Newport City Council Workshop on Rental Moorings & Insurance (2025-10-15)
Newport City Council Workshop on Rental Moorings & Insurance (2025-10-15)
On October 15, 2025, the Newport City Council held a workshop to address the insurance requirements for commercial (rental) mooring permits, proposed amendments to the mooring ordinance including the creation of a 'yacht club' mooring classification, and concerns regarding the transfer of mooring permits. City Solicitor Chris Bean and Harbormaster Steve Land presented arguments for a one-million dollar per occurrence liability policy requiring the City of Newport to be named as an additional insured. The session featured significant testimony from mooring holders expressing concern over the cost of insurance, the definition of the required coverage, and the perceived hostility of the administration, while also discussing the conflict between resident access to private moorings and the allocation of new commercial spaces.
Consent Calendar
- No items specifically listed under Consent Calendar in the transcript; the meeting focused entirely on workshop deliberations and public testimony.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Charlotte Johnson: Expressed that she found business liability insurance for $239/year through Allstate which includes the City as a co-insured; clarified her mooring is managed by Old Port Marine under a long-term contract.
- Jack Grant: Argued that the ordinance should differentiate between seasonal rentals (where the specific boat is known and insured) and transient rentals; supported the city's intention to require yacht clubs to comply with rental insurance standards.
- Pete Denton: Expressed strong concern regarding the legal definition of "indemnification" versus "additional insured" status; stated he would not personally indemnify the city for liabilities outside his own fault, fearing unlimited legal fee exposure.
- Councilwoman Napolitano (Public Questioner): Highlighted confusion among residents regarding whether they are required to insure the boat or the mooring activity and expressed concern that private mooring holders are not currently held to the same insurance standards as commercial holders despite the city owning both.
- Moorings Owners (Mike Musil, Ms. Nover, Greg Diacentis, etc.):
- Mike Musil and other owners expressed perception of animosity from the city and concern that the inability to transfer moorings or use LLCs devalues their 40+ year investments.
- Greg Diacentis (Quidnick Mooring Company) clarified that his brokerage policies already name the city as an additional insured but were previously rejected by the City due to policy name requirements.
- Multiple speakers noted that private boats often operate without insurance and that the city's towing operations could be perceived as competing with private companies.
- Will Musil argued the insurance requirements are a tactic to drive up costs and force permit holders to give up their moorings.
- Neil Gray: Advocated for delaying the November 15 enforcement deadline to allow for better communication and the inclusion of insurance agents in future workshops to clarify requirements.
- Raymond Goddard & Leslie Smith: Emphasized the community value of commercial mooring holders as stewards of the harbor and requested better communication regarding changes that affect long-term residents.
Discussion Items
- Insurance Requirements:
- City Solicitor Chris Bean & Harbormaster Steve Land: Maintained that the City must be an "additional insured" on a liability policy to ensure the City is defended and indemnified against claims arising from commercial activities. They argued that standard homeowners/auto insurance is insufficient and that a marine specialty policy is required. They disputed the $239 quote, suggesting it may be a quote for a different coverage limit or type.
- Councilor Carl: Questioned whether $200 policies would actually cover tragedies or if the City would be left uninsured, noting it is impossible to be indemnified by such low-limit policies if the City is the named plaintiff.
- Public: Questioned why residential mooring holders face different requirements and whether the City collects proof of insurance from private permit holders annually.
- Mooring Classifications & Transfers:
- Yacht Club Moorings: Harbormaster Land explained the proposal to create a specific "yacht club" classification to distinguish from general rental moorings, limiting them to members and reciprocal agreements. He confirmed the City is awaiting CRMC review of this specific definition.
- CRMC Compliance: Discussion revealed conflicting information regarding a 2023 CRMC Red Book definition. The Harbormaster stated CRMC initially suggested the classification but later asked for a delay while reviewing it; the Solicitor noted CRMC had previously stated such a clause was not problematic.
- Transfers & LLCs: The Council discussed the prohibition on owner-to-owner transfers of commercial moorings (a 2019 CRMC rule). Councilor Carl noted that forming an LLC to hold permits is effectively an indefinite transfer, which the Harbormaster stated is currently prohibited based on CRMC guidance to prevent "black market" sales.
