Everyone should know up front that the proposed regulations (see below) concerning vessels left unoccupied on a mooring in Boot Key Harbor or at anchor in Marathon jurisdictional waters, is a complex issue, which has brought about some warm feelings, particulary on the part of local cruisers.
I am going to take on a bit more of an editorial role in this discussion than usual, as I don't think it serves anyone's purpose to bandy about inflammatory language. So, I am going to excerpt portions of a letter written by Captain Marti Brown of Marathon, and mix this text with some of my own comments and those of my "Cruising the Florida Keys" co-author, Morgan Stinemetz.
So, to begin. please peruse excerpts from Catain Marti's letter to the Marathon City Council below, which she forwarded to me:

The intent of this proposed ordinance as I have learned by speaking with Richard Tanner at the City Marina is to provide the harbormaster with legal recourse to prevent wet storage boats from being left in the harbor. This ordinance came about as a result of the lack of contractual authority on the part of the City to manage those vessels that anchor on either the City bay bottom or the State Bay bottom that is leased by the City. Please note that the City Marina already has a contract and recourse for those of us that are living in the mooring field. While the intent of this ordinance appears sound, the wording and the implementation of this plan fall far short of common sense . . .
Point One:
“The registered owner of any vessel anchored or moored in the anchorage areas or mooring field must be present and available and is responsible to attend his/her vessel at all times.”
This could be legally interpreted as; “It’s okay for you to liveaboard your boat but you just can’t get off your vessel.”
Point Two:
“No liveaboard vessel anchored in the anchorage areas or moored in the mooring field may be rented or leased to another party by its registered owner for the purpose of habitation.”
. . . It penalizes and forbids charter vessels from anchoring in Boot Key Harbor or from using the mooring field. . . .
Point Three:
Here’s another interesting statement in 2008-27 ordinance . . .  “Should the owner of a live-aboard vessel utilizing the City of Marathon designated anchorage areas or mooring field wish to leave his or her vessel un-attended for any period of time greater than twenty four (24) hours, the owner must notify City marina staff in writing.”
. . . I attended the Near Shore Waters Committee last Thursday. After hearing my and other law abiding liveaboards’ comments, they agreed to look into changing the wording of the ordinance.
This is serious, folks. If you as the City Council approve an ordinance, it should be one that has been well thought out and presented with a great deal of thought about how it will affect all the citizens of Marathon.
All of the voting boaters in Marathon are now watching to see what the next draft will look like.
Respectfully submitted;
Capt Marti Brown, RN, MSN

Here are some thoughts from my "Cruising the Florida Keys" co-author, Morgan Stinemetz::

Claiborne,
 Overall, I think that the proposed ordinance is over-reaching in its scope and that the people who drafted it were not thinking of the all the variables at hand.
#1. If they changed the wording from "at all times" to "reasonable intervals" they would have a win-win option. If they need to define "reasonable intervals" then they could do that, but reasonable and unreasonable would often be defined by the vagaries of the weather. It's a sticky wicket.
#2. I don't see a problem with this one. If the boat is up for charter then it needs to move out and move on for the duration of the charter. This point seems to be aimed at sublets only. I can't find fault with it. But it probably needs better definition.
#3. This is probably just badly written. The owners of moored/anchored boats are not being required to notify marina authorities of their whereabouts, as the writer states. They are being asked to notify the marina authorities that they are not around. It may allow marina staff to more closely monitor the vessel as a favor to the owner.

And, other thoughts from fellow cruisers:

As is the case with most new boating ordinances, they punish the masses for the evils of a very few.  Last time we were in Boot Key Harbor we were quite impressed with how cleaned up it was.  Yes, there were still a very very few derelict boats but I just don't think you can reasonably expect to get rid of all of them.  I think the City does need  reasonably stated ordinances that give them the right to address this issue but if the regs are stated too strictly it gives all the non-boater, vigilantes a loaded gun!
Mike & Harriet
m/v Dual Dreams

Subject: Proposed Marathon Regulations
Message: It seems to me that Marathon, as well as many waterfront municipalities, are trying hard to address the issue of derelict boats…and that is a wonderful thing.  As a cruiser, I too, have concerns about those vessels left to rot in an anchorage.  Besides being a danger to other vessels, they are unsightly, cast a bad light on the rest of us who are conscientious about our impact on our surroundings and take up valuable anchorage space.  What worries me about Marathon's efforts, as well as those of others dealing with this and related issues, is that it seems that this type of language comes from committees which have NO boaters as members!!  WHAT'S UP WITH THAT?!  If rule-making bodies, especially those along the waterfront, are going to make rules impacting that waterfront, there should be representatives of the populations being affected present on the committee and involved in drafting the language.  This whole rule-making juggernaut is getting out of hand everywhere and not just in Florida.  If these ill-conceived rules are put into play, the economic impact will be felt rapidly…just ask the marina and marine service owners in the Ft. Myers area who were heavily impacted by the drought and low water in Lake Okeechobee.  They were desperate for business without the snowbirds coming through.  The same will happen around the state and it won't be pretty.  My husband and I are natives here and love cruising the state, but this is not a rosy future.
Carolyn Frazier
"Double Dragon"

And, now, "Ta-Da" here are some of my own comments:
I deeply suspect, without really knowing, that what has led the city of Marathon to consider such a set of regulations, are a very small minority of so-called "mariners" who leave their vessels unattended for weeks, or even months, at a time in Marathon waters (Boot Key Harbor in particular). Such an interval of abandonment can truly lead to all sorts of problems, not the least of which is what happens in really foul weather, or, perhaps, if a hose or thru-hull gives way. NOT a pretty picture.
On the other hand, as reported by Captain Marti, the proposed regulations have a real disconnect from on-the-water reality. The wording was obviously ginned up by someone who does not seem to know that the bow is the pointy end of the boat.
If the city of Marathon was using me as a consultant (which they are not – DARN), I would advise them that the goal of discouraging long term abandonment of vessels in their waters is a not unworthy consideration, BUT the wording of their proposal needs to be SERIOUSLY changed and modified so as not to discourage the 98% of all cruisers who would never even consider abandoning their boats in this fashion.
Clearly, we want to hear as many other points of view on this subject as possible. PLEASE click the "Contribute Cruising News" link near the top, center of this, and most Cruisers' Net pages, or e-mail me at CruisingWriter@CruisersNet.net. I am looking foward to hearing from many of you!