This story appeared two days after my last post about this issue.
Marine towing policies making waves off Rochester | Democrat and Chronicle click the link and read the entire article
But the lanky 22-year-old skipper contends that his relationship with the primary law enforcement agency patrolling the waters off Rochester is unsalvageable because of what he claims is a marine unit practice of towing disabled boats in nonemergency situations for free.”It’s a municipal government impeding on the private sector,” said Van Reenen, who estimates he has lost half of his potential business to the marine unit this boating season. “When you run out of gas on the road, the Sheriff’s Office doesn’t tow your car to a garage for free. Why should it be any different with a boat?”
The conflict is new to Rochester and relatively rare, according to marine assistance industry observers. “In most areas, law enforcement is busy enforcing the law,” said Tina Cardone, executive director of the Conference of Professional Operators for Response Towing, a lobbying group for private marine towers. “They don’t get involved in assistance towing and they don’t want to.”
Observers pointed to Orange County, Calif., as the only other location in the country where complaints about government encroachment on commercial marine towing have arisen.
Is that right? Is this issue only limited to Orange Co. CA and now Rochester NY? Maybe my readers in Suffolk County NY, Los Angeles, CA, New York City, Rhode Island, and parts of Florida haven’t been calling CPORT with complaints. You guys who are struggling with competition from public agencies need to get on the phone and let Tina know that you don’t live in Orange County, CA.
What is happening in Rochester seems a perfect opportunity for our industry spokesmen to reaffirm our position on this topic, not soft peddle or characterize it as “relatively rare”. What, like it’s ok if it only stays in California? I have great respect for Tina Cardone, and I think she is doing a good job with CPORT. Perhaps the quote was taken out of context or edited poorly, but gosh Tina, even if the problem is limited, couldn’t you have taken the opportunity to denounced the concept of public rescue agencies conducting non-emergency work and represent the private sector’s side of the debate?
Here is what I think she should have said:
“First of all, the service provided by the Rochester Police is not free, it’s just that the funds are provided by tax payers instead of the boater. The Marine Assistance & Towing industry welcomes a comparison with any public agency on the service costs, dollar for dollar, for providing non-emergency assistance. How much does it cost the city of Rochester to purchase a boat, man it with trained and qualified employees who get salaries, health insurance and pensions, maintain the boat, fuel that boat, insure that boat? Is the city willing to send the boater a bill for the hourly amortized costs of the service (sans profit of course, just the hard costs)? Our industry fully endorses the National Search & Rescue Policy published by the US Coast Guard for response to non-emergency cases. Perhaps this newspaper should ask the City of Rochester to explain why they refuse to adopt that policy?”
That is our position, isn’t it?
[Also blogged this here, here, here, here, or just click on the Public Agencies tag]