Boating lobby sounds alarm against bill that would raise registration fees
PortCityDaily.com is your source for free news and information in the Wilmington area.
A vessel cuts into Brunswick County’s Lockwood Folly Inlet. Aerial by Google Maps.
The national boating lobby is decrying a state bill filed last month to hike vessel registration fees for money that would support shallow-draft inlet dredging.
The proposal from Senate Majority Leader Harry Brown (R-Onslow) would raise the three-year registration cost on a 20-foot boat, for example, by 275 percent, notes the Boat Owners Association of the United States, or BoatUS, which advocates for more than half a million members.
As filed, the bill seeks to fill a “Shallow Draft Inlet Dredging Fund,” which would only be used to cover the state’s share of costs in such projects. The state allocations would require dollar-for-dollar matching funds from a non-state source, such as a county or town government. (Port City Daily story about the bill’s filing)
It follows knowledge that the federal government isn’t in the shallow-draft inlet dredging business like it once was, meaning the state and local-level governments are having to step up. Brown noted the inlets are like highways and recreational grounds that can have tremendous value to neighboring economies.
Official information and updates on the proposal, Senate Bill 58, are viewable here.
BoatUs calls the proposal unfair.
In a release issued Tuesday afternoon, the group said it is “dedicated to preserving access to waterways but S.B. 58 places an unfair financial burden on recreational boaters while ignoring the responsibility of commercial fishing boats and for-hire charter fishing and head boats.”
The group added that boaters who primarily use the state’s non-coastal waters, like lakes and streams, would be paying more to support the maintenance of areas they may never use.
As filed, the bill replaces the current fees of $15 for a one-year registration and $40 for a three-year registration with a schedule of fees based on the length of the vessel.
The draft schedule for a one-year registration ranges from $15 for a vessel less than 14 feet to $150 for a vessel longer than 40 feet.
For a three-year card, the costs would range $45 for a less-than-14-foot boat and $450 for a boat longer than 40 feet.
The legislation would order the state to transfer, on a quarterly basis, at least half of each one- or three-year registration fee to the special dredging fund.
Brown told Port City Daily in November 2012, when the bill was being imagined, that a new revenue source is important for inlet dredging projects and that millions of dollars are needed per year to adequately address the predicament of less federal support.
The bill, which also carries Sen. Norman Sanderson (R-Pamlico) as a sponsor, is currently in the Senate Finance Committee, which is co-chaired by Brunswick County’s Sen. Bill Rabon (R). A populous committee, Brown and Sanderson are also members.
North Carolina ranked 10th nationally for number of boat registrations in 2011, according to the office of U.S. Rep. Mike McIntyre (D-7), who announced Wednesday morning he will co-chair the Congressional Boating Caucus in the 113th Congress. His announcement also said retail sales of new powerboats, motors, trailers and accessories in the state that year exceeded $400 million. Overall, the industry here contributed to 13,180 jobs.
Ben Brown is a news reporter at Port City Daily. Reach him at ben.b@hometownwilmington.com or (910) 772-6335. On Twitter: @benbrownmedia
Posted by Ben Brown
on March 13, 2013. Filed under Brunswick County,Carolina Beach,Local News,New Hanover County,Pender County,Southport,Wilmington,Wrightsville Beach.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
7 Responses to Boating lobby sounds alarm against bill that would raise registration fees
Leave a Reply
The Scene
John Sagar
March 13, 2013 at 7:44 pm
Yes it’s an added cost to enjoy our coastal waters but we need to look for new sources of funds to keep inlets, waterways and boat ramps open and in good condition. Won’t like but I understand the need.
Bill
March 14, 2013 at 9:46 am
Why does every government bureaucrat ALWAYS try to use their creativity in finding ways to TAX us more. These lazy fools, who supposedly represent us, NEVER use their brilliant minds to find ways to reduce spending in one area to fund needs in another area. It’s so much easier to just raise taxes!
One typical example of wasteful spending and cronyism is the NCDOT. They constantly take over the paving and other repair and maintenance of streets and rights of way in private subdivisions. Oh, but they can raise our gasoline taxes to keep that little favor-system going.
Bert
March 14, 2013 at 11:04 am
I completely support this and yes, it will cost me more money but it is of extreme importance that we aggressively dredge and maintain our waters and waterways. I also think that a portion of the NC gasoline taxes should go to dredging. Many gallons of gas are used in boats. However it happens, dredge, dredge, dredge.
Wayne Canning
March 14, 2013 at 11:23 am
What the reporter did not mention:
Slush Fund
But don’t we wants the inlets dredged? Yes, but this fund could become an enormous slush fund doled out to companies politically connected to the NC Wildlife Commission. In fact, provisions are spelled out in the bill for other uses.
“The Commission shall use at least three dollars ($3.00) of each one-year certificate of number fee and at least nine dollars ($9.00) of each three-year certificate of number fee collected under the numbering provisions of G.S. 75A-5 for boating access area acquisition, development, and maintenance.”
The term “at least” needs to be taken into context with the following:
“The Commission shall transfer on a quarterly basis at least fifty percent (50%) of each one-year certificate of number fee and at least fifty percent (50%) of each three-year certificate of number fee collected under the numbering provisions of G.S. 75A-5 to the Shallow Draft Inlet Dredging Fund established by G.S. 143-215.73F.”
So really, only 50% of the taxes collected by this “dredging fund” go to dredging. A smaller amount, maybe 10% of total, goes to boat ramps. And the other 40%? Spent as the Commission sees fit? How well did that work for the ABC Stores commission?
The 50% designated for dredging can only be used with matching out-of-state funds:
“Any project funded by revenue from the Fund must be cost-shared with non-State dollars on a one-to-one basis.”
If the Feds choose not to fund any projects, this fund could grow to be a monster, and the temptation for the General Assembly to confiscate it will be immense. Then we will have been taxed for no purpose.
Just another way for the politicians to increase taxes and reward their friends without out it looking like a tax increase.
Capt. Wayne Canning, AMS
Dennis
March 14, 2013 at 11:36 am
I agree with you Bill that there is a lot of waste on the State and Federal Government level, but in this case, SB58bill was introduced at the request of advocates who want to insure our shallow draft inlets continue to be dredged for the safety of boaters accessing the ocean. The federal government no longer provides funding and the state is stepping up to support our waterways and inlets. Without funding for dredging, the shallow draft inlets will shoal to the point the Coast Guard will remove the buoys and post the inlets “Hazard To Navigation”.
Brian
March 23, 2013 at 7:50 am
Ah Wayne, there you go reading the whole bill and low and behold you have found the fine print! 50% will be used if they have matching funds, but your right, what happens when the “matching” funds aren’t available? Maybe Mr. Brown should explain that small case in point!
J McLendon
March 27, 2013 at 7:48 pm
Still wondering why folks that run their boats on Smith Mountain lake or Falls Lake or Lake Norman or Kerr Lake are being asked to subsidize coastal dredging. Maybe we can put up a few toll booths on 64, 70, and 40 at the Alligator River, between Havelock and Newport, and just north of Castle Hayne to pay for road improvements in western NC and the Piedmont. Maybe 50$ going in and free going out.
This is nothing more than Republicans (rugged individualists in favor of smaller government) RAISING TAXES!
Woo-hoo – I feel so much better now that we have businessmen in charge.