That's more than twice what you can get it done for in the Casco Bay
area of Maine. There are some excellent and very honest boat yards
and marinas but quite a spread in prices.

Even shopping around, a 30 - 35 foot boat is going to cost you $2,000
to $3,000 dollars a year with out fixing anything, replacing anything
that breaks, or making any improvements. Unless you spend about
$50,000 in that size range, you should plan on spending $3,000 to
$6000 additional the first year, assuming you can do a lot of work
yourself. If you have to have all the work done for you, triple that
figure, at least. After that, you'll easily find a couple of grand of
things to fix and improve each year.

Better go into it with your eyes open.

--

Roger Long



"Thomas Wentworth" wrote in message
news:6VdCf.5682$Jn1.898@trndny01...
I am re-entering the world of cruising. It has been a number of
years. My base is New England.

In the last few days I have been brought to the point of absolute
insanity by two of the local marina's near me.

Today, I called a marina to inquire how much it charged to step a
mast. I explained to the woman on the phone that a boat hauling
truck would be bringing my boat [ I don't own the boat yet, I was
seeking the info so that if I make an offer I would know what the
charges would be ] to the marina where it would be launched.

At first she seemed evasive. She didn't seem to want to answer my
question. She kept saying she was looking for her "paper". Finally,
she said it would be $6 per foot of the boat when the boat was
dropped off and another $6 per foot of the boat when the boat was
put in the water. I asked, why are you charging twice. The truck
is bringing the boat, it will go right in the water. She then said
"you are upset by how much it cost". I tried to explain "I can't be
upset since I never knew what the cost was to begin with".

After she started telling me how I feel about issues I never asked
her about, I asked what was the charge to step the mast. She said
around $400 dollars. I almost fell over backwards.

Then, I hung up the phone.

Is this the way of the world in cruising? Have all the marina's
become thieves?

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 05:39:17 GMT, "Roger Long"
wrote:

Even shopping around, a 30 - 35 foot boat is going to cost you $2,000
to $3,000 dollars a year with out fixing anything, replacing anything
that breaks, or making any improvements.

Amazingly, that's about right. But I am in a major club in Toronto.
Some Maine wharf shouldn't be twice the price.

Unless you spend about
$50,000 in that size range, you should plan on spending $3,000 to
$6000 additional the first year, assuming you can do a lot of work
yourself. If you have to have all the work done for you, triple that
figure, at least. After that, you'll easily find a couple of grand of
things to fix and improve each year.

Better go into it with your eyes open.

I run a tight ship, so to speak, and your estimates are only slightly
over (I do two "projects" a year with the goal of making the boat
roughly contemporary instead of being stuck in the '70s in the next
three years or so).

I had some help reassembling my rebuilt Atomic 4, but other than that,
it's all me. But even a stupid replacement Nicro vent was close to 200
bucks. Replacing the fuel and exhaust system was about $550. A PCV kit
is $80. It mounts up, even on a basic boat. A quart of VC17 is $40.

And so on. It's a good thing people give me lightly used sails,
because if I bought a new set every three years like the racing
fellers, I'd be broke.

R.

"rhys" wrote

Amazingly, that's about right.

What you mean, "Amazingly"? I'm a marine professional, author, noted
authority, and I know how to type

Some Maine wharf shouldn't be twice the price.

No such thing as "some Maine wharf". That Maine disappeared when most
boat were built out of wood. The law was just changed to fix the
problem but it hasn't yet been implemented. Every Maine wharf and
shoreline is currently taxed as if it had condos or a waterfront
mansion on it. That cost gets passed on to the fishermen and every
other waterfront user. Recreational facilities have to support those
costs with the income from a two and a half month boating season.

Because of our high tides, you can save a bundle on boat storage by
hauling the boat up on your beach in a cradle and storing it yourself.
You'll be paying enough in property taxes to buy a 30 foot boat every
year though.

