Thursday, May 24, 2001

Floater legislation still keeping its head above water

The floater cabin bill appeared to be taking on water going into last weekend.
   By Monday, its sinking seemed imminent.
   Statewide opposition, likely mobilized by local concerns, that was phoned in to state lawmakers threatened to torpedo the controversial piece of legislation in the eleventh hour.
   Senate Bill 1573, the brainchild of CCA-Texas, proposed to outlaw cabins not in place by June 1, impose a one-time initial fee and an annual fee on all floaters on the Texas coast, and restrict the sale of floaters by limiting transfers only to family members who are in line to inherit property from the owner in the absence of a will.
   The intent was clear: establish accountability among floater owners through minimal regulations.
   But before the bill reached a critical Texas House vote Wednesday, the moratorium deadline had been pushed back to Aug. 31. The initial fee had been reduced from $2,500 to $1,500; the annual fee had been reduced from $600 to $300; a transfer fee had been lowered from $600 to $300 and the unrestricted sale of floaters had replaced the limited transferability clause.
   The $1,500 fee is refundable if the permit is retired and the floater is properly removed.
   Both CCA-Texas and the newly formed Saltwater-fisheries Enhancement Association precipitated these changes, without which the bill would have died, said Rep. Judy Hawley (D-Portland).
   The Senate likely will concur based on the recommendation of Sen. Jon Lindsay (R-Houston), leaving only the governor's signature required for the bill to become law.
   Floater concerns
   It's likely that many of you will thank CCA-Texas for its flexibility during this process. While others will either blame or applaud the organization for proposing the bill in the first place.
   "I had tremendous input from both organizations as they worked to craft a bill that improved public policy," Hawley said.
   Concerns about floaters range from environmental and health issues to aesthetics and navigational hazards these permanently moored houseboats could pose after storms or neglect. A lot of this involves accountability of the floaters.
   But some credit also goes to the SEA, which met with key legislators Tuesday to hammer out compromises to the bill and ultimately endorse the resulting proposal.
   Without SEA's intervention, the bill would have died in light of recent opposition, according to several Austin contacts, including Hawley and local lobbyist Hugo Berlanga, a former Texas legislator, both of whom assisted SEA officials in their effort to tweak the proposal. CCA-Texas, however, disputes that there was widespread opposition to the bill.
   Behind the scenes
   Ironically, SEA's well-timed squawking could have hammered the final nail, had it not been flexible.
   SEA's executive director, Duke Bonilla, denies that he and SEA President Jim Atkins went to Austin to block the legislation. But essentially, their opposition would have accomplished just that because of where the bill was in the legislative process.
   The bill had reached the Local and Consent Calendar for uncontested bills. At this point in the process - and on this calendar - one legislative opponent could mean death.
   And CCA and SEA had the ear of more than one legislator.
   Atkins, Bonilla and SEA Vice President Andy Agan, saying they represented floater owners and other anglers, sat down with Hawley, who sponsored the House version of the bill, Lindsey, author of the original bill, Rep. Edmund Kuempel (R-Seguin), chairman of the State Recreational Resources Committee, Rep. Gene Seaman (R-Corpus Christi), Rep Jaime Capelo (D-Corpus Christi), an aide from Rep. Vilma Luna (D-Corpus Christi)'s office, a Texas Parks and Wildlife representative and Layton Black, representing CCA-Texas.
   During that meeting, SEA's concerns turned into changes that met with Lindsay's critical support.
   In the spirit of compromise, both SEA and CCA Texas hammered out and then signed off on an improved policy.
   Everyone's resolve to help push this bill through was nudged by the fact that another piece of proposed legislation threatened to give ownership or removal authority over floaters to the Texas General Land Office. We can't have that.
   At any rate, the passage of SB 1573 likely would protect floaters from GLO authority, at least for now.
   A FISHERIES MEETING: Any time government proxies convene to discuss "measures to minimize the impacts of fishing activities and gear" is cause for concern. It's certainly pertinent that they plan to convene in Corpus Christi next month.
   To go a step further, when the government requests our input - which in some cases is a constitutional or legislative mandate - some of us should make an effort to give it to them, no matter how innocuous or vague the invitation or subject matter.
   At the very least, I plan to ask questions at this public meeting, scheduled for 3 p.m. June 14 at the Omni Bayfront Hotel, where members of the Gulf of Mexico Fisheries Management Council will hear concerns regarding fishery management.
   This meeting is our opportunity to voice concerns and questions regarding the exclusion or inclusion of areas as essential fish habitat (EFH), waters and wetlands necessary to fish for spawning, breeding, feeding or growth to maturity, and habitat areas of particular concern, a designation given to more sensitive fish habitat.
   The notice I received contains no mention of no-take zones, where no recreational fishing is allowed.
   No-take zones, generally considered a last-resort management tool, have become a hot-button issue for sportsmen, particularly since the Gulf Council approved several of these ecological reserves in Florida waters.