More Beach Driving Permits

My spouse received an email related to this, it was a survey. Not sure how they got the email address.

I've always thought instead of 150 people in the lottery getting use for the year (according to the email there were over 500 applicants), why not draw four groups of 150, each group getting a respective week of every month. That way everyone who applies receives some access to the beach. So in this example, Group A of 150 applicants are assigned the first week of every month, Group B of a different 150 applicants = the second week of every month, Group C = third week, Group D = Four week of every month. Obviously each month is different, so this may work better by days (1st - 7th, 8th-14th, etc.)... but the point is to make the access window smaller, in order to increase the people who get to use this benefit. Have four different colors of permits for the respective weeks to make Code Enforcement easier. I know many people who would rather have one week a month, rather than no opportunity at all during the year to be able to tailgate on the beach.

Lets just turn the place into Dayton Beach. It's swaying that way regardless.

We don't even issue parking citations to violations on 30A, so who gives a who drives on the beach?

Code enforcement.......

That (above) IS TDC Code Enforcement!!!!

Try driving on the beach without a permit!!!!

Wish they could open it up to any and all full time residents of South Walton. And let that be it.

Well

Wish they could open it up to any and all full time residents of South Walton. And let that be it.

I certainly disagree with that! I live here and pay taxes, why should just south Walton residents be the only ones to have the opportunity/ privilege?

Well

I certainly disagree with that! I live here and pay taxes, why should just south Walton residents be the only ones to have the opportunity/ privilege?

Bob, I'd hate to leave you out of anything and agree, you and everyone in the County (that pays taxes) should drive up and down the beach! Like I said, we are going to become Dayton Beach in more ways than one...

Personally, I like the current way it is being done and do not think it should change. I am not a huge fan of driving on the beach and do like the limits that are in place.

I agree and I don't want any driving on the beach, None, Ever.

I can't imagine that anyone truly believes that it is the best interest of the beach, the wildlife, or even most of the people to have vehicles riding on the beaches on a consistent basis. While emergencies, some very limited areas for launching boats, accessing trash receptacles when no roadside access is available, and a few special needs cases make sense, most other uses are for convenience rather than need. Change is hard, but we all have to deal with it, like it or not. to the world of crowds. These are not the beaches of the 70s anymore.

I think there are too many permits out there now. The driving area isn't very big and imagine if everyone with a permit went to the beach at the same time. Could you even get 1,000 vehicles on the beach at the same time?! I also think the county has too many vehicles cruising the beach. The number of tire tracks during the winter months is absurd. I really miss the beaches of the 70's.

Well

I certainly disagree with that! I live here and pay taxes, why should just south Walton residents be the only ones to have the opportunity/ privilege?

Sorry Bob, just need ways to cut back on permits in a realistic way. The lottery seems ridiculous. Who keeps a 4 wheel drive vehicle on the chance they might get a permit for any given year. People do this but shouldn't have to. You either have a permit or you do not. Seems like residents of the area (property owners) should be have priority in some things.

Sorry Bob, just need ways to cut back on permits in a realistic way. The lottery seems ridiculous. Who keeps a 4 wheel drive vehicle on the chance they might get a permit for any given year. People do this but shouldn't have to. You either have a permit or you do not. Seems like residents of the area (property owners) should be have priority in some things.

I understand, but that is leaving out folks who may have lived here for generations for someone who just happened to move here and get a beach permit based on the location of their home.

How about we go back to what the original permit was for.... LAUNCHING BOATS..??

I understand, but that is leaving out folks who may have lived here for generations for someone who just happened to move here and get a beach permit based on the location of their home.

How about those homeowners (generations) that have deeds to their private beach???

How about those homeowners (generations) that have deeds to their private beach???

Are you saying they should be able to drive on their beach?

Are you saying they should be able to drive on their beach?

No silly Bob, they've had their property taken from them by local government, but you complain about long time residents having the "right" to drive on the beach. Has that been established in the courts, or is that just something everyone thought would be "understood"?

I was pointing out your inconsistent argument...

Leaving folks out? Can I drive on the Freeport north of the bay beaches??? (Based on how things are going, maybe I will some day..)

Lotto is fine with a limited number. NO transfers once won. Do NOT increase numbers. Keep vehicles off the beach!

OR

Refer to my original post about Daytona. Let's make Grayton, Daytona Beach!!!! (Sarc)

No silly Bob, they've had their property taken from them by local government, but you complain about long time residents having the "right" to drive on the beach. Has that been established in the courts, or is that just something everyone thought would be "understood"?

I was pointing out your inconsistent argument...

Leaving folks out? Can I drive on the Freeport north of the bay beaches??? (Based on how things are going, maybe I will some day..)

Lotto is fine with a limited number. NO transfers once won. Do NOT increase numbers. Keep vehicles off the beach!

OR

Refer to my original post about Daytona. Let's make Grayton, Daytona Beach!!!! (Sarc)

I still believe in customary use. If you don't that is fine. I am wondering why more people who claim property rights aren't knocking down the dunes and driving on it or building on it for that matter. Oh wait, government regulates that. I have no issue with government enforcing rules/ laws on the beach with relation to customary use. So the government seems to have a lot of latitude as to the beach.

I still believe in customary use. If you don't that is fine. I am wondering why more people who claim property rights aren't knocking down the dunes and driving on it or building on it for that matter. Oh wait, government regulates that. I have no issue with government enforcing rules/ laws on the beach with relation to customary use. So the government seems to have a lot of latitude as to the beach.

Bob, yes the government and Walton County BCC has police power, too much police power IMO, to regulate how to use private property and everything else BUT not WHO can use my or your private property. The Constitution protects that individual right in America. Big difference.

Walton does not have the authority to permit any private individual to drive on my or your private property - including private beach vendors recently. It's never been a custom from time immemorial for private use to drive on private property either. The TDC does not have the right to drive on private property without consent either for that matter.

Bob, yes the government and Walton County BCC has police power, too much police power IMO, to regulate how to use private property and everything else BUT not WHO can use my or your private property. The Constitution protects that individual right in America. Big difference.

Walton does not have the authority to permit any private individual to drive on my or your private property - including private beach vendors recently. It's never been a custom from time immemorial for private use to drive on private property either. The TDC does not have the right to drive on private property without consent either for that matter.

Look, these are my opinions/ beliefs. I am more than willing to allow the Courts to decide and move on from there. I know one individual involved in the lawsuit and respect him immensely, but disagree with his stance. I suppose the difference with me over some posters to this site is my opinion is not the only that matters and I try not to get butt hurt when others disagree but am certainly not afraid to throw my opinion out there.

Look, these are my opinions/ beliefs. I am more than willing to allow the Courts to decide and move on from there. I know one individual involved in the lawsuit and respect him immensely, but disagree with his stance. I suppose the difference with me over some posters to this site is my opinion is not the only that matters and I try not to get butt hurt when others disagree but am certainly not afraid to throw my opinion out there.

You are entitled to your opinion as are we all. Just pointing out why you are wrong IMO about driving on private property and customary-take.

"I am more than willing to allow the Courts to decide ..." But it could be $40 to $50 MILLION Walton taxpayers dollars, according to Comander (Oct 2016) plus the owners legal fees if BCC lose, to find out in the courts if customary-take is a violation of the Constitution. Is that how you want to spent all our tax payer dollars? Don’t bring up economic benefit of customary-take, that is not a historical criteria to justify customary-take. In fact the benefactor of custom shall not profit from use of private property. Regardless of customary-take it would still not justify driving over private property anywhere.

You are entitled to your opinion as are we all. Just pointing out why you are wrong IMO about driving on private property and customary-take.

"I am more than willing to allow the Courts to decide ..." But it could be $40 to $50 MILLION Walton taxpayers dollars, according to Comander (Oct 2016) plus the owners legal fees if BCC lose, to find out in the courts if customary-take is a violation of the Constitution. Is that how you want to spent all our tax payer dollars? Don’t bring up economic benefit of customary-take, that is not a historical criteria to justify customary-take. In fact the benefactor of custom shall not profit from use of private property. Regardless of customary-take it would still not justify driving over private property anywhere.

And sometimes that is how the answer will be found. If for some reason the courts side with my opinion over yours will that make your opinion/ belief wrong? As I said my feelings won't be hurt if the courts rule against my belief/ opinion, but I will certainly have a definitive answer that I can live with. Instead of speculation from what I will suppose is a "Forum Lawyer".

And sometimes that is how the answer will be found. If for some reason the courts side with my opinion over yours will that make your opinion/ belief wrong? As I said my feelings won't be hurt if the courts rule against my belief/ opinion, but I will certainly have a definitive answer that I can live with. Instead of speculation from what I will suppose is a "Forum Lawyer".

Bob, you did not answer the question; in your opinion should the BCC be willing to spend $40M to $50 MILLION Walton tax payer dollars on customary-take litigation as a good use of all Walton tax payer’s money? Given all the other infrastructure priorities.

Especially given that claimant of custom cannot “profit” (I would say take value from) another's private property. Do your homework on the many hundreds of custom doctrine; don’t take my "Forum Lawyer" word for it. Information is power. Theriaque legal opinion is not objective and a disservice to the BCC and has enriched himself in his disservice. He gets paid $0 if he recommends that the BCC not pursue customary-take and $425 and hour and to date 4 lawsuits to spend Walton tax payer's money on if he does.

I understand you, Danny, and Dave R are all for spending TENS? of MILLIONS of other people's (Walton tax payer) money litigating customary-take; but is that the best use of all Walton tax payer's money? Remember economic benefit is not a criteria for a claim of custom.

Bob, you did not answer the question; in your opinion should the BCC be willing to spend $40M to $50 MILLION Walton tax payer dollars on customary-take litigation as a good use of all Walton tax payer’s money? Given all the other infrastructure priorities.

Especially given that claimant of custom cannot “profit” (I would say take value from) another's private property. Do your homework on the many hundreds of custom doctrine; don’t take my "Forum Lawyer" word for it. Information is power. Theriaque legal opinion is not objective and a disservice to the BCC and has enriched himself in his disservice. He gets paid $0 if he recommends that the BCC not pursue customary-take and $425 and hour and to date 4 lawsuits to spend Walton tax payer's money on if he does.

I understand you, Danny, and Dave R are all for spending TENS? of MILLIONS of other people's (Walton tax payer) money litigating customary-take; but is that the best use of all Walton tax payer's money? Remember economic benefit is not a criteria for a claim of custom.

As I said, it is for the courts to decide. If our elected officials decide to bail on this issue, I think there will be problems in the future as this issue comes back. As I said, not a firehouse lawyer or a lawyer of any sort. That being said, I have put my name to my opinion. Unfortunately this forum is not going to settle this issue and you, unless you are part of the team litigating this issue, aren't going to win the case here. You do seem to have your talking points down, I have or think I have, seen you post something similar multiple times. As for spending taxpayer money, part of the tax base here, so my money is in there.