In its infinite wisdom, state agency issues mandate that could ultimately sink the ferry operation

By Gary Sherwin – March 10, 2023

Source: Stu News Newport In its infinite wisdom, state agency issues 031023

The Balboa Island Ferry, one of our most iconic Newport Beach tourism experiences, could be no more.

If that sounds dramatic, it is. I can’t imagine our city without the ferry, but unless something is done, this treasured piece of our city could be gone in less than two years.

Thousands of locals and visitors use the ferry every year and it’s a vital part of our culture and history. It is part of what makes us Newport Beach, and in my mind, it is as important as our beaches. But all of that is now threatened and could be lost.

In another example of bureaucratic overreach, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has mandated that all short run ferries in the state, mostly small privately held businesses, convert to electric engines by December 2025.

The state has been the nation’s leader in moving all motor vehicles to electric energy for a few years now and cleaner more efficient ferries sounds like a noble thing. Everyone likes less pollutants. But as always, the devil is in the details.

But California government officials, particularly unelected bureaucrats like CARB, like to make unfunded mandates on businesses. Our state is guilty of doing that all the time. And in this case, they have mandated a doozy.

I spoke with ferry owner Seymour Beek this week after being alerted to the issue by newly elected Assemblywoman Diane Dixon. She indicated that CARB is requiring all vessels to switch to electric engines and they are offering no assistance to do this.

To give you an idea of how expensive this process is, Beek told me that to engineer and then convert just one of his three ferries, it would cost $2.5 million. Once the design is set, the other ferries would cost another $1 million each. That’s $4.5 million if you are counting.

However, the ferries only generate about $2 million a year total. Add it up, and it doesn’t make sense for a business to stay afloat especially when you are only charging $1.50 a rider.

Beek is intent on saving the ferry and is discussing ways to address the problem with grants from agencies like the Air Quality Resource Board, but that is far from certain.

Aside from the cost, the other challenge is that it isn’t easy to physically convert these ferries. Beek said there is no off-the-shelf product he can purchase to install. That means he needs a custom-built system. He’s contacted several engineering firms, but they don’t even want to look at the project due to its complexity.

“These are old flat bottom barges and there isn’t much room to install anything. No one wants to touch it.” Beek said.

Retrofitting the ferries with new electric engines is one thing. However, he would also need to install charging stations at the docks and bring in new wiring, which would be another $500,000.

But if you are an environmentalist, you might see these dirty diesel engines as a problem for public health. Fair enough. However, how much gas do the ferries burn? About 23 gallons a day or the same as a mid-sized car. In fact, if the ferry wasn’t around, it is likely that lots more gas would be burned as more visitors choose to drive around the peninsula and Balboa Island instead of using the ferry.

Where is the common sense in all of this? Apparently not in Sacramento.

What is also galling is that the state is giving auto manufacturers until 2035 to go electric in the state. Why they are making the ferry do it 10 years earlier seems ridiculous. GM and Ford say they are still developing technology to fulfill the mandate, but no one is granting any grace to the locally owned ferries.

Even boat charters have been mandated to convert, such as Newport Landing, but after some lobbying, even they were granted more time.

So, what is the solution? First, let’s agree that there is no way we can lose the ferry, and this is an all-hands-on-deck emergency. However, there are a few options to consider.

The easiest and most obvious would be for the bureaucrats at CARB to realize that these ferries are not major polluters and exempt them from going all electric. Another way would be to give the 13 short haul ferries in the state more time to comply with the regulations, perhaps another 10 years like auto manufacturers. This would also allow technology to catch up so that battery prices can come down and permit our ferry some time to figure out the engineering challenges.

Batteries are also heavy, which also compromises stability and that means new calculations on how the ferries are used and how many cars you can put on it. More time would also allow battery technology to catch up and create a lighter version.

It would also be nice if the state could assist these small businesses with some grants to make conversion happen since they are making the mandate in the first place.

Another option, which Dixon has said she would be interested in championing, is introducing legislation to exempt our ferry from CARB compliance altogether.

There are also other solutions, such as asking the ferry to install Tier 3 engines which are more affordable, cleaner burning and could fit into the existing ferry structure. However, Beek said that CARB apparently isn’t even interested in those discussions. They are committed to everything going electric.

