Livaboards Florida law

Does anyone know offhand if the New River is State, Fed or local jurisdiction ?

Now that the definition of a livaboard vessel does NOT include a vessel in navigation, should these vessels be allowed to tie up behind residences on the canals and stay aboard on a temporary basis ?? currently Broward Co. does not allow "liveaboards" but lots of them are actually qualify as vessels in navigation.

The new Florida statute has defined "livaboard" and it is NOT your average cruising vessel, so how can Broward Co. deny a vessel in transit, tying up behind a residence for a week or whatever and staying aboard, the statute denies any County from making ordinances etc to control vessels "in navigation".


FL law) 327.60 Local regulations; limitations)
(2) Nothing contained in the provisions of this section shall be construed to prohibit local governmental authorities from the enactment or enforcement of regulations which prohibit or restrict the mooring or anchoring of floating structures or live-aboard vessels within their jurisdictions or of any vessels within the marked boundaries of mooring fields permitted as provided in s. 327.40. However, local governmental authorities are prohibited from regulating the anchoring outside of such mooring fields of non-live-aboard vessels in navigation.
(from Chapter 2009-86, section 14)

I realize the law references anchoring but the full text has defined what a liveabord is not and most of the cruising community qualifies under that law.

I am not putting this out to be contentious rather to point out that perhaps these local Governments are again overstepping their boundary's of jurisdiction. If this is of no interest to you please ignore it.

Sorry Capt, a vessel in navigation does not have to be underway, this is also covered in US Federal Statutes, to be brief, any vessel capable of navigation is a vessel in navigation whether anchored or not and is not a liveaboard vessel.
Now we can debate this back and forth but the issue has been clarified and indeed a few sheriffs have had their feathers cut using the same interpretation as you stated, if you need proof I have the letters.


Very simply and to the point the U.S. Supreme Court has already spoken on this issue.
“1.U.S. Supreme Court, Lewis Blue Point Oyster Cultivation Co. v. Briggs 229 US 82
When overturning a lower court case the U.S. Supreme Court said: “If the public right of navigation is the dominant right, and if, as must be the case, the title of the owner of the bed of navigable waters hold subject absolutely to the public right of navigation, this dominant right must include the right to the use of the bed of water for every purpose which is in aid of navigation.””
Robert Drisco

AND further....
It doesn’t matter whether or not you are living aboard for more than 48 hours. As long as you vessel is used for navigation and not solely as a residence you are not a liveaboard by Florida law, which trumps any local ordinances. Florida statute says this:
327.02 Definitions of terms used in this chapter and in chapter 328.—As used in this chapter and in chapter 328, unless the context clearly requires a different meaning, the term:
(17)“Live-aboard vessel” means:
a) Any vessel used solely as a residence and not for navigation;
b) Any vessel represented as a place of business, or a professional or other commercial enterprise; or
c) Any vessel for which a declaration of domicile has been filed pursuant to s. 222.17.

All of the above is FYI for those interested...

I have written to Broward Co, and will post the reply when and if received.

After all, when the developers cut the canals they didn't do it just look pretty, it was for boats. As the world moves forward, bylaws can get left behind.

The ordinance would seem to allow livaboard if the toilets are connected to a holding tank, if that is the case, how can they fine you ?

based on the ordinance, would seem legal to stay on board behind a residence if you meet the sewage requirements. ?? need a test case