Beach contamination in Seagrove

If people write emails or call the people listed earlier in this thread, you may want to give specific addresses or areas where the brown sand is being dumped. Doing so will help DEP do it's job more efficiently. I didn't give addresses in my email because I'm not in the area and didn't know the specific addresses or areas.

Very good point, Paula. Next week when my husband and I go beach walking, we plan on making notes about where we see something brown and ugly and illegal. :(

If people write emails or call the people listed earlier in this thread, you may want to give specific addresses or areas where the brown sand is being dumped. Doing so will help DEP do it's job more efficiently. I didn't give addresses in my email because I'm not in the area and didn't know the specific addresses or areas.

Addresses in question for dark sand dumping in Seagrove Beach, from the WalCo Property Appraiser's website:

OWNERSHIP INFORMATION:

ISACKS, LEONARD S JR & BRYAN L
260 ROSEWOOD DR
METAIRIE, LA 70005

Situs Address 42 MONTGOMERY ST

*********
JONES, BRADLEY R & CHERYL A
58 MONTGOMERY ST
SANTA ROSA BCH, FL 32459

Situs Address 58 MONTGOMERY ST SRB

**********
KOBLENZER, DALE & PEGGY E
635 RIDGECREST ROAD
AKRON, OH 44303

Situs Address76 MONTGOMERY ST SRB

***********
DAVIS, BARBARA L
90 MONTGOMERY ST
SANTA ROSA BEACH, FL 32459

Situs Address90 MONTGOMERY ST SRB
************************************************
Fox, why do you say the seawalls are illegal?

I am concerned that county officials are allowing violations of the August 1, 2005 BCC ruling at the Montgomery Street beach construction site (west of Greenwood Ave.).

The Special Meeting of Walton County Board of Commissioners decision August 1, 2005 clearly stated:
?Any material placed on the beach, subsequent to this meeting, that does not meet the 7.2 standard would not be an allowable use and would have to be removed at the contractor's or homeowner's expense.?

Sand of considerably less than 7.2 standard has been brought in since August 1 and continues to be dumped on the beach at Montgomery Street beach to west of Greenwood Ave.

This situation is unacceptable and has to be remedied. We also have to wonder if such exceptions to the rules are happening elsewhere on the beach.

I feel we all need to contact the commissioners and request a Special Board of County Commissioner (BCC) meeting so we can have an open forum on this important issue.

What do you think?

If you agree please also contact your friends and neighbors who you think are concerned about this problem. The more of us that call the better.

If you would like more info. please PM me.

Thank you.
Please see commissioner contact information below:

Scott Brannon *
19367 U.S. Hwy 331 S

Freeport, FL 32439

Tel: (850) 835-4860

Fax: (850) 835-4836

E-mail:* brascott@co.walton.fl.us

*
Commissioner Kenneth Pridgen *
Address:
17400 State Highway 83 North
DeFuniak Springs, FL 32433
Phone: (850) 834-6328
Fax: (850) 834-6385
Email: prikenneth@co.walton.fl.us

Commissioner Larry Jones
Contact Information
Donna Walsinkham, District 3*Executive Assistant
1483 County Highway 1087
DeFuniak Springs, FL. 32435
Phone: (850) 892-8474
Fax: (850)892-8475
e-mail: jonlarry@co.walton.fl.us

Commissioner Ro Cuchens
Commissioner Cuchens can be reached at (850) 835-4834.
His office is located at 417 Highway 20 East in Freeport.
Email: cucro@co.walton.fl.us

Commissioner Cindy Meadows
90 Spires Lane, Unit 7-A
Santa Rosa Beach, FL. 32459
Phone: (850) 622-3059
Fax: (850) 622-3067
e-mail:* meacindy@co.walton.fl.us

...
The report basically summarized that some people are upset that people having been dumping darker sand on the beach. They did mention the required minimums, but overall, lacked a grasp of the corrupt politics behind it all, which may be a bigger story than the dark sand.

IMO, the dark sand is only a symptom of the true problem, which is corrupt people in public office.

Thanks for the update smilin joe. This issue is about corrupt people in public office. Chris Mitchell with news 13 was in attendance during the August Emergency Meeting. His camera was running. We need to urge him to get involvede. He saw what was up in Blue MTn and heard the BCC decision. Maybe he will more acturetly get the facts out.

All I want for Xmas is No Mo Roe....

We need ecopal, tuck and SJ to be interviewed. That is my Christmas Wish.
I have been in contact with WC and have let them know that I have friends out there that will be checking on sand grade being used...they say they are as concerned about this as I was...good thing...DON"T MESS WITH TEXAS!

