Harbor Management Commission - Special Meeting

Let's go ahead and get started on this one. We have reached the time of 7:05. I'd like to call the uh meeting to order. We have a quorum. So, that's outstanding. For this special meeting, uh we have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. We the only person we don't have um right now on is Acasta as a permanent person as well. I think that's it, right? Um Mike, can you take are you taking notes for this meeting? I am I have the sheet out. I'm taking notes for our minutes. Thank you. I appreciate it. No problem. So, um, next one in line to be seated for Acasta would be, if I'm not mistaken, it's it is Rich. Is that correct? Yes. So, I'm going to see Rich for for Dave as a voting member. Okay. Okay. All right. Very good. Um, new business. That's brings us to item number two, discussion in motion proposed changes at the old lime town code 58. And I'm going to let um Matt segue in real quick just to provide any other amplifying information before we talk about it further. [Music] Hey Matt on there. Yep. Sorry I muted myself and it took me a second to figure it out. Um, so I you should be able to hear me, right? Yeah, we got perfect. All right. Um, so where um where where do you want where do you want me to start, Mike? All right. I just wanted to say is there uh anything different from what we discussed at the previous meeting? Is there anything else that we should be made aware of before? Um, we I'm sure we've all read the document. You provided us with drafts and uh this should just be a formality, but I just wanted to give you the opportunity to discuss anything further. Um, so the the latest version was sent out uh

yesterday, I believe, because we had some input from Mike regarding the upland support areas of all of our um water access points. So that that was the last change. Um, I did receive a letter today uh from the Sound View Commission. Um, Terry and I were there. Um, and I'll just read it to you. I thought I'd be able to screen share, but I don't see that, so I'll just read it to you. It's kind of short. Um, on behalf of the Sound View Commission, I would like to thank you for attending our recent meeting of April 28. Waterfront management has been a priority of the SBC since its establishment in 2010. Watercraft and vessels encroaching on recreational swim areas has been a chronic issue for years, creating safety and environmental concerns. The SBC welcomes the opportunity to work with the Harbor Master and Harbor Management Commission to address these concerns. Our review of the red line portions of the proposed ordinance is focused on sections that concern the Sound View waterfront, specifically the water taxi lane. Um so they did have a couple corrections um that are not in the um chain um updates that were sent out yesterday. Um they are rather small ones. Um the first one is on 58-8 uh revise the date amended from 121498 to the current. Um on line 58-6 uh section D east should be easterly. Um and the uh the biggest change was that when we added the violations um I needed to update the sections referring to it. So we

um 58-8B should be any person who violates 58-6 C or 58-6D shall be subject to a fine. So, that includes any of those newer swim zone um proposed ordinances would also have a fine. That would be the 58-6D. And I didn't have that in the uh um um in the original fine part um because we added that section. So, um they would also like to have uh fines for the discharge of refuge uh refugees. Um, I didn't put uh any of that in there. That's that's an option for you guys. I'm just relaying it. That was their request. Um, and their their biggest concern is the uh their last paragraph. While the proposed changes do go a long way in addressing many of our concerns. There is an interpretation we take exception to. The 1987 stipulated agreement sections three established the boat lane for use by the defendants with one ferry boat for transportation of customers to and from shore. This section of the agreement defines the boat lane use and intent. We believe the HMC andor deep interpretation of boat lane use for all watercraft less than 35 horsepower is incorrect and will further create a chaotic situation in the limited boat lane area. Um, so those were that's just their re that's just their recommendation. We told them that um it's really not crowded. They think that thousands of dingies are going to look like Block Island dinghy dock and they're all going to be coming into that boat lane and I I've never seen one dinghy to be honest with you leave a yacht and come into

Sound View. So yeah, from my from my past experience or in time out there last year, the boats that um I typically saw out there were not boats that were even capable of carrying dingies. So, um it's it's my my personal belief that that's not going to be a major uh um major use of of dingies. Every time I park my 25 foot wellcraftraft in there, I never have any problems with dingies in the way. Oh boy. Typical. So c do we even have the authority to restrict vessels in a specific lane to one person's vessel? Like one group of people's vessel. No is gonna shut that down. Yeah, they wouldn't allow us to say that's the only boat allowed to go into like this navigable area. Um, so I asked Deep if they would be supportive of any language um that restricted just the one water taxi into the boat lane and their reply back was that they would not be supportive of of of that that that sort of language. So um can't block the public trust. Yes, it's it's definitely their interpretation that um it is public access with that stipulated agreement. It's limiting the horsepower. Um, deep was also all okay, even though it's not in the stipulated agreement, um, with my recommendations of, um, having the, uh, any dingies that go in there, um, not be unattended, um, andor limiting them to 5 minutes. So, they can't go in there and, you know, say they're picking up for half an hour sort of thing. All right. Any further discussion on what's been uh amplified from the previous meeting from the uh recent meeting over at uh Sound View.

