Some private beach owners are attempting to get the legislature to legalize all seawalls. This would include even ones that are illegal and which pose a negative environmental impact and intrude onto public beaches.
State legislators, Rep. Coley, Rep. Drake, Senator Gaetz and Senator Evers are holding a delegation meeting at the south annex next Wednesday, 12/15/10, at 1:30 PM to consider this bill.
If all seawalls are legalized then taxpayers could be held accountable to pay for the mitigation of environmental damage .
There are many seawalls that were done properly according to proper standards and have been properly maintained.
However, there are also some that have used the wrong color sand, have not been completely covered in sand, block seat turtle nesting, and at least one has been built in front of a public beach.
It is not in the public?s interest to legalize all seawalls. This should be done on a case by case basis.
Please contact the county commissioners and state legislators and tell them that the state should not legalize all seawalls nor interfere in the local HCP environmental mitigation process.
See contact information below.
Backgound:
After Hurricane Dennis stuck our area in 2005 the county issued temporary permits to many beach front property owners so they could build seawalls to protect their property.
However, many of those people built permanent seawalls and some of those walls were built out onto other people?s property, built inappropriately in front of vacant lots or in one case built about 20-feet out onto our public beaches.
Currently beach front property owners are required to help pay for the the HCP environmental mitigation. There is a proposed one-time fee of $100 per linear foot of seawall.
Actually the county is paying for two thirds of the cost of the HCP through current programs so beach front property owners are only being asked to fund that last third of the cost.
Many do not want to fund the Plan. If they get this law passed they could get bailed out by the tax payers.
State legislators, Rep. Coley, Rep. Drake, Senator Gaetz and Senator Evers are holding a delegation meeting at the south annex next Wednesday, 12/15/10, at 1:30 PM to consider this bill.
That would be legislation they would take to Tallahassee for approval by the entire legislature. And if that happens the funding source for the HCP could go away.
Beachfront property owners with illegal seawalls who suddenly find themselves with seawalls that are legal are unlikely to take part in the HCP, and if they don?t, how do you think the county will fund the Plan?
Please contact the county commissioners and state legislators and tell them that the state should not legalize all seawalls nor interfere in the local HCP environmental mitigation process.
State Legislators:
Representative Marti Coley
Phone: 850-488-2873 850-488-2873
Email: <marti.coley@myfloridahouse.gov>
Senator Don Gaetz
Phone: Toll Free: 866-450-4366 866-450-4366 or 850-487-5009 850-487-5009
Email: <gaetz.don.web@flsenate.gov>
Representative Brad Drake
Phone: 850-488-4726 850-488-4726
Email: <brad.drake@myfloridahouse.gov>
Senator Greg Evers
Phone: 850-689-0556 850-689-0556
Email: <evers.greg.web@flsenate.gov>
County Commissioners:
Scott Brannon, District 1/ Vice Chairman
Phone: 850-835-4860 850-835-4860
Email: <brascott@co.walton.fl.us>
Kenneth Pridgen, District 2
Phone: 850-834-6328 850-834-6328
Email: <prikenneth@co.walton.fl.us>
Larry Jones, District 3, Chairman
Phone: 850-892-8474 850-892-8474
Email: <jonlarry@co.walton.fl.us>
Sara Comander, District 4
Phone: 850-835-4834 850-835-4834
Email: <comsara@co.walton.fl.us>
Cecilia Jones, District 5
Phone: 850-231-2978 850-231-2978
Email: <joncecilia@co.walton.fl.us>
hi n dryhi n dryBeach Lover205 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach Lover
hi n dryBeach Lover205 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach Lover8,161 views
Replies
58
Matt JMatt JSWGB24,862 postsJoined View profileMessageSWGB
Matt JSWGB24,862 postsJoined View profileMessageSWGBWhy not make the contractors who installed them illegally or improperly liable?
zip3zip3Beach Lover151 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach Lover
Why not make the contractors who installed them illegally or improperly liable?
I agree.
kkddbbkkddbbBanned869 postsJoined View profileMessageBanned
Outlaw all seawalls!
Andy AAndy ABeach FanaticBlue Mountain Beach4,389 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach Fanatic
Andy ABeach FanaticBlue Mountain Beach4,389 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach FanaticAs is the case with most issues there are two sides to the story. This is the side from one beachfront owner's point of view who has not been involved in the formation of the Habitat Conservation Plan until recently.
Let me state at the outset it is probably the unanimous opinion of beachfront property owners that they have a right, and in the case of condominium owners as I am, a fiduciary responsibility, to protect their property and their investment in it. We are not all millionaires, nor as in my case, even close to it. I own one of nineteen units but it is my permanent home and where I chose to retire.
I live on the highest point between Apalachicola and Pensacola and on a morning in 2005 we awoke to find our beautiful bluff gone and the front units of our complex left without sand supporting the foundations. Many up and down Blue Mountain Beach were left in even worse shape. It was obviously an emergency situation and Walton County came to our aid by allowing us through permit to erect armoring for protection of our property and re-construction of the dune system in the area. This not only hopefully would assure future protection of our property but also re-establish habitat for wildlife as well. Somehow, that part got lost in Sharon Maxwell's letter of December 11, 2010.
It is a given that not every bit of armoring done after Hurricane Dennis was done properly. Ours was. There was a multitude of meetings held regarding what should be done and how it should be done. Those meetings included representatives from Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection, Engineers, Armoring Contractors, US Fish and Wildlife and, yes, at at least one meeting, Sharon Maxwell. We were advised to do what we needed to do and our wall would be approved permanently at some point in the future. We paid all fees, hired an engineer, hired a worldwide known seawall contractor and proceeded to do what was necessary to protect our property for the future and to restore it to the best possible use for us as well as our wildlife species.
Well, it is now 2010 and our application has been at FDEP for 4 years. We have responded to every request they have issued for more information. Additionally, now we are told the HCP cannot be completed without an "Incidental Take" permit from US Fish and Wildlife. Funny, this was never mentioned by them at any of the meetings we held when considering the protection of our property and the habitat.
In regard to the turtle population and its being affected by the armoring, the 2008 nesting data shows nesting levels higher than those in 2001 through 2003. Furthermore, nesting data for 2008 and 2009 shows a nesting increase in Loggerhead turtles while the same time period for the rest of the state showed the 4th lowest number of nests since data began to be collected. Where's the "take"? By the way, I was lucky enough to be able to watch a Loggerhead lay her eggs one evening here on Blue Mountain Beach this season.
Now, a personal note but one with which I think most beachfront property owners would agree. I have always been for public beaches. I have always been considerate of the need to protect our turtles and other species of wildlife. No one who has armoring has asked for one cent in reimbursement for restoration of the habitat or for the expense of restoring our property to a useful condition. That can't be said for Katrina, Rita or the BP oil spill victims. We only seek fairness, and with the present situation we do not feel we are getting it. It is my firm belief the the US Fish and Wildlife Service is literally blackmailing the County of Walton. It quite alright for them and the Walton County Turtle Watch Association to dig up and transport over 300 turtle eggs to the East Florida coast and it not be considered a "take" but when we restore our sand so that the turtles may nest, it is a "take". Maybe, on second thought, it is time for the private beachfront property owners to consider restricting the use of their beaches until they receive some consideration for what they have done instead of knocking them for destroying the habitat.
Let me state at the outset it is probably the unanimous opinion of beachfront property owners that they have a right, and in the case of condominium owners as I am, a fiduciary responsibility, to protect their property and their investment in it. We are not all millionaires, nor as in my case, even close to it. I own one of nineteen units but it is my permanent home and where I chose to retire.
I live on the highest point between Apalachicola and Pensacola and on a morning in 2005 we awoke to find our beautiful bluff gone and the front units of our complex left without sand supporting the foundations. Many up and down Blue Mountain Beach were left in even worse shape. It was obviously an emergency situation and Walton County came to our aid by allowing us through permit to erect armoring for protection of our property and re-construction of the dune system in the area. This not only hopefully would assure future protection of our property but also re-establish habitat for wildlife as well. Somehow, that part got lost in Sharon Maxwell's letter of December 11, 2010.
It is a given that not every bit of armoring done after Hurricane Dennis was done properly. Ours was. There was a multitude of meetings held regarding what should be done and how it should be done. Those meetings included representatives from Florida Dept. of Environmental Protection, Engineers, Armoring Contractors, US Fish and Wildlife and, yes, at at least one meeting, Sharon Maxwell. We were advised to do what we needed to do and our wall would be approved permanently at some point in the future. We paid all fees, hired an engineer, hired a worldwide known seawall contractor and proceeded to do what was necessary to protect our property for the future and to restore it to the best possible use for us as well as our wildlife species.
Well, it is now 2010 and our application has been at FDEP for 4 years. We have responded to every request they have issued for more information. Additionally, now we are told the HCP cannot be completed without an "Incidental Take" permit from US Fish and Wildlife. Funny, this was never mentioned by them at any of the meetings we held when considering the protection of our property and the habitat.
In regard to the turtle population and its being affected by the armoring, the 2008 nesting data shows nesting levels higher than those in 2001 through 2003. Furthermore, nesting data for 2008 and 2009 shows a nesting increase in Loggerhead turtles while the same time period for the rest of the state showed the 4th lowest number of nests since data began to be collected. Where's the "take"? By the way, I was lucky enough to be able to watch a Loggerhead lay her eggs one evening here on Blue Mountain Beach this season.
Now, a personal note but one with which I think most beachfront property owners would agree. I have always been for public beaches. I have always been considerate of the need to protect our turtles and other species of wildlife. No one who has armoring has asked for one cent in reimbursement for restoration of the habitat or for the expense of restoring our property to a useful condition. That can't be said for Katrina, Rita or the BP oil spill victims. We only seek fairness, and with the present situation we do not feel we are getting it. It is my firm belief the the US Fish and Wildlife Service is literally blackmailing the County of Walton. It quite alright for them and the Walton County Turtle Watch Association to dig up and transport over 300 turtle eggs to the East Florida coast and it not be considered a "take" but when we restore our sand so that the turtles may nest, it is a "take". Maybe, on second thought, it is time for the private beachfront property owners to consider restricting the use of their beaches until they receive some consideration for what they have done instead of knocking them for destroying the habitat.
KurtKurtAdminSoWal2,470 postsJoined View profileMessageAdmin
KurtAdminSoWal2,470 postsJoined View profileMessageAdmin
scooterbug44scooterbug44SoWal ExpertSowal16,706 postsJoined View profileMessageSoWal Expert
scooterbug44SoWal ExpertSowal16,706 postsJoined View profileMessageSoWal ExpertI don't have a problem with the few properly constructed seawalls (and I have repeatedly suggested that a good budget solution is getting rid of the FDEP folks in Tallahassee who set a new standard of incompetence), but I do have an issue with taxpayers footing the bill for seawalls and illegal seawalls getting a pass.
IMO the contractors/owners who improperly installed seawalls should foot the bill.
IMO the contractors/owners who improperly installed seawalls should foot the bill.
KurtKurtAdminSoWal2,470 postsJoined View profileMessageAdmin
KurtAdminSoWal2,470 postsJoined View profileMessageAdmin
KurtKurtAdminSoWal2,470 postsJoined View profileMessageAdmin
KurtAdminSoWal2,470 postsJoined View profileMessageAdmin
KurtKurtAdminSoWal2,470 postsJoined View profileMessageAdmin
KurtAdminSoWal2,470 postsJoined View profileMessageAdmin
7/3/05 - Walton County Commissioner Ro Cuchens surveys his project and discusses matters with Walton County code enforcement coordinator Kevin Hargett and a passerby.
KurtKurtAdminSoWal2,470 postsJoined View profileMessageAdmin
KurtAdminSoWal2,470 postsJoined View profileMessageAdmin
NotDeadYetNotDeadYetBeach Fanatic1,416 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach Fanatic
NotDeadYetBeach Fanatic1,416 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach FanaticIt is my firm belief the the US Fish and Wildlife Service is literally blackmailing the County of Walton. It quite alright for them and the Walton County Turtle Watch Association to dig up and transport over 300 turtle eggs to the East Florida coast and it not be considered a "take" but when we restore our sand so that the turtles may nest, it is a "take". Maybe, on second thought, it is time for the private beachfront property owners to consider restricting the use of their beaches until they receive some consideration for what they have done instead of knocking them for destroying the habitat.The decision to relocate eggs last summer was made at the state and federal level. Walton County and the South Walton Turtle Watch had nothing to do with it, and the decision had nothing whatsoever to do with the seawalls. It was all about the oil spill.
You accuse USFW of blackmail, and in nearly the same breath, your last sentence sounds very like blackmail to me.
The issue here is not what was done - it was done five years ago - the present issue is how to resolve it and who is going to pay for the resolution. The thread title here is a good one, should the taxpayers bail out the seawall owners, especially now that at least one, you, is talking about restricting use of those beaches by said taxpayers?
Andy AAndy ABeach FanaticBlue Mountain Beach4,389 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach Fanatic
Andy ABeach FanaticBlue Mountain Beach4,389 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach FanaticThe decision to relocate eggs last summer was made at the state and federal level. Walton County and the South Walton Turtle Watch had nothing to do with it, and the decision had nothing whatsoever to do with the seawalls. It was all about the oil spill.I think you should note the rest of the letter. The last sentence only said "maybe" and was considered poetic license as far as I'm concerned. On various threads in this forum, I have strongly defended and supported the public's right to use ALL the beach and that the beaches should not be "private" in Florida. We, the beach front owners, are being asked to fully pay for what all the public now uses and I don't think that is fair. If you do, you are entitled to, what I consider, your very flawed opinion. That said, I realize you are not alone. Everyone likes something that is free.
You accuse USFW of blackmail, and in nearly the same breath, your last sentence sounds very like blackmail to me.
The issue here is not what was done - it was done five years ago - the present issue is how to resolve it and who is going to pay for the resolution. The thread title here is a good one, should the taxpayers bail out the seawall owners, especially now that at least one, you, is talking about restricting use of those beaches by said taxpayers?
Edited
Andy AAndy ABeach FanaticBlue Mountain Beach4,389 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach Fanatic
Andy ABeach FanaticBlue Mountain Beach4,389 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach FanaticKurt, thank you for all the pictures of the construction in2005. I'm sure you are aware that some of the walls were not covered because the owners were told not to cover them. At least that is what I have been told. Please now post some pictures of what the renovated area of Blue Mt. Beach where I now live looks like.
NotDeadYetNotDeadYetBeach Fanatic1,416 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach Fanatic
NotDeadYetBeach Fanatic1,416 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach FanaticThe last sentence only said "maybe" and was considered poetic license as far as I'm concerned.I see. Thank you for clarifying that. :roll:
Matt JMatt JSWGB24,862 postsJoined View profileMessageSWGB
Matt JSWGB24,862 postsJoined View profileMessageSWGBSo you bought a house on a hill of sand. I assume you walked down to the beach and turned around. A hurricane, the strongest force in nature, came along and amazingly washed out the sand. Now I and everyone else in the county who thought that might be a bad idea is going to pay for it?
Let me tell you where you can put your TEA.
Let me tell you where you can put your TEA.
Andy AAndy ABeach FanaticBlue Mountain Beach4,389 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach Fanatic
Andy ABeach FanaticBlue Mountain Beach4,389 postsJoined View profileMessageBeach FanaticSo you bought a house on a hill of sand. I assume you walked down to the beach and turned around. A hurricane, the strongest force in nature, came along and amazingly washed out the sand. Now I and everyone else in the county who thought that might be a bad idea is going to pay for it?"Why not make the contractors who installed them illegally or improperly liable?" Your quote not mine. Its one of the few sensible things you said lately. Also, it is too bad you don't understand how people who have really lived in the world think. Arrogant? Yes. True? Also yes. I know more about the forces of nature first hand than you could possibly learn in your internet exploring and I accept the risks of life, including living on the beach. Have a nice day.
Let me tell you where you can put your TEA.
Matt JMatt JSWGB24,862 postsJoined View profileMessageSWGB
Matt JSWGB24,862 postsJoined View profileMessageSWGB"Why not make the contractors who installed them illegally or improperly liable?" Your quote not mine. Its one of the few sensible things you said lately. Also, it is too bad you don't understand how people who have really lived in the world think. Arrogant? Yes. True? Also yes. I know more about the forces of nature first hand than you could possibly learn in your internet exploring and I accept the risks of life, including living on the beach. Have a nice day.
Just so we're clear you understand that you are socializing your decision to live in a geologically unstable area? Once again it benefits you so it's fine, but if it benefits someone else it's an evil force that must be stopped at all costs. You are beyond arrogant and selfish.
If I follow your above post then your seawall was installed illegally or improperly? Your quote of my quote.
Once again I will bow to your unbelievable life experience and move on since you will simply answer this post with the written version of this:
YouTube - Yosemite Sam
John RJohn Rneeds to get out moreConflictinator6,782 postsJoined View profileMessageneeds to get out more
John Rneeds to get out moreConflictinator6,782 postsJoined View profileMessageneeds to get out moreSo, there are those who choose to build on a moving medium, and when the moving medium moves in a way that's not to their advantage, they change the topography to protect their assets. Then they want to taxpayers to cover the costs. Is there another way to read this?
In effect, the taxpayers are paying for 'private' beaches. Isn't that illegal? And, if not, wouldn't that make the 'private' beaches public? I figure if I'm paying for one's seawall, then I have every right to sit in front of it. And if this gets approved across the board, who will make the determination over private vs public sand?
In effect, the taxpayers are paying for 'private' beaches. Isn't that illegal? And, if not, wouldn't that make the 'private' beaches public? I figure if I'm paying for one's seawall, then I have every right to sit in front of it. And if this gets approved across the board, who will make the determination over private vs public sand?
Smiling JOeSmiling JOeSoWal Expert31,643 postsJoined View profileMessageSoWal Expert
Smiling JOeSoWal Expert31,643 postsJoined View profileMessageSoWal ExpertThe tourists' tax dollars have been paying for private beaches for years. Nothing new there. eg- the TDC collects trash from the beaches on a daily basis from all beaches in South Walton, with maybe the exception of the state parks, regardless of ownership.
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.