- Commercial vs. Private: Harbormaster Land addressed the addition of 20 new commercial moorings in shallow water (the Spindle), explaining they were designated commercial because the depth is insufficient for private moorings which are not size-restricted. He noted the City is replacing forfeited private moorings and maintaining an 8:1 resident ratio for private allocations.
- Enforcement & Deadlines:
- The existing ordinance sets a November 15 deadline for insurance compliance. Harbormaster Land indicated willingness to delay enforcement for those actively communicating with the office, potentially extending to the end of the year.
- The Council debated whether an amended resolution or ordinance is needed to legally extend this deadline to protect residents from forfeiture due to confusion.
Key Outcomes
- Insurance Policy: The City continues to require a general liability policy of $1 million per occurrence/$2 million aggregate with the City as an additional insured for all commercial mooring holders. The Harbormaster expressed willingness to accept an alternative arrangement for the current year if a mooring management company can add the City as an additional insured on an existing policy via a simple agreement.
- Yacht Club Definition: The Council acknowledged the need to clarify the "yacht club" mooring definition in the upcoming second reading of the ordinance to explicitly prohibit rentals to non-members/non-reciprocal parties.
- Enforcement Delay: The Council directed the administration to consider delaying the November 15 insurance enforcement deadline (likely to year-end) to allow for further workshops and clarification, though the Solicitor noted the current ordinance legally mandates the deadline until a new ordinance is passed.
- Future Action: The City Council agreed to hold future workshops, potentially with insurance experts present, to clarify the specific policy language required. The issue of LLC transfers and commercial mooring reclassification will be addressed in subsequent ordinances and workshops.
- Resolution on Animosities: Multiple Council members and officials acknowledged the perception of animosity toward commercial mooring holders and expressed a desire to resolve the insurance and transfer issues cooperatively rather than adversarially.
Meeting Transcript
Comment we're gonna keep it at about three minutes. Uh so when you hear the little buzzer go off, we can kindly wrap up as quick as possible if you're gonna go over the time. Um and I'll try to make sure we get as many people in uh two comment tonight as we can. I know uh obviously this is a great turnout for both of our uh workshops or meeting. So all right, so I'll turn it over to our city solicitor, Chris Bean. Thank you, uh Mr. Chair. So I thought I'd start off with um uh addressing the policy behind the insurance requirement for the rental moorings now, and that insurance requirement uh was enacted uh pursuant to ordinance uh I believe back in November of 2024. Um the policy uh well the what it requires is a liability policy for the renewal of the rental mooring and places limits of uh one million dollars per occurrence and two million in the aggregate, and also just as importantly uh it requires the city to be an additional insured on that policy, and I'll get into a little later um uh why that's just as important as having that that insurance. The um we believe this policy is sound. Uh and in fact, uh we've listened to a lot of the input from the members of the rental community. So I addressed it also with our insurance provider, the Rhode Island uh interlocal risk management uh group, the trust. Um, and I discussed it actually with their legal counsel, uh their uh Andy Murray. And uh he also believes it's sound, and in his own words, he thought it was a no-brainer. Um and you know the trust deals with the the members of the trust are some 15, 16 communities, so they do this for public entities. So they're very burst in the needs of a public uh entities, uh governments uh and their insurance requirements. And he felt that any time you're you're allowing public facilities, in this case the harbor, actually the territorial waters of the state of Rhode Island to be used for a revenue generating um means, then these provisions need to be to be in there. Um so although we're talking about rental moorings and whether the holder of the rental mooring owns one, two, or many more, they are commercial, they involve commercial activities. Is that and given a permit for what goes on on those those moorings, the city should not have to in any way, shape, or form assume any risk or liability for that. It should be all assumed by the permit holder. And you'll see a little later, there's some subsequent users or managers of these moorings down the down the road. So these are revenue producing, and unlike private moorings, private moorings. We we know what's going on in uh private moorings. There is a owner, it has to be an individual. Um there's a boat registered to that. They do have to provide liability insurance on the private moorings also. Um, but we have uh a good idea who's using them and who's not, and you know what's going on with these private moorings. With the rental moorings, it's a little different just by the nature. And I'm not not suggesting that there's anything, you know, untoward or you know, that uh uh anything uh um uh wrong, but they just by their nature there is that transient use, the change in use. Um we don't know at any given time what boat or who's gonna be using them. In fact, we've over the years some of these rental mooring holders have actually um sublease these moorings to mooring companies who are using them and and um um generating income off of them. uh anything uh um uh wrong but they just by their nature there is that transient use the change in use um we don't know at any given time what boat or who's gonna be using them in fact we've over the years some of these rental mooring holders have have actually um sublease these