Matt, was that it? Uh that was uh yeah, that was that was pretty pretty much that was everything in their letter that they sent to me uh this afternoon. Um and there there really wasn't anything else uh um that came up uh at the meeting itself. All right. So I guess we're gonna have to say when we go ahead if if someone would is there any further discussion on it actually is the question at this point. Is there any further discussion on the proposal Matt send out with the additional points um with a new date and with the additional um this one of the point you want the violations and adding the um I can't even read my own handwriting. I can forward you the email. I can I I can forward to everybody, but uh Mike, I'll forward you the email so you see the uh exact uh um so it's 58-8, right? You they wanted you to add the new date of today. Uh yes, 58-8 is uh the current date of the current amended date. Okay. Um 58-6D line five eastly eitherly. Mhm. Uh 58-8B. Uh line one, add 58-6D to read, "Any person who violates 58-6 C or 58-6D shall be subject to a fine." And I just want to make mention there was a bunch of conversation about having boat seiz seizures. we're having a seizure seizing trying to take it. If there's a third violation, we kind of um we decided that is not a smart thing to do. That's a whole different world

trying to take people's vessels. So, we we got rid of that. They had made that suggestion. Um the other suggestion obviously is they don't want any vessels in there. And again, we're trying to work, you know, everybody work together, Sound View, Harbor Management Commission. Um, but you know, again, we want to hear their concerns because that is their they're down there trying to, you know, corral its chaos. So, I understand that they want a stiffer penalty, but we're just not in the business right now without a police vote um or police officers being able to write these tickets. Very good. I think we are we're all understanding in agreement of that. We just don't have the bandwidth and the onwater presence to enforce it. So what's why put it out there right now? And this letter put a ranger on a paddle board. Yeah, they wrote this letter because honestly we'll just attach it to our minutes and making sure that they have a voice and that we're hearing them and um and that it just goes into our minutes so it's on record. Outstanding. I agree with that. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Um, is there any further discussion on the proposed changes with the additional things mentioned by um by Matt to the T No Lime Code 58? Hey, hey, Mike. I I just had my hand raised. I don't know if it can be seen, but um I can see it now. Yep, there it is. Okay. Yeah. So, I was just um now I know this is not pertaining to the content, the official content by any means, but it's it's just something that this is an official document um and it came up in a couple of spots. Just the the the gender pronouns, he I I don't know. I think that should be more universal. Um I don't know if they do he

she still or what, but um it just drives an assumption on the on the document itself. when it comes to uh yeah, we'll look at that to make sure where the language I guess is um it just feels a little bit archaic when I read that and you could even go back to saying the boat owner. I mean that's kind of repetitive but um you know boat owner I suppose they giving that as an example referring to who they're talking about. Yeah. So this is actually so preliminary to be honest with you. This all goes now next. And I agree with you. Anything that we can those are good ballot changes. We can't now it goes to the to the town attorney. The town attorney is going to put in all of those fancy reconfiguring and keeping it obviously the language the the the substance the same but the language is going to change. So, we'll probably get that back from the town attorney. Again, even though we're approving to do these certain specific ordinances, the town attorney is going to take it and dissect it, put it into different language. We'll make that mention to him and then um it'll come back to us after that before it goes to vote um at with the selectman. And then after that, then it goes to um when does it go after that, Mike? Oh, it goes to the town. Right. Yeah. Right. And I I think that you know once when we get that back again we'll make mention of that then we'll send it back out to everybody to just do a final that change that one. Yeah. No, she definitely did. Yeah. All right. Very good. appreciate that that uh that comment and that concern. So, all right. Um

is there anything other um when it comes to discussion on this proposal hearing? None. Would somebody like to put a motion on the table to approve um the OAM town code 58 changes for the harbor master with the addition of those three items previously discussed? I do. Yeah, I do. Finley makes a motion. Can I get a second? Ma second. No, wait a minute. Who else? I heard one other one. Sorry. Sloan seconds. Yeah. No, Sloan seconds. So, Finley Sloan seconds. All right. So, we have a motion. Um, no further discussion. Can I go to a vote? All in favor? I I any not sure if I vote here but I All right. Any opposed? Hearing none and hearing no further discussion. The motion carries. All right. I appreciate it. Can you guys hear me now? Yep. Yeah. All right. So, moving on to Who is that? Barnes. Yeah, we just lost him, I think. You just lost him again. Anyway, that's not a bad thing. Keep it going. I got to eat dinner. No, I'm just kidding. That's right. This This mute button is great. No, just kidding. Um, can I get another motion? Section 3A. Motion to adjurnn. Next meeting May 13, 2025 at 7 p.m. A motion. I will motion to adjurnn. Thank you. Motion to turn. We are journ. Thanks. Thanks for taking your time.