could potentially void Walton County's customary land use ordinance
This past spring, Walton County Commissioners passed a law defining the rights of South Walton beach visitors and although the ruling has been done, the battle is not over.
"Right now, I don't really know what the bill says so it could be something that could be a detriment to Walton County and our customary use," District 2 Walton County Commissioner Cecilia Jones said. "If we lose our right for the public to be on the beach that would affect us economically, very much so. We want to just be aware and be proactive in trying to lobby for the right legislation to come forth."
Wednesday, Walton County Commissioners say they will make their way over to the state capital as the topic comes up for debate at the 2018 legislative session.
"I'm all about local control," Jones added.
If the proposed bill passes, it could void Walton county's customary land use ordinance.
www.wjhg.com/content/news/Proposed-bill-could-potentially-void-Walton-Countys-customary-land-use-ordinance-468524403.html
Replies
63
Beach Lover
And yes...nobody used to care if you sat (or drove across, or rode horses, or fished) on "their" beach, or even used their walkovers to get to the beach. Kinder, gentler times when everyone pretty much knew everyone else. And then we were "discovered." The beach driving (except at Grayton) and the horses came to an end, and those are not necessarily bad things. However, sitting and fishing should not be activities that cause you to get run off from the shoreline. *sigh*
That's simply not true. I have photos of private beach signs that are 30-40 years old. There are deeds and restrictions from developers that private beaches are dedicated to the exclusive use of the residents and owners of the property. Seaside has had private beaches since 1981... others back into the 1970's.
Many walkovers have "private" and "no trespassing" signs on them to this very day. Customary use does not change private walkovers.
You are confusing informal use by a few locals, with hordes of tourists overtaking a private beach. Walton county's customary use ordinance is in place for the main purpose to facilitate the hordes of tourists and new development by overturning private property for public use. Follow the money.
Beach Fanatic
AND THE BEAT GOES ON! Yet another attack on beachfront owners (see below in BOLD). Don't people understand that these constant attacks only make things worse rather than better? Pretend that you live on the Bay, on a lake, a river, next to a nature trail, next to a park, have a wooded area open to hunting or something else that happens to be appealing to the public. One day, your local government passes a customary use ordinance that says the public has rights to set up on your property and you are prohibited from asking them to move no matter the circumstances (barring illegal activity) with no due process to determine whether there has actually been long standing use of your property supported by actual facts and evidence. You might just have a problem with that. If you don't, then in all likelihood you have no problem with not having any priority of use over property you bought and pay taxes on, you/your family/your guests either don't use you property and don't care who does, and/or people don't really hang out on your property.
Remember that we have roughly 8 miles (out of 26) of beach open to the general public even though there is a considerable amount of deeded beach to private entities. Of those deeded beach areas, quite a few of them cater to tourists in a resort capacity. Some influential people in this County have done everything they know how to create a divide among those of us who want to use the beaches and those who have deeds to the beach. Instead of encouraging rules and guidelines for everyone sharing and getting along on the beach, they have pitted almost the entire population of Walton County and tourists who come here against beachfront owners, many of whom actually do have deeds to the dry sand adjoining their buildable property, and would willingly share with respectful beachgoers. They also continue to make quiet title actions sound like some nefarious action instead of recognizing that a quiet title is based on facts, evidence, and the law, not some frivolous attempt to give away public property as has been implied on a number of occasions.
There is plenty of blame (not that blame is helpful) to go around for changing South Walton from "the character of the small town." It certainly is not all about the beach, although it is the major draw. Look at over development, inadequate infrastructure such as storm drainage, insufficient roadways and parking, and over-marketing the area being some of the major issues. To say that beachfront owners "are willing to threaten the success and viability of our entire county's to have an relatively unused piece of sand in front of their home is the ultimate example selfishness" is to ignore significant facts. Walton County's decision makers over many years have actually created a great deal of the situation we find ourselves in today. We are now overburdened by the number of residents and visitors without making sure that we could accommodate them FIRST.
How about we START fixing the situation by being better neighbors and friends, by getting involved in CONSTRUCTIVE dialogue, attending meetings (or at least watching them) so that you know what is going on, ask questions when you don't what is going on, VOTE, VOTE, VOTE when elections come around, but make sure that you have researched the candidates so that you some idea what they stand for and the kind of governance you are likely to experience. The blame game just creates animosity and solves nothing.
"Although it has now passed out of the Rules Committee and will pass on to the floor for a full vote, (date & time TBD), the character of the small town, with it's breathtaking free and open beaches, warm and welcoming community has forever changed. Knowing that an entitled group of gulf front property owners who have orchestrated this action (with the help of some legislators unrelated to our community), are willing to threaten the success and viability of our entire county's to have an relatively unused piece of sand in front of their home is the ultimate example selfishness. All those sneaky quiet title actions that have occurred like in Beach Highlands and Seagrove, would now have new meaning. I can hear the bottles of Cristal popping right now. I hope you guys are proud of yourselves."
