Proposed bill could void Walton County's customary use ordinance
- Thread starter Kaydence
- Start date
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
Suggestion. Merge this thread with Customary Use Will Happen On Sowal Beaches
The bill is still a bill and has to be voted on and go the Governor before it is law so lets not get ahead of ourselves. Actually read the bill.
Fact: The bill is about how local government and politicians, abused their police powers in the name of self-rule and declared private property with out due process and shifted the burden to property owners to disproof the plaintiff’s (County) assertion that the narrow doctrine of custom applies to all Walton County littoral dry sand. Even if the bill becomes law Walton can still claim customary use on private property but Walton first has the burden of proof, not property owners.
Fiction: Tell them [FL legislators] that you support Customary use and reject any bill that would restrict it. BEACHFRONT HOMEOWNERS: “We will have our beaches back."
Although the names are not included these are Rauschkolb-isms if I’ve ever read one but Dave R can correct me if I’m wrong. Surprised a “Your Sand is My Sand” wasn’t thrown in there too.
Fact: The bill is not about if custom applies but who has the burden of proof. Local government (Plaintiff) or private property owners (Defendant). Just like in the on-going Walton County customary use litigation between New & Tippen (Plaintiff) v Bradford (Defendant-property owner). Except that New & Tippen can not declare customary use by ordinance on the Bradford's property and the Bradford’s have to disprove Plaintiff’s claim.
Court rules that 10-foot-wide walkway to beach doesn't create easement to subdivision beachfront - The Defuniak Herald & Beach Breeze
Misleading Channel 7 “report”.
Beachfront property owners could soon take back their rights to the beach
Fiction: Surfrider Foundation, Holly Parker, states property owners don’t like the answer [declaration of customary use on private property] they got from their local government and seek a legislative resolution. NOT true. Property Owners don’t like that Walton BCC did not prove it in court so owners can rebut the BCC so called “experts” and evidence. The bill/law does not prohibit local governments claiming public customary rights on private property; governments just have to proof it in court first.
Fact: The elements of proving custom on private property does not include local economics. Bill reads and courts have held “ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and free from dispute”. Historically the custom claimant cannot “profit” or take value from the property owner.
Fiction: Rauschkolb-ism - the historical definition of customary use does not include ancient native Americans throwing a Frisbee. The bill does not aim to give property owner certain rights to restrict access to their beachfront property. Owners already have that right; unless Walton BCC can prove otherwise in court.
Dave R’s support of a incompetent Walton BCC abusing their police powers to declare private property for public use, a BCC and customary-take proponents that villainize property owners and legislators for protecting Constitutionally protected property rights, and Dave R’s arrogance and ignorance of customary use of private property is the abomination in my view.
The bill is still a bill and has to be voted on and go the Governor before it is law so lets not get ahead of ourselves. Actually read the bill.
Fact: The bill is about how local government and politicians, abused their police powers in the name of self-rule and declared private property with out due process and shifted the burden to property owners to disproof the plaintiff’s (County) assertion that the narrow doctrine of custom applies to all Walton County littoral dry sand. Even if the bill becomes law Walton can still claim customary use on private property but Walton first has the burden of proof, not property owners.
Fiction: Tell them [FL legislators] that you support Customary use and reject any bill that would restrict it. BEACHFRONT HOMEOWNERS: “We will have our beaches back."
Although the names are not included these are Rauschkolb-isms if I’ve ever read one but Dave R can correct me if I’m wrong. Surprised a “Your Sand is My Sand” wasn’t thrown in there too.
Fact: The bill is not about if custom applies but who has the burden of proof. Local government (Plaintiff) or private property owners (Defendant). Just like in the on-going Walton County customary use litigation between New & Tippen (Plaintiff) v Bradford (Defendant-property owner). Except that New & Tippen can not declare customary use by ordinance on the Bradford's property and the Bradford’s have to disprove Plaintiff’s claim.
