Well, of course the ideal would be to have metered electric at the slips, even though it is more of a hassle for the marina staff, it's the most fair approach. Like Bubblehead, our marina has folks who don't live aboard, but leave the A/C running all season while the boat is unattended at the dock - why should they pay less electric than the guy who lives aboard, but is out cruising most of the summer? Because our boat is set up for cruising, we get most of our power from solar, while the weekenders' boats haven't invested in those systems. In our marina's case there is also a charterboat fleet that operates out of this marina. They are the KINGS of using staff time. Because they are vacationers and haven't learned the subtleties of the system, as opposed to the fulltime liveaboards, those charter folks generate copious amounts of trash. (A disproportionate amount of that is empty booze bottles, but that's a whole 'nother issue. They are on vacation, after all.) I think the point is that generalizations about which group uses resources, and how, are problematic.
On your other point, Dave, I'm actually agreeing with you - thereby showing the problems with communication by text without benefit of tone and body language. Of course, your club, and any other marine entity, should be able to determine for itself and set the amount of liveaboard slips, if any, that it feels appropriate for its character, infrastructure, and economics. What is weird is the situation LauderBoy described in San Diego, that there's a county-wide determination that all marinas in the county can support exactly 10% liveaboards, regardless of their differences in character, size, support structure, etc. I think those decisions should be left to the individual marina and their circumstances - 25%? 90%? None at all? The more so in San Diego, where winter isn't a factor given their nice weather year-round.