these moorings to mooring companies who are using them and and um generate an income off of them so the issue with the city as an additional insured is some of the questions we've heard is I only have one mooring why do I need to have insurance I don't use it I have my own boat on it these are all just in these are some of the things we've heard and we've we've tried to address some of these questions well well you do because you're the permit holder and you're the ultimate as a permit holder what you allowed on that on that uh on that mooring is going to come back to you and potentially also to the city because it issued the the mooring so you have that issue now we've been uh if some of these who rent out to a a mooring company why can't their insurance cover cover them well I I mean that mooring holder probably should be asking those mooring companies to make them a additional insured on their policies but because the city doesn't have a legal relationship with these down users these mooring companies um they cannot um uh put the city necessarily outright as an additional insured they would have to either they'd have to go and negotiate with their insurance company to do so or they would have to um we'd have to have an agreement with them between the city and that mooring company to provide us as an additional insurance so there is some it some of that can be worked out but there is some uh I don't want to say well obstacles it's just not as clean as some people might think so why do we want to be an additional insured is that even though there's insurance from a uh say the mooring holder has insurance and the mooring company that might be using has insurance if something tragic happens something a a substantial loss they're gonna be looking to find everyone who has a pocket who can provide some insurance um coverage so if the city gets uh brought in and they're not an additional insured they have to operate under their own insurance and they have to uh pay whatever costs associated with that um and people also have to understand that among defendants even in defendants you think defendants go oh this guy's suing us we all should have commonality of interest you don't all always sometimes the defendants can be as adversarial among themselves as they are with the plaintiff so we can have competing um claims between the defendants when the city is made an additional insured that goes all out the window that insurance company has to uh look upon the city the same as the insurance the the insured they're providing the insurance for they owe a duty of good faith and fair dealing on that so it's very important that's another very important aspect of this is for the city to be an additional insured um so there is um at this uh stage I probably would ask uh Steve Land um I think he can give you an update uh on there has been uh and you guys have heard it at the last uh meetings um that there is some uh some uh mooring holders who are um finding it difficult to get the insurance or say that it's it's um too expensive but the only thing I would say on that although you know I certainly haven't looked I don't have a rental mooring so I don't want to you know um say that that's uh the right or wrong I think Steve Land has more information on that but I would say this you have to look you have to look at a insurance company that provides this insurance your traditional homeowners your traditional car insurance provider is not gonna provide this type of insurance it would be a specialty insurance same thing with some of us in professions uh where where we have special insurance company that provide professional liability insurance so there are marine insurance um providers out there that would probably you could probably look at but uh um steve could you master Steve Land um so we have had a lot of success with people finding insurance and um they started with their original homeowners or car insurance and they weren't getting they're getting very high quotes um yesterday I someone emailed me with a um it was just an estimate it was hard to read the estimate but it was for two hundred and thirty six dollars for the year which I find is is pretty pretty reasonable the same insurance company has given a lot Um so we have had a lot of success with people finding insurance. And um they started with their original homeowners or car insurance and they weren't getting they're getting very high quotes. Um yesterday, I someone emailed me with a um, it was just an estimate, it was hard to read the estimate, but it was for 236 dollars for the year, which I find is is pretty pretty reasonable. The same insurance company has given a lot for 400. I've seen some for six. So people have been very successful in finding insurance. Um I was under the impression I wasn't supposed to give out insurance company names. I've talked to the city solicitor, and uh if if anyone does have a question, I'd be more than happy to share insurance uh company names that people with people that we've we've accepted and people have had success with. Uh, you know, this should be an easy, not stressful thing. Um I think a lot of times when they're calling insurance companies, they have a single mooring, they they're they're lending it or having it subleased, so they really don't know the details of it. They're having a hard time describing the business to the insurance company, which I completely understand. Um, but we have had a lot of success with this. Um if people are looking for insurance, the deadline that for mooring applications is November 15th. They still have a month. But if people are in contact with us and they're working on it, we absolutely you know postpone that deadline. What that what that November 15th deadline is for people we haven't had any contact with, they haven't reached out to us. We've sent emails saying it's it's done, and uh then we send out a letter on that date that's saying that they forfeited their mooring. But we don't do that with people.
openpublica.com