California Coastal Commission Rejects Newport Beach Mooring Proposal

The California Coastal Commission voted on February 5, 2025, to deny the City of Newport Beach’s proposal to realign the mooring fields and replace existing moorings with helix anchors, a decision that pleased mooring holders. The decision came after strong opposition from the community, with 50 mooring holders gathering at the Long Beach meeting to voice concerns over safety, inequity, conflict of interest, and environmental justice.

During deliberations, the Coastal Commission emphasized the need for greater collaboration between the city and local stakeholders to develop a more equitable solution. The decision signals a call for Newport Beach officials to work more closely with the community before moving forward with changes to the harbor’s mooring system.

Anne Stenton is president of the Newport Beach Mooring Association, a nonprofit founded in 1995 to advocate for fair mooring rates and equitable terms for permit holders. Stenton remains uncertain about the true intent behind the City’s proposal to realign the mooring fields and transition to helix anchors. Some speculate that the motivation stems from a desire among homeowners for a more aesthetically pleasing and structured view of the mooring fields, resembling an orderly parking lot. However, this is not confirmed.

While the city claimed the changes were intended to improve navigability, many mooring holders question this reasoning, comparing it to building a major street through an alley to invite more traffic. Additionally, Stenton added that city officials stated in a December 2023 letter that they would not pursue helix anchors due to significant stakeholder opposition, yet in January 2025, they unexpectedly amended the application to include them without consulting the Newport Mooring Association. According to Stenton, this abrupt reversal has left mooring holders frustrated and confused.

John Pope, Public Information Office for The City of Newport Beach said in an email to The Log, “The objective was established by the Harbor Commission and endorsed by the City Council in 2018, shortly after the City Harbor Department was formed:

‘Evaluate the current mooring fields and provide a recommendation for new guidelines that better define rows and fairways to improve navigation, safety, and optimization of space within the mooring fields.The specific proposed pilot project to optimize the utilization of the C Mooring Field and introduce the use of helical anchors in lieu of traditional mooring anchor systems was in direct support of this objective.  Had the project moved forward, the expected results would have been better-defined rows and fairways in the C field, improved navigation and safety in and around the C field, optimization of space within the C field, freeing up approximately two acres of water for all harbor users, not just the mooring permittees, fostering eelgrass growth and improving water quality by converting traditional anchors and mooring tackle with more environmentally friendly helical systems.’”

The California Coastal Commission’s decision regarding the proposal was made during a public meeting, where several commissioners provided comments on their votes. While the reasoning behind their decision is theirs to articulate, the discussion during the meeting offers insight into the factors considered.

The Log asked Pope how the city plans to address the Coastal Commission’s concerns and foster greater collaboration with mooring holders moving forward and Pope stated that the city intends to further demonstrate to the Commission that the proposed safety improvements will be realized under the plan. He noted that, at the Commission’s urging, the city made significant efforts to identify and engage qualified, independent third parties to assess the potential safety benefits of the project. As a result, two experts provided written opinions supporting the proposal’s likely improvements to navigation safety.

“One [expert] is the Port Manager for Americas Cup Harbor where the proposed system has been in use for decades — Greg Boeh,” said Pope. “The other [expert] is under contract with The California Division of Boating and Waterways to proctor and issue Captain Licenses under the ‘For Hire Boating License Program’ in all inland lakes of California — Doug Powell.  Mr. Powell has than 8,000 hours of time on the water patrolling and enforcing boating laws of California and has investigated, reviewed and or approved over 500 boating and PWC accident reports.  He is an instructor for the CA Department of Boating & Waterways.  Both Mr. Powell and Mr. Boeh indicated in their letters to the Coastal Commission that the project, if implemented, would significantly improve the safety of navigation in and around the C Mooring Field.  We plan to solicit additional expert opinion on the proposal.”

On the contrary, Stenton states that for over 50 years, mooring holders have collaborated with the City to maintain a safe and thriving harbor. Many longtime boaters remember a time when the City actively sought input from mooring holders, working together to design public dinghy docks, organize mooring fields, and address potential safety concerns. Stenton argues that this history of cooperation contrasts with the current proposal, which many feel has lacked meaningful engagement with those directly impacted.

“Over the past 8 years, however, there has been a shift away from this collaborative approach,” said Stenton. “Many experienced mariners, including licensed captains who hold mooring permits, feel their expertise has been overlooked. Moving forward, we would like to see a renewed commitment to cooperation. One suggestion that has gained support is ensuring that the Harbor Commission includes mooring permit holders who are selected by or endorsed by the Newport Mooring Association.”

According to Pope, the public process remains open and receptive to all input, including from mooring holders. He emphasized that mooring permittees will be encouraged to offer constructive suggestions in support of the Harbor Commission’s goal of improving safety. However, he noted that despite multiple meetings on the matter, no constructive recommendations aimed at achieving this objective have been provided by individuals representing themselves as mooring holders.

With alternative solutions being a topic of discussion, Stenton believes before considering any new plan, the City should step back and reassess whether the proposed changes genuinely address a documented concern. She points out that in the past 50 years, there have been few, if any, reported accidents related to the current layout of the mooring fields, raising the question of whether changes are necessary at all. “Any modifications,” she argues, should be based on clear evidence of a problem rather than assumptions.”

Additionally, she notes concerns among mooring holders that efforts to reconfigure the mooring fields may serve to benefit waterfront homeowners by altering view corridors rather than improving safety or harbor access. Stenton encourages the City to engage mooring holders in open discussions to identify what challenges, if any, truly need to be addressed before moving forward with any revisions.

Pope’s response is that there are no alternatives currently in development related to the Harbor Commission’s objective to improve the mooring field layouts and safety of navigation.

The decision’s outcome has also sparked concerns among liveaboards, as it may impact their living situations. Samantha McDonald, a community member and liveaboard, expressed her support for the Commission’s decision to deny the realignment. Speaking on behalf of others in similar circumstances, she emphasized the importance of preserving the current mooring arrangement.

“The main issue with the double row configuration is that mariners lose an important approach direction to their mooring which is critical during adverse weather conditions,” said McDonald. “Newport harbor is a relatively large basin with many constriction points where strong tidal currents can oppose prevailing wind and quickly overcome deckhands trying to pick up mooring lines. The double row configuration places another vessel too close for safe handling. There’s a reason why America’s Cup Harbor is the only mooring field with this configuration. It has little tidal currents and is very protected from the prevailing wind, thanks to Point Loma. I am happy the Commission’s recognized the safety concerns we had with this configuration.”

Stenton encourages a comprehensive approach to mooring policies to help ensure Newport Harbor remains both accessible and well-managed. Rather than addressing regulations in isolation, considering them collectively allows for a more balanced strategy that aligns with the City’s long-term objectives while also supporting mooring holders. By evaluating key factors such as transferability, rate adjustments, and overall harbor use together, decision-makers can create practical solutions that maintain fair access without compromising safety or functionality. Moreover, fostering open collaboration between stakeholders promotes policies that serve all boaters, regardless of financial resources, leading to a more inclusive and sustainable harbor environment.

“Again, we stand ready to return to a time of collaboration between mooring holders and City officials,” said Stenton.

For further details, the meeting is available for viewing online at cal-span.org/meeting/ccc_20250205-20250206/live. Item number 16.b.