As Beek explained to me, the ferry is not a hugely profitable enterprise even during the best of years. He admitted that his family could make more money repurposing the docks and land and getting out of the business altogether. But given the legacy of the ferry and the importance to the community, he is committed to finding a solution assuming it is financially and operationally prudent.

The irony is that we hear from the California Coastal Commission all the time about protecting water access and offering affordable experiences for visitors. They don’t apparently talk to CARB who told Beek that they should just jack up their prices to pay for the retrofit. If they followed that logic, fares would probably go way past $10 a person. That doesn’t sound like a way to promote water access and for an 800-foot trip, would probably put it out of business anyway.

The ferry has been a part of the essential fabric of our city since 1919. Losing it due to government overreach would be simply criminal as well as heart breaking.

It’s time to get the City Council involved and lend their voice to stopping this and finding a constructive solution. I think everyone supports cleaner air, but not when a cherished and historically significant community asset unnecessarily gets sunk in the process.


Gary Sherwin is President & CEO of Visit Newport Beach and Newport Beach & Company.

Source: Stu News Newport In its infinite wisdom, state agency issues 031023

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Newport Harbor Fiscal Area
Newport Harbor Dredging Project

By Laylan Connelly – Orange County Register

Officials have secured $8.3 million to dredge Newport Harbor in the $14 billion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, but sand replenishment projects for two stretches of Orange County coastline were not included.

U.S. Rep. Michelle Steel said dredging of Newport Beach’s harbor is long overdue in her announcement Wednesday, Jan. 19, about the federal funding, but also stressed the need for added sand along the coastline. Funding for the Surfside-Sunset Replenishment Project, which would seed beaches through Huntington Beach south to Newport Beach will have to hope for final approval from another Congressional appropriations bill, the timeline of which has been unclear.

So is the San Clemente Shoreline Project, which would replenish beaches in the southern city, including improving the buffer of shoreline along a key coastal rail line.

Both projects have been stalled for years, awaiting funding for U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to do the replenishments that help create a beach buffer that would protect roads, homes and infrastructure from ocean flooding, as well as keep beaches – one of the region’s major tourism draws – from disappearing.

In 1962, Congress passed the Rivers and Harbors Act, which required the Army Corps of Engineers to address the impacts of the constructed flood control structures on the sand deposits that should be happening naturally along shorelines.

The $23 million Surfside-Sunset project – $15.5 million in federal money and $7.63 from local agencies – would add 1.75 million cubic yards of sand to Surfside, which would then be pushed down the coast by ocean currents and waves, spreading it 12 miles south to Newport Beach.

The last time sand was added was 2010 – previously the replenishment happened every five to seven years.

“There is more work to do, and I will continue to demand action from the administration and the Army Corps to fully fund the Surfside-Sunset Replenishment Project because we are one natural disaster away from devastation,” Steel said in a statement.

San Clemente has been waiting about two decades for its big replenishment project. The city two years ago received a boost in the amount of $500,000 in federal funding for the design phase.

With no beach left, a wave crashes against the rocks and stairs just below the railroad tracks at North Beach in San Clemente on Wednesday, October 20, 2021.(Photo by Mark Rightmire, Orange County Register/SCNG)

The project would add 251,000 cubic yards of sand from Linda Lane beach to T-Street beach south of the pier. The sand has shrunk so much there in recent years, city leaders have discussed the possibly of moving San Clemente’s Marine Safety Headquarters off the beach. When big surf hits, the surf laps onto the railroad tracks.

About $9.3 million was requested in the bipartisan infrastructure bill by U.S. Rep. Mike Levin for the San Clemente Shoreline Project.

Levin helped secure $30.5 million in federal funding for the Encinitas-Solana Beach Coastal Storm Damage Reduction Project and $1.8 million for the Oceanside Special Shoreline Study, his office announced Wednesday.

The Encinitas-Solana Beach project involves placing 700,000 cubic yards of sand along 7,200 feet of beach in Solana Beach and 340,000 cubic yards of sand along 7,800 feet of beach in Encinitas.