Remember that we have roughly 8 miles (out of 26) of beach open to the general public even though there is a considerable amount of deeded beach to private entities. Of those deeded beach areas, quite a few of them cater to tourists in a resort capacity. Some influential people in this County have done everything they know how to create a divide among those of us who want to use the beaches and those who have deeds to the beach. Instead of encouraging rules and guidelines for everyone sharing and getting along on the beach, they have pitted almost the entire population of Walton County and tourists who come here against beachfront owners, many of whom actually do have deeds to the dry sand adjoining their buildable property, and would willingly share with respectful beachgoers. They also continue to make quiet title actions sound like some nefarious action instead of recognizing that a quiet title is based on facts, evidence, and the law, not some frivolous attempt to give away public property as has been implied on a number of occasions.
There is plenty of blame (not that blame is helpful) to go around for changing South Walton from "the character of the small town." It certainly is not all about the beach, although it is the major draw. Look at over development, inadequate infrastructure such as storm drainage, insufficient roadways and parking, and over-marketing the area being some of the major issues. To say that beachfront owners "are willing to threaten the success and viability of our entire county's to have an relatively unused piece of sand in front of their home is the ultimate example selfishness" is to ignore significant facts. Walton County's decision makers over many years have actually created a great deal of the situation we find ourselves in today. We are now overburdened by the number of residents and visitors without making sure that we could accommodate them FIRST.
How about we START fixing the situation by being better neighbors and friends, by getting involved in CONSTRUCTIVE dialogue, attending meetings (or at least watching them) so that you know what is going on, ask questions when you don't what is going on, VOTE, VOTE, VOTE when elections come around, but make sure that you have researched the candidates so that you some idea what they stand for and the kind of governance you are likely to experience. The blame game just creates animosity and solves nothing.
"Although it has now passed out of the Rules Committee and will pass on to the floor for a full vote, (date & time TBD), the character of the small town, with it's breathtaking free and open beaches, warm and welcoming community has forever changed. Knowing that an entitled group of gulf front property owners who have orchestrated this action (with the help of some legislators unrelated to our community), are willing to threaten the success and viability of our entire county's to have an relatively unused piece of sand in front of their home is the ultimate example selfishness. All those sneaky quiet title actions that have occurred like in Beach Highlands and Seagrove, would now have new meaning. I can hear the bottles of Cristal popping right now. I hope you guys are proud of yourselves."
Beach Lover
"Although it has now passed out of the Rules Committee and will pass on to the floor for a full vote, (date & time TBD), the character of the small town, with it's breathtaking free and open beaches, warm and welcoming community has forever changed. Knowing that an entitled group of gulf front property owners who have orchestrated this action (with the help of some legislators unrelated to our community), are willing to threaten the success and viability of our entire county's to have an relatively unused piece of sand in front of their home is the ultimate example selfishness. All those sneaky quiet title actions that have occurred like in Beach Highlands and Seagrove, would now have new meaning. I can hear the bottles of Cristal popping right now. I hope you guys are proud of yourselves."
A private property owner does not have any moral or ethical obligation to let the public use their property (except in a life threatening emergency). That's been the case since the days of the King - and attempting to guilt property owners about getting back their own rights that were taken away in 2016 - is laughable.
What else is laughable is that of the public beaches, 50% of that space is given away to the beach vendors by the county - so the argument that the public does not have free beaches and out of space isn't based in any reality.
This was a land grab by the county, plain and simple. Thank goodness the State figured out this simply cannot stand and they won't allow anyone else - including Walton county to try this kind of crap again. Using a high paid out of town lawyer to cherry pick the findings of the court and a high school powerpoint presentation as evidence of ancient use (did no research on uninterrupted criteria) - pathetic.
A private property owner does not have any moral or ethical obligation to let the public use their property (except in a life threatening emergency). That's been the case since the days of the King - and attempting to guilt property owners about getting back their own rights that were taken away in 2016 - is laughable.
What else is laughable is that of the public beaches, 50% of that space is given away to the beach vendors by the county - so the argument that the public does not have free beaches and out of space isn't based in any reality.
This was a land grab by the county, plain and simple. Thank goodness the State figured out this simply cannot stand and they won't allow anyone else - including Walton county to try this kind of crap again. Using a high paid out of town lawyer to cherry pick the findings of the court and a high school powerpoint presentation as evidence of ancient use (did no research on uninterrupted criteria) - pathetic.
Edited
Beach Fanatic
That's simply not true. I have photos of private beach signs that are 30-40 years old. There are deeds and restrictions from developers that private beaches are dedicated to the exclusive use of the residents and owners of the property. Seaside has had private beaches since 1981... others back into the 1970's..
