Private Beaches in South Walton - Customary Use Updates & SB1622

I believe some owners have been getting bad advice from their lawyers . . . like "put up chains, ropes and signs or the people will take your beach away and such. Also not allowing beach renourishment is dumb.

Yes there is no doubt that our species has the propensity to be dumbed down by bad advice from false prophets who stir up the pot and keep us from using our own common sense.

How does this situation now impact communities from Rosemary to Seaside to farther west? They mostly have blocked access to their beach from 30A. And currently block use of the beach if you access by a public beach access. At Seaside they have had security to check for wristbands. And then there are the curfew times but those young people access the beach east from the public access then hang out - by the hundreds sometimes - at the 4 houses just east of Seaside. We still have bad behavior even after the Arkansas people have come and gone and the restrictions have been lifted. (Counting down again. Next month.) Ellen

How does this situation now impact communities from Rosemary to Seaside to farther west? They mostly have blocked access to their beach from 30A. And currently block use of the beach if you access by a public beach access. At Seaside they have had security to check for wristbands. And then there are the curfew times but those young people access the beach east from the public access then hang out - by the hundreds sometimes - at the 4 houses just east of Seaside. We still have bad behavior even after the Arkansas people have come and gone and the restrictions have been lifted. (Counting down again. Next month.) Ellen

It's a shame. They would gate the entire towns if they could. I believe Seaside wants to route 30A around watercolor.

It's a shame. They would gate the entire towns if they could. I believe Seaside wants to route 30A around watercolor.

I could see all that happening and those behind the gates will have no shame. It is a form of greed that most people do not have. Those that do have found a way to mitigate their greed and desire to become exclusive owners of this planet's most valuable resources. Mike Huckabee taught me all this and now I can see it clearly by just paying attention to current events in the news. All we have to do is listen and you can feel it. History repeats itself because human nature does not change...

I could see all that happening and those behind the gates will have no shame. It is a form of greed that most people do not have. Those that do have found a way to mitigate their greed and desire to become exclusive owners of this planet's most valuable resources. Mike Huckabee taught me all this and now I can see it clearly by just paying attention to current events in the news. All we have to do is listen and you can feel it. History repeats itself because human nature does not change...

Wow so right - all you have to do is look at how the white man took all the occupied land that is now America founded on genocide and slavery. Huckabee, the orange buffoon and Desantis are just descendants of that legacy.

Wow so right - all you have to do is look at how the white man took all the occupied land that is now America founded on genocide and slavery. Huckabee, the orange buffoon and Desantis are just descendants of that legacy.

Slavery and genocide is not exclusive to the white man. I think most every great civilization old and new was founded on slavery. What is interesting is the relationship between wealth, civilization and slavery. It goes back to what I learned from Huckabee. Wealth and Civilization will justify Slavery and many other things that our brain knows is wrong. The closer we are to power and wealth the closer we are to compromised morality. I believe it is human nature but I would like to be wrong. I would like to believe that power and wealth changes our brain where morality exists. However, All Men have less empathy which is human nature and all men have ego which is human nature. These are biological and it really does not matter what color you are. I agree that it is easy to throw all the blame at white man in the short time that we have existed but I am not sure that can answer all our problems. Would we have had great civilizations without white man? As human population increased through human history so has the need for civilized society to maintain order. Huckabee's theory is that white man is the reason why we have civilized society. Of course his spirtual beliefs and studies support his theory. I am able to listen to all sides, all theories and then try and apply common sense. No, it makes no sense that the color of our skin makes us good or evil. I think it makes more sense that we all have capacity to be good and we all have the capacity to be bad. Life is already a great mystery and we are all part of that mystery...

Slavery and genocide is not exclusive to the white man. I think most every great civilization old and new was founded on slavery. What is interesting is the relationship between wealth, civilization and slavery. It goes back to what I learned from Huckabee. Wealth and Civilization will justify Slavery and many other things that our brain knows is wrong. The closer we are to power and wealth the closer we are to compromised morality. I believe it is human nature but I would like to be wrong. I would like to believe that power and wealth changes our brain where morality exists. However, All Men have less empathy which is human nature and all men have ego which is human nature. These are biological and it really does not matter what color you are. I agree that it is easy to throw all the blame at white man in the short time that we have existed but I am not sure that can answer all our problems. Would we have had great civilizations without white man? As human population increased through human history so has the need for civilized society to maintain order. Huckabee's theory is that white man is the reason why we have civilized society. Of course his spirtual beliefs and studies support his theory. I am able to listen to all sides, all theories and then try and apply common sense. No, it makes no sense that the color of our skin makes us good or evil. I think it makes more sense that we all have capacity to be good and we all have the capacity to be bad. Life is already a great mystery and we are all part of that mystery...