I run a tight ship, so to speak, and your estimates are only
slightly over

They should be slightly over. These numbers are what you should be
prepared to spend without being forced to either put up with unsafe
situations are end up sitting on your boat wishing you could actually
use it. Hopefully, you can get by with less but you don't want to
spend that kind of money and then not be able to use your boat. You
need a little cushion.

--
Roger Long

Some Maine wharf shouldn't be twice the price.


Roger Long wrote:
No such thing as "some Maine wharf". That Maine disappeared when most
boat were built out of wood. The law was just changed to fix the
problem but it hasn't yet been implemented. Every Maine wharf and
shoreline is currently taxed as if it had condos or a waterfront
mansion on it.

Do you mean that the tax laws have changed so as to reflect
property usage? That is wise and we are trying to get such
laws passed here, otherwise there are no brakes on the
condo-ification of pretty much all desirable real estate in
the country.



Because of our high tides, you can save a bundle on boat storage by
hauling the boat up on your beach in a cradle and storing it yourself.
You'll be paying enough in property taxes to buy a 30 foot boat every
year though.


Ouch! Our taxes are high enough that mom-n-pop businesses,
farms, small friendly marinas, etc etc, have no option but
to sell out to Wal-Mart and the condo developers. And
communities are wondering why things are changing to such an
unfriendly world, but they can't seem to forego the tax dollars.


I run a tight ship, so to speak, and your estimates are only
slightly over

Roger Long wrote:
They should be slightly over. These numbers are what you should be
prepared to spend without being forced to either put up with unsafe
situations are end up sitting on your boat wishing you could actually
use it. Hopefully, you can get by with less but you don't want to
spend that kind of money and then not be able to use your boat. You
need a little cushion.


Very well said. It's very important to have both a set of
priorities, and the bucks in pocket to implement those
priorities. Boats need "stuff" and while you need not pay
the exorbitant cost of some items which triple in price for
the word "marine" printed on the label, it still ain't free.
Even spit'n polish costs something.

Fresh Breezes- Doug King

"DSK" wrote
Do you mean that the tax laws have changed so as to reflect property
usage?

Yes, the referendum passed this fall and the legislature is working on
implementation. In a state that usually shows unusual common sense,
the change failed the first time around. It took a massive education
effort to get enough people to realize that the coastline was
effectively going to become part of Massachusetts and New Jersey if it
didn't pass.

It used to be that, every time a waterfront business watched a new
house going up on a piece of vacant shoreline, they knew that their
property taxes would shortly follow. This still won't prevent
waterfront users from being priced out of obtaining property but it
will help keep them from being forced off of what they have now.

--

Roger Long

Roger Long wrote:
"DSK" wrote

Do you mean that the tax laws have changed so as to reflect property
usage?


Yes, the referendum passed this fall and the legislature is working on
implementation. In a state that usually shows unusual common sense,
the change failed the first time around. It took a massive education
effort to get enough people to realize that the coastline was
effectively going to become part of Massachusetts and New Jersey if it
didn't pass.

It used to be that, every time a waterfront business watched a new
house going up on a piece of vacant shoreline, they knew that their
property taxes would shortly follow. This still won't prevent
waterfront users from being priced out of obtaining property but it
will help keep them from being forced off of what they have now.


We have the same problem up here. Rich 'mericans throwing around Yankee
dollahs and driving up the cost of shore front properties. The
provincial govt jumps on the band wagon by raising assessments sky
high...forcing more & more long time owners to sell at least part of
their family owned properties to... you guessed it...more rich
'mericans. Vicious cycle for locals.

"Roger Long" wrote in news:%DoCf.146409$XC4.144502
@twister.nyroc.rr.com:

This still won't prevent
waterfront users from being priced out of obtaining property but it
will help keep them from being forced off of what they have now.



Everytime I read about these kinds of things, I think back to a quote in
the newspaper from a Beaufort, SC, waterfront mansion owner. She didn't
want that "floating trailer park" blocking her view she'd paid $1.2M for.

