguments for registration:
It can generate some additional funds to be utilized for boating infrastructure
A matter of fairness
Ability to trace a vessel if stolen (also requires titling)
Arguments against registration:
Non-motorized vessel owners typically do not use boating infrastructure
Non-motorized vessels create no environmental damage or use fossil fuels
Not practical to affix a decal to many non-motorized vessels
Administrative costs outweigh revenue benefit
Overwhelming opposition by citizens around the state
Non-motorized vessels are involved in very few boating accidents
Titling those vessels would create an additional administrative nightmare
Cost of affixing numbers to the vessel may be greater than the revenue generated
Registration would affect the affordability of owning paddle craft, etc.
Registration would burden what is now an important nature-based tourist sector
Registration may encourage the use of motors on currently non-motorized vessels
Non-motorized, low impact vessel use should be encouraged