I am concerned that county officials are allowing violations of the August 1, 2005 BCC ruling at the Montgomery Street beach construction site (west of Greenwood Ave.).

The Special Meeting of Walton County Board of Commissioners decision August 1, 2005 clearly stated:
?Any material placed on the beach, subsequent to this meeting, that does not meet the 7.2 standard would not be an allowable use and would have to be removed at the contractor's or homeowner's expense.?

Sand of considerably less than 7.2 standard has been brought in since August 1 and continues to be dumped on the beach at Montgomery Street beach to west of Greenwood Ave.

This situation is unacceptable and has to be remedied. We also have to wonder if such exceptions to the rules are happening elsewhere on the beach.
...

What really gets me about all of this flip flopping the County Commissioners are now doing is that, at the Aug 01 meeting, the specific question was asked by a homeowner from the audience (I doubt it was recorded in the official record), "What if I already have a contract for sand that meets only the 6.2 min. standard?" That is when the Commissioners tried to clarify what ecopal wrote above. The answer from the County Comissioners was, "?Any material placed on the beach, subsequent to this meeting, that does not meet the 7.2 standard would not be an allowable use and would have to be removed at the contractor's or homeowner's expense.?

They knew the answer at that meeting, and the Commissioners clarified it for them. It doesn't get any more black and white than this.

also email the following:

I received a reply back from Rick Harter, so the more people expressing concern, the better.

Tony McNeal with DEP. <tony.mcneal@dep.state.fl.us> 850-921-7745.

Jim Martinello, DEP Enforcement & Compliance officer.
<James.Martinello@dep.state.fl.us> 850-414-7772.

Rick Harter , rick.harter@dep.state.fl.us 850-921-7746

Ask for DEP to come and officially test the sand. If they determine that the dark sand is "not beach compatible material" they can order the county to have it removed.

This sand was already tested and did not make the grade. Now it sems the county staff and Commissioners are saying it is some sort of grandfathered in.

We need to remind them to listen to the tape of the August meeting on the sand.

Quoting from the minutes on the Clerk of Courts website:


"Motion by Commissioner Jones to remove any material that does not meet the 6.2 standard as set forth by staff. The motion also included raising the standard to 7.2, and requiring that any material used was to be in accordance with the typical section for shoreline stabilization as presented by Mrs. Blackshear, capped with a minimum of three feet of sand with a value of 8.1. This is to be effective as of August 2, 2005. Any material placed on the beach prior to this meeting, that met the standard of 6.2 when approved, would be considered an allowable use for emergency stability fill. Any material that was placed on the beach prior to this meeting and was not in compliance with the 6.2 standard must be removed at the contractor's or homeowner?s expense. Any material placed on the beach, subsequent to this meeting, that does not meet the 7.2 standard would not be an allowable use and would have to be removed at the contractor's or homeowner's expense. Commissioner Meadows seconded the motion.

Chairman Pridgen asked about the sand approved by staff at Blue Mountain Beach. Chairman Jones stated that if the sand was approved by staff and met the 6.2 standard it could remain and be used in accordance with the typical section. However, if materials did not meet the 6.2 standard, then Code Enforcement would need to work thru those issues. He also recommended that the Board set a standard and allow staff to enforce it and work out the best engineering practices.

Commissioner Cuchens restated that the materials were checked numerous times and that if the materials were going to be rejected they should have been rejected at an earlier time. Commissioner Jones stated again that if the materials delivered were approved by staff at the 6.2 standard they were to stay.

Attorney Hallman asked Commissioner Jones to clarify as to the initial placement of the darker material. Commissioner Jones stated that the material must end up as directed in the typical section presented by Mrs. Blackshear. Commissioner Cuchens asked if this also applied to staging areas, which he stated was what Blue Mountain Beach was intended to be. Commissioner Jones re-stated that the final result must look like the typical section.

Commissioner Meadows asked if a time frame would be used to determine how long residents had to complete the work. Commissioner Jones stated that he did not know what a reasonable time would be. Ms. Blackshear asked that the time frame be left for staff to determine.

Chairman Pridgen called for the question on the motion. Ayes 3, Naye 1. Jones Aye, Meadows Aye, Pridgen Aye, and Cuchens Naye. Motion passed.

Ms. Blackshear asked for clarification on the motion stating that her understanding was that sand approved by staff at a 6.2 would stay but, future material would be at a 7.2 and the darker materials were to be used in accordance with the typical section for shoreline stabilization and then capped with the 8.1 or better material.

