Harbor dwellers sue city over new regulations

Published 12:00 pm Saturday, September 30, 2006

‘It’s a perpetual city hammer poised over our heads,’ one liveaboard says.

With their homes in jeopardy, a group of Eagle Harbor liveaboards are suing the city over its efforts to remove vessels cited as derelict or abandoned.

The lawsuit, filed with Kitsap County Superior Court earlier this month, also questions the constitutionality of such actions, the city’s jurisdiction over vessel removal and cites earlier city provisions that protect the harbor’s liveaboard community.

The lawsuit was filed by the Boaters and Mariners of Bainbridge Island (BAMBI), an unincorporated 9-year-old community association, along with harbor liveaboards Brian Snyder, Michael Martin, Phillip Todd Addy, Jeff Anderson and Mike McCarthy.

Many of the plaintiffs’ vessels were cited as “derelict” earlier this year as part of the city’s stepped up effort to remove boats it considers abandoned or requiring essential repairs.

Liveaboards contend that the city’s actions deprive them of their constitutionally-protected property without requisite due process.

“The current (derelict vessel) notices are the latest development in a 20-year history of efforts led by a few property owners living on the south shore of Eagle Harbor to rid the harbor of boats that they consider unsightly, and the people who live in them,” states the lawsuit filed by Fall City attorney Ian McRea.

City Attorney Paul McMurray said Friday that he is reviewing the lawsuit and could offer no further comment.

“At this point, we’re looking at the legal argument and don’t have much of a response,” he said.

The derelict vessel program remains active, but is undergoing a legal review, he added.

“It’s still there, but we are evaluating it in light of the lawsuit,” McMurray said.

While the plaintiffs named in the lawsuit declined comment, longtime Eagle Harbor liveaboard Ray Nowak said he understands his neighbors’ growing frustration with the city.

“It’s a perpetual city hammer poised over our heads, ready to squash,” he said Thursday. “Of course this is causing bad feelings, but it doesn’t have to be that way.”

Ryan Landworth, a harbor liveaboard and BAMBI member, said conciliatory efforts with the city have largely failed.

“This (lawsuit) is a necessary step in order for the community in the harbor to be heard,” he said. “If this is heard in the legal arena, (the city) has to listen.”

Five vessels were removed from island waters and destroyed this year under the state Department of Natural Resources’ Derelict Vessel Removal Program.

Nine other vessels were cited, including some owned by the lawsuit’s plaintiffs, but have not yet been removed.

The Bainbridge City Council in April increased the vessel removal program’s operating budget by almost 17 times its previous annual level, swelling the typical outlay from $10,000 to $166,000 after assurances that a new state law will reimburse the city 90 percent of the collection and disposal costs.

With a larger budget, “enforcement efforts increased exponentially to vessels that were occupied as homes and not in danger of sinking, including plaintiff’s vessels,” according to the lawsuit.

Furthermore, the suit contends that the city has no jurisdiction under state law to “take custody of, control, sell, salvage, scrap and/or otherwise dispose of vessels” serving as the plaintiff’s homes.

These removals and derelict vessel citations contradict values codified in the city’s Comprehensive Plan, the lawsuit further argues.

According to a portion of the plan cited by the liveaboards’ attorney, “water-based housing is a viable component of the present and future housing stock of Bainbridge Island…”

The lawsuit also points to a 1998 rule, commonly referred to as the “liveaboard ordinance” that states liveaboard vessels are entitled to remain in the harbor, subject to the creation of an open water marina.

The marina, as specified in the city’s Anchoring and Mooring Plan, would allow liveaboards to remain in a portion of the harbor under a new set of fees and regulations.

The plan is aimed at striking a balance between the concerns of liveaboards, the state Department of Natural Resources and the harbor’s shoreline residents.

Harbormaster Tami Allen, who administers the city’s derelict vessel program, has said it is in the interest of liveaboards to put boats in working order before the marina is finalized by the state next year.

But the lawsuit contends recent vessel removals are stripping away the homes the marina aims to protect.

“…The city appears intent on getting rid of (liveaboards) before the creation of an open water marina to which they could potentially move,” the lawsuit states.

The liveaboards’ attorney also characterized the city’s derelict vessel citations as “arbitrary and capricious,” and “discriminatory.”

The plaintiffs are seeking attorney’s fees and other legal costs from the city.