EARLY YEARS
Local boaters, commercial fishermen, businessmen, and residents had sought
the construction of a harbor in Santa Cruz County since before the turn
of the century.
The Santa Cruz coast was first surveyed by the Army Corps of Engineers
for a possible harbor of refuge in 1879. It was not until after
World War II, however, that a strong enough local support group was
organized to secure the attention and backing of the state and federal
governments. In 1949, Santa Cruz was resurveyed by the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers. The Corps strongly recommended the formation of a local,
special district to lead and administer the harbor development and to
manage the harbor after completion.
THE PORT DISTRICT IS FORMED
Citizen groups obtained 3,000 signatures and presented them to the
County Board of Supervisors, who authorized an election. The
election, held in 1950, officially formed the Santa Cruz Port
District under the guidelines of the State of California Harbors
and Navigation Code. The purpose of the district was to provide
and manage small craft harbor facilities in Santa Cruz County.
Several sites were evaluated for the harbor, including both
Neary's and Wood's Lagoons. Wood's Lagoon (the other "Twin Lake"
to Schwan Lagoon) was eventually selected by the Corps of Engineers.
This site, however, has proven to be problematic, as there are no
natural features to support a sheltered harbor entrance. In fact,
its close, down-coast and down-drift proximity to the San Lorenzo
River mouth has had a major, negative impact on the harbor entrance.
The original boundaries of the Port District were drawn to
coincide with those of the Santa Cruz City Schools. This
boundary includes the entire City of Santa Cruz and most of
Live Oak and Pasatiempo areas. By legal definition a "Port District"
may contain only one incorporated city, which in our case is
the City of Santa Cruz. A 10 cent (per hundred dollars of
assessed value) tax on real property in the district was
also authorized by the election. The funds generated by this
assessment were viewed as "seed money" to provide start-up
capital for the harbor and to create a business and recreational
climate centered around boating that would stimulate the Santa
Cruz economy and provide other forms of local tax income.
In 1958, with tremendous local and state support, HD 357
was passed and was the fundamental federal legislation that
authorized the Santa Cruz Small Craft Harbor and Beach Erosion
Project. There were several key concepts in HD 357 that have
proved quite important to the Port District since 1958. They
are the concepts of littoral drift of sand; beach stabilization;
annual federal dredging; federal ownership of the harbor entrance
channel; and the eventual need for a permanent sand bypass
system paid for by cost-sharing between the federal government
and the Port District.
SANTA CRUZ SMALL CRAFT HARBOR BECOMES A REALITY
Between 1958 and 1960, the State Department of Parks and
Recreation began acquiring land for the harbor itself and
its supporting parking and concession areas.
In 1962, Congress appropriated $1.6 million for jetty
construction and the dredging of the original south harbor basin.
Loans from the State Department of Harbors & Watercraft
(now called "Boating and Waterways") were obtained, totaling
$3 million, to pay for the cost of the pilings, docks,
restrooms, and parking facilities. The local share (35.1%)
of the federally-built jetty system was paid for by the Port
District from property tax funds accumulated since 1951.
To grant these loans, the state required that Santa Cruz
Harbor be built as a state or regional resource. Hence,
the Port District is mandated to provide equal boating
opportunities to all residents of the state, not just Santa
Cruz County or Port District residents. Construction actually
began on the south harbor in 1962, with the facility being
completed in 1964. 360 slips were dedicated.
THE NORTH HARBOR EXPANSION
The south harbor proved to be a success and generated
interest in expansion. A state planning loan was obtained
in 1968 to study the physical and economic feasibility of
adding more slips north of the Murray Street Bridge. The
studies were positive, additional state loans of $5 million
were secured, and 455 more slips were completed in 1973.
HARBOR USER GROUPS
Santa Cruz Harbor now has space for approximately
1,000 wet-berthed and 275 dry-stored vessels. Roughly
15% of these vessels are commercial fishing boats, 35%
pleasure power boats, and 50% pleasure sailboats. The
official name of this harbor is Santa Cruz Small Craft
Harbor. "Small Craft" is fitting as our average boat
size is only 25'. 70% of our current boaters are Santa
Cruz County residents. Of the 1,100 persons waiting
for slip space, 50% are from Santa Cruz County.
Approximately 12,000 visitor-nights are spent each
year by boaters using Santa Cruz as a harbor of
refuge and the launch ramp is used about 19,000 times
per year. There are also about 2,000 local people
who crew on boats regularly, and many hundreds of
thousands of people who enjoy the harbor's concessions,
beaches, and grounds.
PORT DISTRICT ADMINISTRATION
The Port District itself is a municipal corporation
and a political sub-division of the State of California.
The Santa Cruz Port District is governed by a five-person
Board of Commissioners. The Commission is elected
at-large by the voting residents of the Port District.
Commissioners receive no pay for their service, and
are elected to four-year seats. The basic
responsibilities of the Port District Commission
are to set the policies of the Port District, approve
the yearly operating budget, govern land-use questions,
and act as judge for any tenant disputes over policy or
enforcement of Port District regulations.
The Commission directly hires the Port Director to
act as an officer of the municipal corporation.