40 years ago I was a teenager doing all those things that you can't do on the beach any longer. Never saw a private beach sign except for Grayton Beach State Park, although we knew Four Mile Village was private due to the Coffeen Nature Preserve. This was before Deer Lake and Topsail Hill became state parks. Sandestin was the first large development that touted private beaches; we snuck in there anyway. Seaside didn't exist.
As far as deeds to the MHWL, my uncle's family - the one who had the fill dirt issue - developed most of Grayton Beach. I also worked for Cube McGee, who platted and sold most of what is today "downtown" Seagrove Beach. My parents were friends with Eric Allen, developer of Dune-Allen. That is where my information comes from. And all these people would be rolling in their graves if they knew how literally today's gulf-front owners were interpreting ownership to the MHWL. I agree that respect should be given to those who live in gulf-front homes; after all, there are things you and I wouldn't want done in our front yards. But, the beach is for all to enjoy.
Beach Lover
Why and where does it say that the beach is for all to enjoy? Can’t people enjoy the beach at the parks etc without the taking titled private property on the whim of the County?
Beach Fanatic
Suggestion. Merge this thread with Customary Use Will Happen On Sowal Beaches
The bill is still a bill and has to be voted on and go the Governor before it is law so lets not get ahead of ourselves. Actually read the bill.
Fact: The bill is about how local government and politicians, abused their police powers in the name of self-rule and declared private property with out due process and shifted the burden to property owners to disproof the plaintiff’s (County) assertion that the narrow doctrine of custom applies to all Walton County littoral dry sand. Even if the bill becomes law Walton can still claim customary use on private property but Walton first has the burden of proof, not property owners.
Fiction: Tell them [FL legislators] that you support Customary use and reject any bill that would restrict it. BEACHFRONT HOMEOWNERS: “We will have our beaches back."
Although the names are not included these are Rauschkolb-isms if I’ve ever read one but Dave R can correct me if I’m wrong. Surprised a “Your Sand is My Sand” wasn’t thrown in there too.
Fact: The bill is not about if custom applies but who has the burden of proof. Local government (Plaintiff) or private property owners (Defendant). Just like in the on-going Walton County customary use litigation between New & Tippen (Plaintiff) v Bradford (Defendant-property owner). Except that New & Tippen can not declare customary use by ordinance on the Bradford's property and the Bradford’s have to disprove Plaintiff’s claim.
Court rules that 10-foot-wide walkway to beach doesn't create easement to subdivision beachfront - The Defuniak Herald & Beach Breeze
Misleading Channel 7 “report”.
Beachfront property owners could soon take back their rights to the beach
Fiction: Surfrider Foundation, Holly Parker, states property owners don’t like the answer [declaration of customary use on private property] they got from their local government and seek a legislative resolution. NOT true. Property Owners don’t like that Walton BCC did not prove it in court so owners can rebut the BCC so called “experts” and evidence. The bill/law does not prohibit local governments claiming public customary rights on private property; governments just have to proof it in court first.
Fact: The elements of proving custom on private property does not include local economics. Bill reads and courts have held “ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and free from dispute”. Historically the custom claimant cannot “profit” or take value from the property owner.
Fiction: Rauschkolb-ism - the historical definition of customary use does not include ancient native Americans throwing a Frisbee. The bill does not aim to give property owner certain rights to restrict access to their beachfront property. Owners already have that right; unless Walton BCC can prove otherwise in court.
Dave R’s support of a incompetent Walton BCC abusing their police powers to declare private property for public use, a BCC and customary-take proponents that villainize property owners and legislators for protecting Constitutionally protected property rights, and Dave R’s arrogance and ignorance of customary use of private property is the abomination in my view.
The bill is still a bill and has to be voted on and go the Governor before it is law so lets not get ahead of ourselves. Actually read the bill.
Fact: The bill is about how local government and politicians, abused their police powers in the name of self-rule and declared private property with out due process and shifted the burden to property owners to disproof the plaintiff’s (County) assertion that the narrow doctrine of custom applies to all Walton County littoral dry sand. Even if the bill becomes law Walton can still claim customary use on private property but Walton first has the burden of proof, not property owners.
Fiction: Tell them [FL legislators] that you support Customary use and reject any bill that would restrict it. BEACHFRONT HOMEOWNERS: “We will have our beaches back."
Although the names are not included these are Rauschkolb-isms if I’ve ever read one but Dave R can correct me if I’m wrong. Surprised a “Your Sand is My Sand” wasn’t thrown in there too.
Fact: The bill is not about if custom applies but who has the burden of proof. Local government (Plaintiff) or private property owners (Defendant). Just like in the on-going Walton County customary use litigation between New & Tippen (Plaintiff) v Bradford (Defendant-property owner). Except that New & Tippen can not declare customary use by ordinance on the Bradford's property and the Bradford’s have to disprove Plaintiff’s claim.