Attorney Hallman asked for clarification, asking if the sand previously approved at a 6.2 using the washing procedure would still be permissible under the motion. Mrs. Blackshear stated that her understanding was that anything brought in after the following morning that did not meet the 7.2 standard would need to be removed and that she would work with the contractor to remove the sand left at Blue Mountain Beach.

Commissioner Cuchens asked for clarification as to who was to pay for removal of the sand at Blue Mountain Beach. Mrs. Blackshear stated that her understanding was that unapproved sand was to be removed at the contractor?s expense, but asked that staff be allowed to work out the issue of removing sand approved by staff using the washing procedure.

Motion by Commissioner Meadows, second by Commissioner Jones, to remove sand dumped at Blue Mountain Beach that was approved by staff and did not meet the 6.2 standard prior to washing at the county?s expense.

Commissioner Jones asked for clarification on the motion. Commissioner Meadows stated that her motion was that the sand at Blue Mountain Beach approved at a value of 6.2 or higher using the washing procedure be removed at the county?s expense. Attorney Hallman asked at what rate the contractor would charge the county for removal. Commissioner Meadows stated that the rate was unknown, but it would be checked into. Ms. Blackshear again asked that staff be allowed to work out the details.

Chairman Pridgen called for the question on the motion. Ayes 3, Naye 1. Jones Aye, Meadows Aye, Pridgen Aye, and Cuchens Naye. Motion Passed.

Ms. Blackshear stated that she was clear on the directives from the Board and that she was disappointed at the treatment of contractors working on the beach. She reminded the citizens that Code Enforcement was working hard to repair the beaches and that they requested this meeting because clarification was needed. She also stated that she felt the majority of the complaints came from the stockpile of material at Blue Mountain Beach.

Attorney Hallman asked for clarification about sand that met the washed 6.2 standard, but does not meet it without washing, in areas other than Blue Mountain Beach.

Ms. Blackshear stated that it was her understanding that it would need to be removed and that the Board had directed her to work with the contractor to remove the sand at Blue Mountain Beach.

Mr. Goodwin objected to the Board calling a meeting without sufficient public notice and asked how to file a formal objection to the decision of the Board. Attorney Hallman replied that there was no formal objection used in a legislative hearing, but that he should consult his own attorney for legal advice.

Motion by Commissioner Meadows, seconded by Commissioner Jones, to adjourn the meeting at 8:20 p.m. Ayes 4, Nayes 0. Jones Aye, Cuchens Aye, Pridgen Aye, and Meadows Aye."



************

From the minutes, it looks like Mrs. Blackshear understood clearly, and therefore should not have been confused when explaining the situation to the "uncertain" Mr Greg Graham.

Even Ro states that the sand should have been removed earlier when it tested below the minimum. :bang:

Good work SJ!

Lets hope we can get a Special BCC meeting called to bring all this up.

For those interested in reading minutes on all BCC meetings go to:

http://minutes.co.walton.fl.us/

However, the Special BCC July 14 meeting was not on the site.

The confusing terminology here seems to be "sand brought in after August 1." Do they mean brought in for approval, or brought in for dumping. This could be a legal stickler.

In other words, this quote from the minutes can be interpreted two ways: "..sand approved by staff at a 6.2 would stay but, future material would be at a 7.2.."

There are a couple of key verbs missing here.
Did they mean that after Aug 1, future mat'l (brought in for approval) would be (approved) at 7.2, [thus allowing for previously-approved sand to be dumped at any time going forward, justifying the current situation?]

OR

Did they mean that after Aug 1, future mat'l (to be dumped) would be (required to be rated) at a 7.2, [in order to be dumped at all after Aug 1--thus disallowing the current situation?]

The following paragraph seems to point to the latter case, since they use the term "removed" and not "rejected." But a good lawyer could make either case if this is all they had to work with.

Oh, Katie Blue, I hope that regardless of the specific wording, the non-code sand would have to come out. The wording may make a difference in terms of whether the owner pays or the county pays, but either way it really should be taken out and the appropriate sand should be put in.

By the way, I noticed that some sea walls were going in by our beach. Have you seen them? Other than the sea walls, a lot of tractor tracks in the sand, and that 1950s house hanging over the side of the dune, our beach looked very good. I'm sorry you won't be there over the break -- it would have been nice to run into you at the beach.

Thanks, Paula, we really wish we could be there too.

Generally I'm optimistic about things, but not so much about the chances of owners removing bad sand. If they had conscience and foresight, I'm betting they wouldn't have dumped it to begin with. And with all this confusion about what the actual letter of the law is, there's going to be lots of (eventual) infractions getting grandfathered in over the next year or so -- lots of irreversible damage. Best hope is that the majority of gulf front owners will do the right thing. But you know, I lost faith in the local govt about a year ago. I really hope that won't always be the case going forward, but until the next election... :idontno:

Well, sounds like we need to get some of the posters on this board who value the environment, think long-term, and can't be bought elected to county positions if they want to take them. Anyone want to run for office?

It's really too bad we won't cross paths this trip, Katie Blue, especially since we found out we're neighbors.

Good work SJ!

Lets hope we can get a Special BCC meeting called to bring all this up.

For those interested in reading minutes on all BCC meetings go to:

http://minutes.co.walton.fl.us/

However, the Special BCC July 14 meeting was not on the site.

The minutes I posted were from the "Special Meeting" on Aug 1, 2005.

Seagrove Villas has a new walkover-but it is private property.
If you use that walkover the dirty sand will be on your left-east and the excavation into the beach will be down a block on our right/west.

If you want to go down a public access you can use the Andalussa street access then walk or run west for a couple blocks.

Thanks for the directions. I finally walked down there - actually I walked all the way to Doodle's. Couldn't believe my eyes - all of the brown "sand" (I know, not all of the sand is brown) and seawalls. It must cost an individual a boatload of money to build of of those seawalls, fill it with sand, create a dune, plant sea oats, and try to protect it all with the textile meshing and wooden fencing.

It must have been on another thread, but I can't find it - what is the science behind behind how these wooden seawalls covered with sand are supposed to stop erosion from a future storm?

it's really not exactly designed just to protect from a storm - its to keep the dune, while had been left in a vertical shape by the last big storm, from slumping back down to a more rounded shape (and taking their building with it), plus they are hoping that it will protect, at least a little, from the next big storm. we'll see.



the unesco thing (for the carribean but valid for sowal as well - has everything in it, just read through each case and you will pretty much have everything) is at: http://www.unesco.org/csi/pub/source/ero6.htm

it's really not exactly designed just to protect from a storm - its to keep the dune, while had been left in a vertical shape by the last big storm, from slumping back down to a more rounded shape (and taking their building with it), plus they are hoping that it will protect, at least a little, from the next big storm. we'll see.



the unesco thing (for the carribean but valid for sowal as well - has everything in it, just read through each case and you will pretty much have everything) is at: http://www.unesco.org/csi/pub/source/ero6.htm

Thanks for the info! I'll read up on it.

IMPORTANT CORRECTION to earlier post of 15Dec.05 on this thread which read in part:
>>>>...the dark sand dumped in Seagrove, as recently as yesterday, measures a 6.2 and it should be 7.2 per County Commissioners' ruling from the Blue Mtn Beach Special Mtg. ...When Mr Graham was asked why they are being allowed to add sand below the minimum standards, he responded in a way that let my friend believe that he was being poked and prodded by higher-ups in the County. ....According to Mr Graham, he and Pat Blackshear went to Pat's boss and several County Commissioners, including Cindy Meadows, and their response was, if they started before the change in minimum standards to the 7.2, they could continue with the jobs. ... My friend also asked him why he could not now tell all dirt contractors and homeowners that since they now understand the law to be different from what he was telling them, any new sand delivered from this day forward would have to meet the new 7.2 minimum requirement. He did not have a response, other than the people told him if the owners had started before the Blue Mtn Beach Mtg, they could continue. <<<<

Commissioner Cindy Meadows asked me to post the following correction regarding what she allegedly said to Mr. Graham (in above posting) regarding sand standards. Ms. Meadows stated on 22Dec.05:

" ... misrepresentations of my response to Greg Graham when he told me (only after I called him to ask about the complaints) of the Planning Department's ruling on this newly imported sand.* Pat's boss would be the County Commission and NO ONE called me to* ask my opinion.* I called Greg last week after receiving the e-mails from complainants.* I never agreed with Greg's ruling that they could continue dumping less than 7.2 sand.* I listened to his after-the-fact explanation of the case and how they were handling it.* I haven't officially (on the record) given my opinion on the matter.* I want all the information I can get before doing so and I will address this with Pat Blackshear.* I know that the owners importing the sand have applied pressure to the Planning Department.*
Commissioner Cindy Meadows"