The Port District provides for nearly all its own
services, including maintenance, security, financial
and administrative functions. It is very much like a
small city, operating within the City of Santa Cruz
boundaries. The only outside services required are
for major fire suppression, City of Santa Cruz Police
and Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Department assistance
in jail transports and booking for criminal offenses
committed in the harbor; and City of Santa Cruz City
Schools supports the few children who live on boats
in the harbor. The Port District voluntarily acts as
a "Good Samaritan" using its harbor patrol boat to
assist the Coast Guard and local agencies in year-round
emergency ocean rescue and law enforcement services.
If another local agency had to provide this service,
it would cost several hundred thousand dollars each year.
Twenty-three permanent employees provide all the
necessary harbor services over seven days a week,
twenty-four hours a day, year round. In addition
to this, 20-25 seasonal employees are hired during
peak periods.
Slip licenses are not allowed to be sold or transferred
in any way with the sale of a boat. Slips are assigned
through a chronological waiting list system.
Approximately 10% of our total slips are reassigned
through the waiting list each year; this percentage
compares very favorably with other California harbors.
HARBOR ECONOMICS
There are ten major concessions and over 30 other smaller
businesses which operate directly out of the harbor. These
businesses employ approximately 800 people. The Port
District generates in excess of $40 million gross product
for Santa Cruz County. There are also many other
harbor-related businesses not located on harbor property
which contribute significantly to the local economy.
The Port District operates as a government-owned business,
funded entirely by user fees. By agreement with the City
and the County of Santa Cruz, the Port District divested
itself of all property tax income. Personal property and
possessory interest taxes paid by boat owners and businesses
in the harbor generate approximately $537,000 back to the
County. Also, of the over $600,000 in sales taxes generated
by harbor businesses, the State receives $436,000 and the City,
County and Transit District receive $164,000. The Port
District does not receive any portion of the personal property,
possessory interest, or sales taxes which it generates.
These revenues go to other governmental agencies and therefore
directly benefit local taxpayers by paying for some of the
services provided by those agencies.
HARBOR ENTRANCE SHOALING / DREDGING:
The problem of winter shoaling of the harbor entrance has
plagued the Port District since 1964. The harbor was
placed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in an area of
the coastline where there are no natural features to support
a safe and deep entrance. In fact, the harbor's proximity
to the San Lorenzo River and the drift of its run-off sand
eastward substantially worsens the shoaling problem. The
original federal legislation (HR357) passed in 1958 contained
the provision for the federal government and Port District
to cost-share a harbor-based dredge, with the Port District
then providing the yearly operating and maintenance funds.
Between the years 1964 and 1986, the federal government chose
to provide yearly maintenance dredging of the harbor entrance
by contract rather than supply the Port District with a dredge.
Although this solution was free to the Port District, it was
fraught with problems. The Port District could never rely on
a level of federal funding from year to year and would not
know whether any funding was available until October 1 of
each year, with the entrance problems usually beginning in
November or December. The tightening of the federal budget
in response to deficit problems continued to make this
problem worse. The Port District began earnestly pressing
the Corps of Engineers to implement their federally mandated
solution (the cost-shared, harbor-based dredge) in 1980.
Federal funding was obtained in 1986 for the federal
government's share of the dredging system.
To prepare for the economic impact of the locally financed
dredging operation, the Port District began setting aside
funds in 1981. By June 30, 1985, $793,000 was reserved for
dredging contingencies which was sufficient to cover the
Port's share of the dredging system. Some of these funds
were generated by increases in slip rent during 1984 and 1985.
The balance of the funds were generated through the
implementation of the harbor's Economic Development Plan.
The objective of this plan was to stimulate harbor businesses
and create new businesses and user groups, thereby spreading
the impact of dredging costs to a larger revenue base.
In March, 1986, the federal funding authorization was finally
obtained and the Port District staff set about purchasing the
dredging system. This system included a dredge, a dredge-tending
workboat, pipeline, floating pontoons, and a number of pieces
of landside equipment. The total cost of the system was
approximately $2.3 million, with the federal government
paying 80%. The Port District brought this system on-line
on October 1, 1986 with the first year's operation being
the winter of 1986-87. The Port District now pays for the
yearly operating and maintenance costs of the dredge, which
are currently budgeted (FY 94-95) at $470,000. With the Port
District finally in control of the dredging operation, the
District has been able to keep the harbor entrance open and
safe a substantially greater amount of time.
ANCHOVY KILL PROBLEM
Four times in the history of the harbor (1964, 1974, 1980,
1984), large schools of anchovies have entered the inner
harbor area, consumed all of the available oxygen in the
water and died. The estimates of the size of the schools
of fish that have died are in the 1,000-2,000 ton range.
For over ten years, the Port District has been actively
seeking to identify solutions to this problem. A primary
solution that has been identified and has been implemented
is mechanical aeration of the water. Currently, 30
aeration units aerate the water as needed during the
summer months. It is possible, however, that the size of
schools of fish could be large enough that even the
artificial aeration is overwhelmed. Other experiments have
occurred, including establishing a net system to try to
physically keep the fish from entering the harbor. Work
has also been done with a variety of sound sources which
hopefully are such that the fish will avoid the source of
sound and stay out of the harbor. None of these potential
solutions are, however, completely able to guarantee that
the harbor will not experience another fish kill. This
problem is a difficult, naturally occurring phenomenon;
the Port District staff is continuing to look at every
possible solution.
|