I've always sided with fighters like John Brown and Harriet Tubman. I hope I'm not in the minority.

Someone mentioned a war between BFO's and the general public. Greed is usually a component of war. There are many to blame but I do not think it is the general public who just want what everyone wants...freedom to enjoy mother nature's beauty. So that leaves BFO's holding the greed basket. However, it is not really that simple is it. More people are coming to our beaches from just about everywhere and to be honest we want them here spending their money. So back to the blame game. Does anyone recall Reggie Gaskins aka Mike Huckabee on this forum? If not go back and look at his posts. My take on Mike's posts was all about greed, power and privilege. He really believed in his "prophet" status. This forum provided an awakening on my part regarding how greed, power and privilege can affect a person's belief's. Mike believed that he earned the privilege to control his beach and that he was on a higher plane of existence to make that call. That is offensive greed not just your basic greed that we all have. In my opinion that is where this war began. Well Mike stirred up the war and then left. Does this ring any bells? He left this community with so many more problems and he probably even brought out more greed in all of us as we took such strong positions and circled our wagons to fight. Okay enough about war and blame. Now we have problems to solve. I would imagine it will take all of us to come together and solve these problems. Decent human beings all on the same level just trying to live our lives and be happy. In the future we just need to be better able to recognize false prophets and prevent the chaos that always follows and hurts everyone...

SIX mentions of the word GREED in just one post. And there's not one mention of private property rights or even that the customary use fell flat its face as I predicted here years ago. Some things never change.

Interesting... Reggie Gaskins aka Mike Huckabee - I never knew.

Sincerely glad to see you're alive and kicking.

After all these years, I've always wondered why the county didn't declare immanent domain below the dunes. I'm not a lawyer so please educate me.

Immanent domain would require the county pay beach front owners market rates for the property seized, however that would be determined through the court process (via appeals of initial appraisals).

On the other hand, I believe I mentioned years ago on SoWal that the county could strategically seize only adjacent properties next to public accesses to minimize expense and maximize public use. To me, this made the most sense - the county actually paying for something that they are taking.

SIX mentions of the word GREED in just one post. And there's not one mention of private property rights or even that the customary use fell flat its face as I predicted here years ago. Some things never change.

Interesting... Reggie Gaskins aka Mike Huckabee - I never knew.

Sincerely glad to see you're alive and kicking.

You knew. Glad to hear from you too

Greed is a human behavior. That means we all have it. Read all the words and you will see that I do not blame everything on one group of people. I own property. You own property. We all want privacy and that is not greed. Greed (in this context) is when you desire privacy at the expense of others. I think using the word GREED six times in one post might be a bit much. I got it down to four

Immanent domain would require the county pay beach front owners market rates for the property seized, however that would be determined through the court process (via appeals of initial appraisals).

On the other hand, I believe I mentioned years ago on SoWal that the county could strategically seize only adjacent properties next to public accesses to minimize expense and maximize public use. To me, this made the most sense - the county actually paying for something that they are taking.

Eminent Domain would only work if private property owners need or want the money. Wealthy people do not need the money. They want exclusive rights to the beach. Go back and read what Reggie Gaskins aka Huckabee wrote. He believed that he earned the right to keep people off his beach. He used all sorts of reasoning but the one that stuck with me is that he believed his status in life gave him that right...

Immanent domain would require the county pay beach front owners market rates for the property seized, however that would be determined through the court process (via appeals of initial appraisals).

On the other hand, I believe I mentioned years ago on SoWal that the county could strategically seize only adjacent properties next to public accesses to minimize expense and maximize public use. To me, this made the most sense - the county actually paying for something that they are taking.

I don't have a problem with county paying to correct an old mistake of putting deeds on beach - but the state should reimburse the county.

Today, the Florida House of Representatives unanimously passed a bill (SB 1622) that would repeal a 2018 law limiting public access and barring local governments from passing ordinances regarding customary use.

The Florida Senate passed the Customary Use bill last week. With today’s House vote, the measure now goes to Gov.
Ron DeSantis for his signature.

Walton County Commissioner
Tony Anderson praised House Rep.
Shane Abbott, who spearheaded
this legislation. “We owe Rep.
Abbott our deepest thanks. He
worked tirelessly on this bill and
encouraged his House colleagues to
support it. The unanimous vote
illustrates his resolve and
perseverance in getting this done.”


Rep. Abbott noted that this was the top issue for his constituents and this bill goes a long way to helping correct what the Legislature did in 2018.

Most people who debate customary use rely on emotion rather than facts. SB 1622 will DO NOTHING to reinstate customary use as CU has already been litigated and settled in favor of private property owners. However it's great if you're a politician looking for praise and support by letting everyone know you're all about customary use.

Again, the county settled customary use WITH PREJUDICE. So even if the county were to "re-declare" customary use, the property owners would file suit against the county citing the previous customary settlement (did I mention settled WITH PREJUDICE?). At that point, I believe the county would be on the hook for ALL legal fees if it got that far.

CU is dead.

The real hook that SB 1622 has is that it authorizes the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to proceed with beach restoration projects for any area designated by the department as critically eroded in the Critically Eroded Beaches in Florida Report dated August 2024 (Coastal Critical Erosion Areas - click).

But my understanding is that a construction easement is required by the county/state on beach front property before any beach nourishment work can begin. Years ago, the county tried this and well over 90% of the beach front owners refused to provide an easement and ended the beach nourishment attempt.

So the real question at hand is whether or not the state/county can FORCE a construction easement via this bill upon an unwilling property owner who does not feel their beach needs nourishing as they did years ago. IMO, that will be the next wave of racked up legal expenses and the State of Florida / Walton County will be the defendant if they try to force construction easements.

Eminent Domain would only work if private property owners need or want the money.

Absolutely false. All the property owner can do is haggle over the price in court.

BTW, you really need to let go of Mike Huckabee being the focused demon in all of this, for your sanity.

Absolutely false. All the property owner can do is haggle over the price in court.

BTW, you really need to let go of Mike Huckabee being the focused demon in all of this, for your sanity.

That is where people like Mike Huckabee comes in. I do not believe he is a demon. I believe that he is a hypocrite yes. I believe that he does not care about you and I working class human, does not care about this community and finally does not really care about any beach but his.

That is where people like Mike Huckabee comes in. I do not believe he is a demon. I believe that he is a hypocrite yes. I believe that he does not care about you and I working class human, does not care about this community and finally does not really care about any beach but his.

Jesus gave it to him.

Most people who debate customary use rely on emotion rather than facts. SB 1622 will DO NOTHING to reinstate customary use as CU has already been litigated and settled in favor of private property owners. However it's great if you're a politician looking for praise and support by letting everyone know you're all about customary use.

Again, the county settled customary use WITH PREJUDICE. So even if the county were to "re-declare" customary use, the property owners would file suit against the county citing the previous customary settlement (did I mention settled WITH PREJUDICE?). At that point, I believe the county would be on the hook for ALL legal fees if it got that far.

CU is dead.

The real hook that SB 1622 has is that it authorizes the Florida Department of Environmental Protection to proceed with beach restoration projects for any area designated by the department as critically eroded in the Critically Eroded Beaches in Florida Report dated August 2024 (Coastal Critical Erosion Areas - click).

But my understanding is that a construction easement is required by the county/state on beach front property before any beach nourishment work can begin. Years ago, the county tried this and well over 90% of the beach front owners refused to provide an easement and ended the beach nourishment attempt.

So the real question at hand is whether or not the state/county can FORCE a construction easement via this bill upon an unwilling property owner who does not feel their beach needs nourishing as they did years ago. IMO, that will be the next wave of racked up legal expenses and the State of Florida / Walton County will be the defendant if they try to force construction easements.

Follow our leader...don't get hung up on facts

Emotion is being used against all of us. One day you will figure this out.

Dead is the end of life. As long as we have human life and beautiful beaches this will be an issue. Elite wealth and unchecked power is not our friend. I have "listened" to many a podcast of this group. They are obsessed with money and power. Not saying you and I do not have obsessions but unchecked power is not something we have. We have more in common than you would like to believe. Instead of a war between customary use and private property rights which could be negotiated in a common sense manner we should be discussing the impacts of over-development and who benefits and who loses and what to do about it.

Follow our leader...don't get hung up on facts

Emotion is being used against all of us. One day you will figure this out.

Dead is the end of life. As long as we have human life and beautiful beaches this will be an issue. Elite wealth and unchecked power is not our friend. I have "listened" to many a podcast of this group. They are obsessed with money and power. Not saying you and I do not have obsessions but unchecked power is not something we have. We have more in common than you would like to believe. Instead of a war between customary use and private property rights which could be negotiated in a common sense manner we should be discussing the impacts of over-development and who benefits and who loses and what to do about it.

We all know we have an amazing spot here with an ecosystem that should be revered instead of exploited. What if bed tax dollars focused on respect instead of just fun? Could we improve the behavior of visitors? Ask them to come to experience the wonders of nature?

Dead is the end of life.

To reaffirm my previous comment:

CU is dead.

However there are other ways the county could have addressed the lack of public beach:

1. PAY for it, as previously mentioned, via eminent domain but only on strategically located properties. The biggest question would be how much $$$. How does one value the sandy part of the beach that is connected to upland private property? The county could try a pilot case in court to see how it works out.

2. On appropriate parcels, the county could work out a compromise with willing beach front owners where the public could use private beach in exchange for lower taxes or some other annual compensation. BTW, I mentioned this years and years ago that the back half of the beach was lightly used and that maybe in exchange for compensation, private property owners would let the public use this part of the beach. Mike Huckabee even suggested a similar measure when he was part of a committee to try to come to some compromise. Dave Rauschkolb would have none of it - "ALL OR NONE" and "NO COMPROMISE". He said it reminded him of "go to the back of the bus" days. So right now, the public has none.

3. The county could buy beach front properties and retitle the sandy beach part as public. Then they could resell the beach front property for close to what they paid for it.

4. Or they can just wait. A large enough hurricane will eventually come through that will REDEFINE the DEP's slanted definition of "Critically Eroded". At that point, I'm guessing beach front owners will throw in the towel and settle for beach nourishment and the demise of squeaky white sugar beaches.

1. Value Beach by the value of mining and selling the sand.
2. Messy
3. I wish government was that flexible.
4. Don't we already have areas that are critical?

1. Value Beach by the value of mining and selling the sand.
2. Messy
3. I wish government was that flexible.
4. Don't we already have areas that are critical?

1. Cute, but value beach based on court outcome when the county executes eminent domain.
2. Not disagreeing with "Messy" but it is a possibility.
3. Me too. They are, however, flexible enough to buy property at a premium and sell it on the cheap to insiders (ring a bell?).
4. Bingo! What is the definition of critically eroded anyway? The beaches have significantly built back up naturally since the 2004-2005 hurricanes. Sorry, but I have a tough time buying into the DEP definition of critical erosion now that legislation is apparently focusing on forced nourishment of beaches, again, based on DEP's definition. It doesn't smell right.

To reaffirm my previous comment:

CU is dead.

However there are other ways the county could have addressed the lack of public beach:

1. PAY for it, as previously mentioned, via eminent domain but only on strategically located properties. The biggest question would be how much $$$. How does one value the sandy part of the beach that is connected to upland private property? The county could try a pilot case in court to see how it works out.

2. On appropriate parcels, the county could work out a compromise with willing beach front owners where the public could use private beach in exchange for lower taxes or some other annual compensation. BTW, I mentioned this years and years ago that the back half of the beach was lightly used and that maybe in exchange for compensation, private property owners would let the public use this part of the beach. Mike Huckabee even suggested a similar measure when he was part of a committee to try to come to some compromise. Dave Rauschkolb would have none of it - "ALL OR NONE" and "NO COMPROMISE". He said it reminded him of "go to the back of the bus" days. So right now, the public has none.

3. The county could buy beach front properties and retitle the sandy beach part as public. Then they could resell the beach front property for close to what they paid for it.

4. Or they can just wait. A large enough hurricane will eventually come through that will REDEFINE the DEP's slanted definition of "Critically Eroded". At that point, I'm guessing beach front owners will throw in the towel and settle for beach nourishment and the demise of squeaky white sugar beaches.

I do not think you would like the results from Eminent Domain. The lawsuits would not be fun for anyone involved. Trust me. I like No. 2. Unfortunately No. 4 is a real possiblity. Please do not believe anything MH suggested in this forum or in the news or anywhere else. He wanted no part of any compromise. Trust me.

When I see waves licking the dunes in a few places in South Walton after a few hours of 20mph SE wind is that critical?

When I see waves licking the dunes in a few places in South Walton after a few hours of 20mph SE wind is that critical?

Absolutely critical Yes! Climate changes are bringing more tornado's, stronger thunderstorms and intense hurricanes. All these will affect beach erosion. Some people will forever be in denial but climate change is a fact. We will need global cooperation to decrease the affects of climate change. Our leadership at the moment is unconcerned.

Absolutely critical Yes! Climate changes are bringing more tornado's, stronger thunderstorms and intense hurricanes. All these will affect beach erosion. Some people will forever be in denial but climate change is a fact. We will need global cooperation to decrease the affects of climate change. Our leadership at the moment is unconcerned.

Erasing science. Unbelievable.