Could it be they're trying to get rid of boating for these kinds of people?

The tax bureaucrats are....

"Larry" wrote in message
...
"Roger Long" wrote in news:%DoCf.146409$XC4.144502
@twister.nyroc.rr.com:


Everytime I read about these kinds of things, I think back to a quote in
the newspaper from a Beaufort, SC, waterfront mansion owner. She didn't
want that "floating trailer park" blocking her view she'd paid $1.2M for.

Could it be they're trying to get rid of boating for these kinds of
people?

The tax bureaucrats are....

I live in Beaufort and the problem is that we have a transplant Yankee for a
mayor. Btw, he is the one that got the bridge schedule change several years
ago. So many people have come here because of the laid back charm. After a
while they get bored and try to change it to the way they did it up north. I
am a transplant, but have been here long enough to be naturalized
Beaufortonian and can still see the beauty as it is. You are right about the
tax bureaucrats. We lucked on this old cottage in an estate sale over 20
years ago. Because we are on a deep water creek, the taxes have been going
up every year. The funny part is the house valuation seems to stay the same,
but the land value has about quadrupled.

Leanne

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:47:55 +0000, Roger Long wrote:

"DSK" wrote
Do you mean that the tax laws have changed so as to reflect property
usage?

Yes, the referendum passed this fall and the legislature is working on
implementation. In a state that usually shows unusual common sense, the
change failed the first time around. It took a massive education effort
to get enough people to realize that the coastline was effectively going
to become part of Massachusetts and New Jersey if it didn't pass.

It used to be that, every time a waterfront business watched a new house
going up on a piece of vacant shoreline, they knew that their property
taxes would shortly follow. This still won't prevent waterfront users
from being priced out of obtaining property but it will help keep them
from being forced off of what they have now.

One nice thing about California is that property taxes are based on what
you bought the property for, plus ~4% per year appreciation. This is how
little old ladies can afford to keep their multi-million dollar homes.

There's no way to stop rising real estate values, but limiting property
tax and therefore fixed costs is how the little guy can stay in the
game, instead of selling out to the super-rich and the corporations.

New England is a wonderful place, but limits its own economic growth by
taxation -- not just high taxes, but stupid taxes. I read
recently that Maine has the highest overall taxes in the US.

Matt O.

Hey Matt ,,, did you hear that OJ Simpson is moving to Maine; yup, he wants
to live in a state with only one DNA.

Hey Matt,,, what's the nicest thing you can say to your neighbor up in
Maine? Nice Tooth.

Hey Matt,,,, last week I was up around Bangor looking for a boat. I'm
driving down this country road and I see a sign that says "Welcome to
Bucktooth, why across the road when ya can go across the hall".



==============================================


"Matt O'Toole" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:47:55 +0000, Roger Long wrote:

"DSK" wrote
Do you mean that the tax laws have changed so as to reflect property
usage?

Yes, the referendum passed this fall and the legislature is working on
implementation. In a state that usually shows unusual common sense, the
change failed the first time around. It took a massive education effort
to get enough people to realize that the coastline was effectively going
to become part of Massachusetts and New Jersey if it didn't pass.

It used to be that, every time a waterfront business watched a new house
going up on a piece of vacant shoreline, they knew that their property
taxes would shortly follow. This still won't prevent waterfront users
from being priced out of obtaining property but it will help keep them
from being forced off of what they have now.

One nice thing about California is that property taxes are based on what
you bought the property for, plus ~4% per year appreciation. This is how
little old ladies can afford to keep their multi-million dollar homes.

There's no way to stop rising real estate values, but limiting property
tax and therefore fixed costs is how the little guy can stay in the
game, instead of selling out to the super-rich and the corporations.

New England is a wonderful place, but limits its own economic growth by
taxation -- not just high taxes, but stupid taxes. I read
recently that Maine has the highest overall taxes in the US.

Matt O.