The Oceanside shoreline study will create a plan to mitigate erosion and other effects from the construction of Camp Pendleton Harbor and will restore beach conditions along the affected shores to the conditions that existed before its development.

Levin’s office said he is also “continuing to fight to finalize federal funding for the San Clemente Shoreline Project.”

Read more at the Orange County Register…

By Amy Senk

Corona del Mar resident Paul Blank was named Newport Beach Harbormaster last spring, a grand achievement to cap off an on-the-water lifestyle that began at age 10 with a two-week sailing class offered through the city’s recreation department. The harbormaster’s job is typically described as being a lead ambassador for Newport Harbor, one of the largest recreational harbors in the country, and includes overseeing a dozen or so employees and an annual budget of $1 million-plus. But like most things in the past year or so, the first several months have been filled with surprises. I caught up with him to learn more.

Q: What role did you play as harbormaster in the days after the oil spill, and what stands out in your mind now as the most notable thing that happened?

A: The response to the Amplify Energy Oil spill in early October was swift and multifaceted. My specific roles included surveying the harbor beaches for oil contamination, monitoring the harbor entrance for potential intrusion or contamination and participation in the City of Newport Beach Emergency Operations Center, which integrated with the Unified Command Response managed by the U.S. Coast Guard. A huge amount of my time was spent communicating my findings to others in the EOC and the UCR as well as with Harbor constituents and my patrol team in the Harbor Department. When the decision was made to close the harbor entrance, I was there to witness it and then established a patrol presence to advise mariners in a firm but friendly way of the closure and alternatives while they were unable to get in or out of the harbor. As the situation evolved, my role shifted into advising mariners, local businesses and residents where they could go for support or to file claims for loss or damage sustained as a result of the spill. I also spent considerable time and effort supporting the vessel decontamination site that was established at Marina Park. I am thankful that through the duration of the crisis, we were not forced to close or curtail activities on the harbor. Sailing classes, races, rowing, paddle boarding and casual harbor cruising all continued even though the entrance was closed. While not everyone could engage in all the activities they may have wished to while the entrance was closed, the harbor remained clean, safe and well enjoyed.

Q: We keep seeing mega yachts off the coast of Newport Beach. Have they caused any problems?

A: Newport Harbor has become a more popular port of call for mega yachts this year. Some vessels choose to enjoy anchorage off Big Corona Beach for their visits. Others have stopped there while waiting for a favorable tide to enter and transit the harbor. I am pleased to have made the process of reserving and making use of the Large Vessel Anchorage easier for the yacht managers. I am also pleased with the tenor and tone of the dialogue that continues with nearby residents and businesses. Concerns remain about traffic and congestion in that part of the harbor, but no negative impacts have been observed or reported to me. Newport Harbor is a “no-discharge harbor,” meaning no waste or refuse may go overboard. All vessels mooring or anchoring in Newport Harbor, including these mega yachts with dozens of paid, professional crews, are subject to dye-tab testing of their marine sanitation systems. This is the method we use to test the integrity of the vessel’s plumbing and waste holding tank. One vessel was tested upon arrival recently and didn’t pass. We allowed the crew an opportunity to check the settings on all their pumps and valves. A little less than an hour later we returned to re-test and the vessel passed. No pollution or waste was discharged into the bay in that first test, so no citation was issued, and the vessel was welcome to stay in the harbor. If any vessel is subsequently witnessed discharging into the bay, citations are written which come with a financial penalty and the vessel may be asked to leave the harbor. Thankfully it doesn’t happen very often.

Q: What is the Take Back Our Harbor movement, and what are your thoughts about it?

A: Take Back Our Harbor is the tagline for the newly formed Newport Harbor Foundation. The Foundation is a nonprofit group with a mission similar to the Newport Bay Conservancy. While the Newport Bay Conservancy is focused exclusively on improving Upper Newport Bay –essentially everything north of the PCH Bridge – the Newport Harbor Foundation is focused on preserving and improving the lower Newport Harbor. While I am not directly involved with the group, I am supportive of their mission. The group’s efforts align nicely with the Harbor Department’s goal of keeping the harbor clean, safe and well enjoyed.

Continue reading at Stu News Newport…