Title
Report regarding marine debris clean up in the City’s navigable waterways, in compliance with Chapter 8.78 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code (“Mooring Regulations”) and discussion of potential preventative measures (Max Hollenback, Assistant City Manager)
Recommendation
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council receive the informational update on Mooring Ordinance enforcement activities and provide direction to staff on potential preventative measures.
Background
BACKGROUND
On September 11, 2024, the City Council adopted an ordinance adding Chapter 8.78 (“Mooring Regulations”) to the South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC). The ordinance defined terms according to the similar ordinances in; The City of Oakland, City of Sausalito, and the Counties of Contra Costa, Sacramento, and Solano, in coordination with the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC)
On January 8, 2025, the City Council amended SSFMC Chapter 8.78, which included definitions of “Emergency”, removal of section 8.54.070(k)(3), and changed language to be more broad.
As of February 27, 2025, as shown in the Marine Audit included as Attachment 1, there were 26 vessels in the City’s navigable waterways. The vessels are a threat to public safety and health due to improper disposal of waste, fire risk, and fuel leakages, and diminish the value of the development and safety of the residents of Oyster Point.
SSFMC Chapter 8.78 gives the city the power and responsibility to:
I. Issue 10-day notices to vessels out at sea
II. Issuing public nuisance warrants
III. Issuing arrest warrants
IV. Having the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office enforce the warrant
body
ENFORCEMENT STATUS UPDATE
As agreed by the council, the City Manager has signed on-call agreements with three salvage companies in January of 2025. The City Manager’s Office issued a call for bids the following month. The City will engage in vessel removal in phases. The first phase will be the lowest hanging fruit: unoccupied vessels.The City Manager signed a task order with the salvage company that provided the lowest responsible bid to remove the nine unoccupied vessels. The cost of the initial removal is $125,000. The salvage company will start the week of May 5th, for their first removal.
NEXT STEPS
Phase two of clean up will be occupied vessels. The steps are listed above (Background). The process of removal can take 20-40 days, depending on availability of the on-call salvage companies, high tides, and weather. The cost of the second phase will likely be double than that of the first phase. The additional cost is primarily attributable to the greater number of occupied vessels and the significant amount of legal support needed from the City Attorney’s Office.
The City Manager’s Office will also be applying for the California Parks Division of Boating and Waterways Surrendered and Abandoned Vessel Exchange (SAVE) Grant. The cycle is March 14th to April 30th, 2025, closing at 5pm. The grant, to remove recreational vessels, is a reimbursement of 10% of the clean up cost. The costs covered are removal, storage, and disposal of abandoned vessels. Reimbursement will be done by the City Manager’s Office before the 45 day grant cutoff.
Currently the grant would reimburse the city $12,500 of the clean up cost. As a two year agreement the reimbursement will rise.
Potential Preventative Measures
I. Artificial Submerged Barrier-Oyster Channel Exclusive
One potential option to prevent continuation of boats in the Oyster Point and to protect the sea and wildlife is to install several instances of rock pylons from the unused Oyster Cove Marina to the bend in the Bay Shore Trail by the end of ShorelineCourt street. Materials would consist of 32 tons of large rock and large high density polyethylene (as an alternative to metal which will corrode and leave heavy metals) and cost approximately $9,000. Labor would be approximately $1,500 and in conjunction with BCDC to make sure the City is environmentally conscious and within BCDC recommendations. Initial labor will include a preliminary underwater survey and insulation. The cost of ongoing maintenance is to be determined.
II. Artificial Reef Wall-Oyster Channel Exclusive
Another option to prevent continuation of boats in Oyster Point and to protect the sea and wildlife is to install an artificial eco wall from the unused Oyster Cove Marina to the bend in the Bay Shore Trail by the end of Shoreline Court Street. Materials will be marine blocks to facilitate marine habitation. Each costing around $100, it is estimated that it will take 250 blocks to make a wall up to 3” below sea level. The benefits are a re-invigorating of oyster point sea life, and seabirds. The blocks will also stop boats from treading into the cove. Adequate marking for the line will be required to stop accidents, however the permitted reasons for going into Oyster Point are primarily limited to rescue operations by the South San Francisco Fire Department and the San Mateo County Harbor District’s responsibilities for operating and maintaining Oyster Point Marina. As such, staff anticipates very few accidents. The cost of ongoing maintenance of the wall is to be determined.
III. Housing the Unhoused Policy
Staff recommends that the City Council promote more unhoused friendly legislation and zoning. Larger issues of improperly disposed waste, fire hazard, and disease hazard stem from our unhoused community. Staff recommends that the City pursue more development and construction of subsidized and affordable housing. Opening housing to the unhoused will contribute to keeping people off the boats and keep others safe from the fires and fecal waste.
IV. Legality and Jurisdiction
The waters of the Oyster Point are one foot to seven feet deep, while also being historically unused were recently expanded due to land fillings in the 60s and 70s. There has been no commercial use of the waters discussed in this report. The State of California defines navigable waters as:
“Navigable waters and all streams of sufficient capacity to transport the products of the country are public ways for the purposes of navigation and of such transportation.”
The cove discussed does not conduct trade nor does it have history of trade. As seen in the Montello case (1874):
“It depends upon the fact whether the river in its natural state is such that it affords a channel for useful commerce.”
Oyster Point Does not afford any commerce.
Additionally the case of the Economy and Light states:
“Artificial obstructions subject to abatement by public authority do not render non navigable in law a stream which, in its natural state, would be navigable in fact.”
The blockage would not threaten its claims if it were navigable.
The case of Oyster Point also is in public and environmental interest, the fires, and fecal contamination provide a threat to the wildlife and people of the area. With that it is in the City’s best interest to pursue prevention of long term anchored boats. Under the public trust doctrine, counties and states have taken more steps to protect waters and this case would exemplify that.
CONCLUSION
The removal and disposal of the marine debris in the Oyster Point waters is under way, and will pursue the next step of removing occupied vessels afterwards. The cost of these clean ups will be costly for the City, prompting the City Manager’s Office to recommend preventative measures for Oyster Point.
Staff will pursue grant opportunities for the Artificial Submerged Barrier and The Artificial Reef Wall . One potential grant opportunity will be from the Environmental Protection Agency(EPA), which has granted the State of California $43 million to protect watersheds.