Court rules that 10-foot-wide walkway to beach doesn't create easement to subdivision beachfront - The Defuniak Herald & Beach Breeze
Misleading Channel 7 “report”.
Beachfront property owners could soon take back their rights to the beach
Fiction: Surfrider Foundation, Holly Parker, states property owners don’t like the answer [declaration of customary use on private property] they got from their local government and seek a legislative resolution. NOT true. Property Owners don’t like that Walton BCC did not prove it in court so owners can rebut the BCC so called “experts” and evidence. The bill/law does not prohibit local governments claiming public customary rights on private property; governments just have to proof it in court first.
Fact: The elements of proving custom on private property does not include local economics. Bill reads and courts have held “ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and free from dispute”. Historically the custom claimant cannot “profit” or take value from the property owner.
Fiction: Rauschkolb-ism - the historical definition of customary use does not include ancient native Americans throwing a Frisbee. The bill does not aim to give property owner certain rights to restrict access to their beachfront property. Owners already have that right; unless Walton BCC can prove otherwise in court.
Dave R’s support of a incompetent Walton BCC abusing their police powers to declare private property for public use, a BCC and customary-take proponents that villainize property owners and legislators for protecting Constitutionally protected property rights, and Dave R’s arrogance and ignorance of customary use of private property is the abomination in my view.
Last edited by a moderator:
No interpreting ownership to MHWL. It's in the deed. You can go to the Walton PA and Clerk of Court internet site and look for yourself. Look for ... to the water's edge, point marking Gulf of Mexico, or MHWL.
Like this deed Walton County paid $7,427,000 for.
http://orsearch.clerkofcourts.co.wa.../?booktype=OR&booknumber=3020&pagenumber=4008
I am extremely familiar with the Property Appraiser and Clerk of Court websites. Of course it is in the deed. That is the whole problem. BUT gulf-front owners in the past by and large did not regard the beach in front of their homes as "private" to the point that nobody else could be there.
It is the same change of spirit that causes rustic concrete block beach houses, that have withstood decades of beach life, to be replaced by mega-houses. Sure, that is another topic entirely but it exemplifies the change in attitude.
You still don't get it. It's about entire neighborhoods and new developments claiming these private properties as their property to use paying zero taxes on. It's a strategy by the TDC to support more development, a lot more development to North of 30A.
I believe there is also a change in demographic that goes along with the attitude.
No question that there are some beachfront owners who want to exclude everyone, but I'm sure that the ones who are willing to share with respectful beachgoers get really tired of being lumped together with ones who want total exclusion. Nobody likes to have their rights unilaterally usurped, which is what the customary use ordinance did, but that doesn't mean that there aren't beachfront owners who did, would, and will still share. I recall Gov. Huckabee suggesting trying a beach share program, but that was pretty much dismissed without any real consideration. The whole point of my FEARMONGERING post (above) was that all the divisiveness and stereotyping is making it MORE likely that beachfront owners feel persecuted when they have done nothing to exclude respectful beachgoers from being on the beach in front of their homes within reasonable limitations (like walking, swimming, sunbathing; minimal and reasonable uses). Attitudes have not just changed on the beachfront owner side, they have also changed with the general public. Again, the blame game doesn't help. Some common sense rules and etiquette on the beach would go along way toward healing and bringing some peace back to the beach.
I suspect that resort areas and condo associations have the most difficult time with trying to share their beaches because they already have a considerable number of people who share use of limited beachfront. Single family owners would likely be much more amenable if they had at least some portion of their beachfront linear footage that they could actually reserve for their family and guests. For owners who rent, whether it be resort areas, condos, single family, etc., it is understandable that they would like a section of beach in front of the property they are renting for however $$$$/week they are paying.
It would be great if people would offer up some suggestions/remedies. Maybe if enough people change from focusing on problems and focus on potential solutions, something could be worked out.
Last edited: