Beach nourishment-so me the money!

The taxpayers are already paying. Also from the TDC website regarding the completed restoration on the west end:
"The project was a joint effort between Walton County and the City of Destin, and the overall cost of the project was proposed at $27,733,399 of which Walton County?s responsibility was $19,136,045. The Walton County portion of the project was paid for using bed tax collections, state grants, and a loan that is pledged against future bed tax revenue."

That state grant came straight out of taxpayers' pockets.

Here is an interesting little fact, also from the TDC website:

"In a disaster, FEMA will pay for up to 75 percent of recovery efforts for the restoration of an engineered beach. After the completion of the restoration project, it will be an engineered beach. "

Hmmm, FEMA money comes from where? Could it be from the taxpayers' pockets? :scratch:

And what about the bed-tax-paying "visitors" who are arrested and marched off the "dry" beach sand (they've paid for) in handcuffs?


.

I really hesitate to dispute Shelly 😱. But this shouldn't happen. When renourishment takes place, the state sets a line seaward of which the "new" beach is public property. That is why those few beachfront owners challenged the west end renourishment and went to court. That new, public beach would have been between "their" beach and the water. I think the county is betting on 30A renourishment to "solve" their problem regarding public vs private beaches. Don't look for anything definitive from Walton County defending the public's right to use the current "private" beaches. They will stall until either renouishment takes place, or the court halts renourishment alltogether, thanks to the holdouts who sued.
:trainwreck:

So the beach is public because we are all "property owners" by virtue of our various tax dollars. :blink:

Actually, the state grants are funded through documentary tax stamps from purchased properties. So unless you bought property in 2003/2004 when the state grant was awarded to the County, you did not pay for the western Walton County beach nourishment project. On the other hand, if you bought property in another year since the late 90's when the dedicated funding stream was created, you probably paid for someone else's.

FEMA on the other hand IS funded through flood insurance payments and other tax sources


-------------------
From Not Dead Yet:

The taxpayers are already paying. Also from the TDC website regarding the completed restoration on the west end:
"The project was a joint effort between Walton County and the City of Destin, and the overall cost of the project was proposed at $27,733,399 of which Walton County?s responsibility was $19,136,045. The Walton County portion of the project was paid for using bed tax collections, state grants, and a loan that is pledged against future bed tax revenue."

That state grant came straight out of taxpayers' pockets.

Here is an interesting little fact, also from the TDC website:

"In a disaster, FEMA will pay for up to 75 percent of recovery efforts for the restoration of an engineered beach. After the completion of the restoration project, it will be an engineered beach. "

Hmmm, FEMA money comes from where? Could it be from the taxpayers' pockets? :scratch:

I will add that the TDC's website information is not entirely correct. Bed Taxes are not charged to only tourists as the TDC'S site states. Bed Taxes are collected on any properties rented for less than six month terms, and I know many people who rent for less than six months at a time, who are year round citizens of Walton County.

Remember that even after beach nourishment takes place, the part of the dry sandy beach which has been used for numerous years can still disputed as to whether it is for private use only. It would still be possible for someone to be charged with Criminal Trespass on that part of the beach on a case by case basis, and the Courts would have to rule.

And in the end..no matter who pays for sand, Mother Nature can change her mind tomorrow about what the beach will look like. There should be no renourishment, and people should stop all building on the sand...Duh!

And in the end..no matter who pays for sand, Mother Nature can change her mind tomorrow about what the beach will look like. There should be no renourishment, and people should stop all building on the sand...Duh!

And you have way too much common sense! :clap: :wave:

I have a hard time looking at it that way. It?s my understanding that doc stamp revenues are used to fund general revenue, debt service, land acquisitions, etc. Some of it goes for local infrastructure, and every year some of it goes for beach renourishment projects identified by the DEP. First you get your beach determined to be critically eroded, then you follow some other steps, and then eventually you get one of these state grants, maybe, if there is enough money appropriated. Doc stamp revenue is also collected on demand notes, retail installment sales contracts, etc. including refinancing. So if you signed onto any sort of money transaction that is subject to the doc stamp tax, you paid a tax to the state that is then distributed as the legislature sees fit, like most taxes. It isn't as if you can say, well, we had a lot of real estate transactions here so therefore we are able to pay for the restoration with other people's money. IMHO, it's always a mistake to consider a tax, even the bed tax, as someone else's money. :bang:

Thanks I appreciate the further discussion. I just think its important that everyone realizes that taxes are collected in different ways and that the beaches are not funded through general revenue (property taxes) but through the documentary stamp tax, especially in light of all the property tax reform discussions. Here's a question for you, how would you rather see the issue handled? I like the County using grants and bed taxes to pay for the projects instead of general revenue.

Here's a question for you, how would you rather see the issue handled? I like the County using grants and bed taxes to pay for the projects instead of general revenue.

Hmm, not sure exactly what you are asking. I haven't taken a position on renourishment either for or against, except to comment that I think eventually retreat will be the only option. So are you asking how I want to see renourishment paid for in the meantime, on the assumption that it will proceed regardless of my opinion as to whether or not it's a good idea? There is no way the county could use general revenue to pay for it, it's way too expensive. Bed tax by itself is not adequate, so that leaves state and/or federal dollars. I like to think of them as dollars, not as grants. The word grants sort of implies painlessness. In any case it's probably best to spread out the pain amongst as many taxpayers as possible. All the money wasted on unliveable Katrina trailers and ice that rode around the country for months could buy a lot of sand, or it could buy a lot of health care for poor kids, or, well, you get the idea, we could be here for a long time discussing what we think is the "proper" use of tax revenues. Should we start a new thread maybe? :wave: