The committee started its discussions by addressing the budget increase that led to a rise in the mooring field rates. The monthly rate has been adjusted from approximately $436 to $532.84, while the daily rate now stands at $37.28, up from $35. The staff liaison, Curtis, explained the price hike, attributing it to the increased costs of maintaining mooring balls. While acknowledging some pushback from the boating community, he expressed optimism about retaining long-term boaters, stating, “I don’t want to lose our base.”

The committee also touched on the implications of these rate increases for the community and discussed the transparency of the funding sources for a new enforcement boat. The previous pontoon boat was nearing the end of its operational life, necessitating a new vessel to maintain effective marine operations. The funding for the new boat is believed to be primarily through grant money and FEMA reimbursements, although specifics were not entirely clear at the time of the meeting. One committee member emphasized the need to communicate clearly about the funding sources to mitigate public skepticism, particularly in the current atmosphere of cynicism toward local government expenditures.

Security of the enforcement boat was another concern. Curtis reported that the stolen enforcement boat had been recovered and was undergoing engine repairs. While there are leads in the investigation, no suspects have been named. The committee discussed implementing security measures such as installing cameras at the mooring field and using air tags to enhance vessel tracking. The idea of involving the public in naming the new skiff was also proposed, with enthusiasm for a potential contest and public introduction event.

In addition to these discussions, the meeting included a significant dialogue about the roles and responsibilities of the Anchorage Advisory Committee. A review was initiated to clarify the committee’s remit and ensure alignment with current practices and regulations. This review may lead to revisions of existing ordinances and the harbor management plan, which will ultimately be presented to the town council for approval. The importance of maintaining clear communication channels between the committee and town staff was emphasized, with assurances that the intention was not to restrict inquiries but to foster a collaborative environment.

The committee also addressed jurisdictional matters, confirming that the mooring field’s jurisdiction extends through the Back Bay to Big Carlos Pass, covering a 1,000-foot radius from the shore. Clarification on the specific boundaries was deemed necessary to prevent confusion.

Data accuracy and management were other topics. Concerns were raised about the flawed methods of extracting data on boat occupancy and revenue forecasting. Members acknowledged the challenges in obtaining reliable statistics and agreed on the importance of addressing these inaccuracies promptly. Proposals were made to categorize boat stays into different time frames for better insight into occupancy trends, and a further analysis of the data extraction process was suggested.

The meeting also touched on the issue of pricing for boat stays, particularly the transition from daily to monthly rates. A member highlighted that patrons often end up paying more if they remain for more than 14 days without the option to transition to a monthly rate. The committee agreed that recommendations for adjustments to the pricing structure should be formalized and brought to the council for consideration.

Lastly, the committee discussed promotional opportunities and community engagement. A recent promotional video about the mooring field received attention, and the committee expressed interest in contributing content to publications as a cost-effective promotional strategy. The meeting concluded with a discussion on scheduling and agenda topics for future meetings, emphasizing the importance of effective communication with the public and continued efforts to address operational challenges.