March 8, 2022, Board of Supervisors Meeting.
After reviewing the video of yesterday’s Board of Supervisors Meeting, Agenda Item #29, we should be surprised at the number of irregularities stated by Supervisor Bartlett and County Executives, but, sadly, we aren’t. To quote one boater, “I think Supervisor Bartlett has been drinking the Dana Point Harbor Partners' Kool-Aid on so many things, without doing her own homework. I would expect more from a Supervisor who was elected by the People, to represent the People, not powerful interests.”
Assertion One:
Quoting Supervisor Bartlett, “But just want to clarify relative to the slip rates, the Dana Point Harbor Partners did go out and had a very extensive survey relative to harbors along the coastal areas and even with the rate increases it has shown the rates being charged are still below market rate.”
In Dana Point Boaters Association’s Opinion:
Click here for DPHP’s “extensive” survey. It is easy to justify Dana Point rates as being under market when all you survey are the smallest and most exclusive marinas in Orange County located in Newport Beach with the largest marina there only having 442 slips. After the fact, the Partners did a slap-dap survey of marinas from SD to SB, but left out some, like Oceanside and the results they came up with would have only supported a rate increase from the old rates, but not as much as they increased rates. Click here for the Dana Point Boaters Association on slip rates.
Assertion Two:
Quoting Supervisor Bartlett, “And relative to any concept about boaters leaving the harbor area, en masse that is really not the case.”
In Dana Point Boaters Association’s Opinion:
We ask you, Supervisor Bartlett, have you walked the docks over the last six months? Have you? Would you like us to take you on a tour of the Dana Point Marina? Our estimate shows approximately 250 to 300 boaters have left the marina. Many of them have sold their boats and others have moved to marinas in Long Beach or San Diego. All you have to do is count the stickers on the dock boxes which say, “No Parking Private Property”. Click here for a picture. By the way, when did Dana Point Marina become private property?
Assertion Three:
Quoting Supervisor Bartlett, “The original waitlist was 1700 on the waitlist and I did have the Harbor Partners send out a letter to those on it to make sure they were apprised of what was going on so we have open and transparent government. Now, the waitlist has gone from 1700 to 2200.”
In Dana Point Boaters Association’s Opinion:
When reviewing a waitlist, it is important to note how many individuals are on multiple waitlists which is common in the boating industry. Secondly, when there is a moratorium on boats coming off the waitlist as in the case in Dana Point, it is logical the list might increase. According to The Marina at Dana Point’s website, the current waitlist is at 2037 and not 2200. See the link to the Marina at Dana Point waitlist click here.
Assertion Four:
Quoting Supervisor Bartlett, “The approval of the lease amendments will assist the Dana Point Harbor Partners, our best-in-class P3 partners, in securing the best financing for the revitalization of Dana Point Harbor.”
In Dana Point Boaters Association’s Opinion:
It is our understanding that one of the reasons DPHP was selected by our Orange County Supervisors was because they could internally fund the construction. To quote ASR Control 17-001082 dated 10/17/17, “DPHP has the represented internal capacity to fund the Project without using institutional equity sources and the ability to secure construction financing for all project components from one lender.”
Several great questions were posed by Supervisor Foley, “Why are the fees allowed to be increased at this time and there is no work that has been done? What allows them to increase the fees early?”
OC Real Estate Executive, James Campbell answered, “Supervisor Foley, this is part of the lease, the rate increase and was anticipated to help finance the project. The main contributor is the marina and the slip fees to the financing.”
Dana Point Boaters Association must ask, Was the language in the lease written in the best interest of Orange County and CA residents and voters, or in the best interests of Dana Point Harbor Partners? Is Mr. Campbell’s answer in congruence with the language and spirit of the Tidelands Act? Also, recall the financials submitted by the Partners indicated no increase until the construction on the docks was done.
Supervisor Foley then asked, “What is the status of the litigation?”
OC County Counsel Leon Page responded, “Under the lease, Dana Point Harbor Partners is required to indemnify the county. The board approved the tender of the defense to Cox Castle. They filed a motion to dismiss, and the hearing is set for the 19th.
As Dana Point Boaters Association has advised you in the past, the Plaintiffs, DPHP, and Orange County filed a Demurrer motion, which is not a motion to dismiss.
Supervisor Bartlett went on to say and get confirmation from James Campbell, “James, I think it is important to mention relative to the slip rate increases that when the Dana Point Harbor Partners took over, there weren't any base rent slip rate increases for about four years; is that correct? He answered, “That is correct”.
Dana Point Boaters can loudly affirm this is not correct. How many times do we have to point out to County Officials that there was a slip rate increase by the County in July 2018, four months before the lease was signed with DPHP? Once the lease was signed boaters had a left-handed rate increase when boats were remeasured and charged overhang fees. Do our County Officials even look at their own records to confirm information?
What is the old adage, Garbage in, Garbage out? Maybe if accurate information was given to County Officials and they actually reviewed it the outcome might just be different. Is it time to request a 3rd Grand Jury Investigation into Dana Point Marina?
Inquiring minds want to know!