CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal
...Based on error regarding these two issues, we set aside the final order and remand for further proceedings. With respect to the cross-appeal, we find no reversible error and affirm on that issue without discussion. In November 2004, the City enacted an ordinance pursuant to section 327.60, Florida Statutes (2004), to impose slow speed zones in portions of Naples Bay....
...ouglas Finlay. [1] Rule 68D-23.105(1)(b) provides as follows: 68D-23.105. Criteria for Approval of Regulatory Markers. (1) The division shall find a valid vessel traffic safety or public safety purpose is presented for ordinances adopted pursuant to Section 327.60, F.S., under the following facts and circumstances: .......
...The rule sets forth six fact-based circumstances in which waterways need marking for safety or navigational purposes. (1) The division shall find a valid vessel traffic safety or public safety purpose[ ] is presented for ordinances adopted pursuant to Section 327.60, *74 [F.S.], under the following facts and circumstances: * * * (b) For a Slow Speed Minimum Wake boating restricted area if the area is: * * * (4) Subject to unsafe levels of vessel traffic congestion....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1995 WL 621536
...Section
327.46(1) expressly authorizes only the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to create restricted areas upon the waters of the State for purposes of public safety ... [and] the statute vests no authority in local governments to actually create restricted areas. 3... . Section
327.60 permits local governments to adopt ordinances relating to the operation and equipment of vessels, but provides that no such ordinance shall be operative when it is in conflict with Chapter 327....
...We find no language in section
327.46(1) or any other provision of chapter 327 that evidences a legislative intent to preempt the authority of a county to regulate personal watercraft by designating areas in which they may not be operated. On the contrary, section 327.22, Florida Statutes (1993), and section
327.60, Florida Statutes (1993), both expressly recognize the authority of local governments to regulate these vessels in accordance with specified conditions....
...the vessel. Any such ordinance shall apply only in designated restricted areas which are properly marked and in need of shoreline protection. Any county and the municipalities located within the county may jointly regulate vessels. (emphasis added) Section
327.60(1) provides: The provisions of [specified sections of chapter 327, including
327.46] shall govern the operation, equipment, and all other matters relating thereto whenever any vessel shall be operated upon the waterways or when any activity regulated hereby shall take place thereon....
...ing laws of this state are noncriminal infractions: ... . (i) Violations relating to restricted areas and speed limits: 1. Established by the department pursuant to s.
327.46; 2. Established by local governmental authorities pursuant to s. 327.22 or s.
327.60....
CopyAgo (Fla. Att'y Gen. 1985).
Published | Florida Attorney General Reports
...Bustin City Attorney City of Clearwater Post Office Box 4748 Clearwater, Florida 33518-4748 Dear Mr. Bustin: This is in response to your request for my opinion on substantially the following questions: 1. ARE VESSELS WHICH ARE USED AS A PERSON'S PRIMARY RESIDENCE "LIVE-ABOARD VESSELS" FOR PURPOSES OF s 327.60 (2), F.S., EVEN THOUGH THEY MAY ALSO BE USED FOR RECREATIONAL PURPOSES? 2. WHAT ARE THE RIGHTS OF NAVIGATION WHICH A MUNICIPALITY IS PROHIBITED FROM REGULATING PURSUANT TO s 327.60 (2), F.S., WHEN ENGAGED IN BY NON-LIVE-ABOARD VESSELS? Inasmuch as both questions involve the application of s 327.60 (2), F.S., your questions are related and will be answered together....
...Your inquiry states that the City of Clearwater maintains a marine police patrol which is engaged in the regulation of local maritime traffic and the enforcement of state statutes governing marine activity. You further state that the city officials have encountered considerable difficulty in applying the provisions of s 327.60 (2), F.S., in that "it is extremely difficult to ascertain whether a vessel is a `live-aboard vessel' for the purposes of this statute." Moreover, "municipal officials are at a loss to understand when non-live aboard vessels are engaged in the...
...eprive[s] municipal authorities of jurisdiction?" Finally, as to the exercise of rights of navigation by non-live-aboard vessels, you state that city officials are in doubt as to their authority to regulate the mooring and anchoring of such vessels. Section 327.60 , F.S., provides as follows: 327.60 Local regulations; limitations....
...that "if municipal authorities were required to ask an individual to acknowledge that the vessel is his `legal residence,' the municipal authorities would be at the mercy of the public in determining where their jurisdiction lies" for purposes of s 327.60 (2), F.S....
...est that proof of legal residence cannot be measured by objective factors[.]" Therefore, I am of the opinion that vessels which are used as a person's primary residence may be "live-aboard vessels" for purposes of municipal regulation permitted by s
327.60 (2), F.S., even though they are not used solely as a residence but are also used for recreational purposes, if such vessels are represented as such person's "legal residence" pursuant to s
327.02 (13)(b), F.S....
...rusion into the province of the judiciary; thus, I must decline to discuss specific objective "indicia" from which municipal marine patrol officers may infer that a vessel is a "legal residence" and therefore a "live-aboard vessel" for purposes of s 327.60 (2)....
...Calhoun,
566 F.2d 969 (5th Cir. 1978) (court's discussion of objective facts in evidence supporting determination of taxpayer's "legal residence"). Finally, you inquire as to the meaning of the term "rights of navigation," as that term is used in s
327.60 (2), F.S....
...l governmental authorities are prohibited from regulating "the anchorage of non-live-aboard vessels engaged in the exercise of rights of navigation." I am unaware of any appellate decision of the courts of this state interpreting this provision of s 327.60 (2), But see generally, Ferry Pass Inspectors' and Shippers' Association v....
...owner's premises, particularly when such anchorage is attended with dumping of refuse, pollution of waters, and consequent impairment of riparian owner's use and enjoyment of his property. Thus, it would appear that the plain statutory language of s
327.60 (2) and the common-law inclusion of rights of anchorage as an element of the exercise of rights of navigation compel the conclusion that a municipality is prohibited from regulating the anchorage of non-live aboard vessels when such anchorage is incident to the exercise of rights of navigation. Therefore, unless and until legislatively or judicially determined otherwise, I am of the opinion that vessels which are used as a person's primary residence may be "live-aboard vessels" for purposes of municipal regulation permitted by s
327.60 (2), F.S., even though they are not used solely as a residence but are also used for recreational purposes, if such vessels are represented as such person's "legal residence" pursuant to s
327.02 (13)(b), F.S. (1984 Supp.); the determination of whether such vessels are represented as a person's legal residence may be based on a combination of the person's subjective intent and objective facts; in addition, the plain statutory language of s
327.60 (2) and the inclusion of rights of anchorage as an element of the exercise of rights of navigation compel the conclusion that a municipality is prohibited from regulating the anchorage of non-live-aboard vessels when such anchorage is incident to the exercise of rights of navigation....