Court rules that 10-foot-wide walkway to beach doesn't create easement to subdivision beachfront - The Defuniak Herald & Beach Breeze
Misleading Channel 7 “report”.
Beachfront property owners could soon take back their rights to the beach
Fiction: Surfrider Foundation, Holly Parker, states property owners don’t like the answer [declaration of customary use on private property] they got from their local government and seek a legislative resolution. NOT true. Property Owners don’t like that Walton BCC did not prove it in court so owners can rebut the BCC so called “experts” and evidence. The bill/law does not prohibit local governments claiming public customary rights on private property; governments just have to proof it in court first.
Fact: The elements of proving custom on private property does not include local economics. Bill reads and courts have held “ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and free from dispute”. Historically the custom claimant cannot “profit” or take value from the property owner.
Fiction: Rauschkolb-ism - the historical definition of customary use does not include ancient native Americans throwing a Frisbee. The bill does not aim to give property owner certain rights to restrict access to their beachfront property. Owners already have that right; unless Walton BCC can prove otherwise in court.
Dave R’s support of a incompetent Walton BCC abusing their police powers to declare private property for public use, a BCC and customary-take proponents that villainize property owners and legislators for protecting Constitutionally protected property rights, and Dave R’s arrogance and ignorance of customary use of private property is the abomination in my view.
Edited
Beach Fanatic
... today's gulf-front owners were interpreting ownership to the MHWL..No interpreting ownership to MHWL. It's in the deed. You can go to the Walton PA and Clerk of Court internet site and look for yourself. Look for ... to the water's edge, point marking Gulf of Mexico, or MHWL.
Like this deed Walton County paid $7,427,000 for.
http://orsearch.clerkofcourts.co.wa.../?booktype=OR&booknumber=3020&pagenumber=4008
Beach Comber
Suggestion. Merge this thread with Customary Use Will Happen On Sowal Beaches
The bill is still a bill and has to be voted on and go the Governor before it is law so lets not get ahead of ourselves. Actually read the bill.
Fact: The bill is about how local government and politicians, abused their police powers in the name of self-rule and declared private property with out due process and shifted the burden to property owners to disproof the plaintiff’s (County) assertion that the narrow doctrine of custom applies to all Walton County littoral dry sand. Even if the bill becomes law Walton can still claim customary use on private property but Walton first has the burden of proof, not property owners.
Fiction: Tell them [FL legislators] that you support Customary use and reject any bill that would restrict it. BEACHFRONT HOMEOWNERS: “We will have our beaches back."
Although the names are not included these are Rauschkolb-isms if I’ve ever read one but Dave R can correct me if I’m wrong. Surprised a “Your Sand is My Sand” wasn’t thrown in there too.
Fact: The bill is not about if custom applies but who has the burden of proof. Local government (Plaintiff) or private property owners (Defendant). Just like in the on-going Walton County customary use litigation between New & Tippen (Plaintiff) v Bradford (Defendant-property owner). Except that New & Tippen can not declare customary use by ordinance on the Bradford's property and the Bradford’s have to disprove Plaintiff’s claim.
Court rules that 10-foot-wide walkway to beach doesn't create easement to subdivision beachfront - The Defuniak Herald & Beach Breeze
Misleading Channel 7 “report”.
Beachfront property owners could soon take back their rights to the beach
Fiction: Surfrider Foundation, Holly Parker, states property owners don’t like the answer [declaration of customary use on private property] they got from their local government and seek a legislative resolution. NOT true. Property Owners don’t like that Walton BCC did not prove it in court so owners can rebut the BCC so called “experts” and evidence. The bill/law does not prohibit local governments claiming public customary rights on private property; governments just have to proof it in court first.
Fact: The elements of proving custom on private property does not include local economics. Bill reads and courts have held “ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and free from dispute”. Historically the custom claimant cannot “profit” or take value from the property owner.
Fiction: Rauschkolb-ism - the historical definition of customary use does not include ancient native Americans throwing a Frisbee. The bill does not aim to give property owner certain rights to restrict access to their beachfront property. Owners already have that right; unless Walton BCC can prove otherwise in court.
Dave R’s support of a incompetent Walton BCC abusing their police powers to declare private property for public use, a BCC and customary-take proponents that villainize property owners and legislators for protecting Constitutionally protected property rights, and Dave R’s arrogance and ignorance of customary use of private property is the abomination in my view.
Beach Comber
Very well done.
Beach Fanatic
No interpreting ownership to MHWL. It's in the deed. You can go to the Walton PA and Clerk of Court internet site and look for yourself. Look for ... to the water's edge, point marking Gulf of Mexico, or MHWL.
Like this deed Walton County paid $7,427,000 for.
http://orsearch.clerkofcourts.co.wa.../?booktype=OR&booknumber=3020&pagenumber=4008
I am extremely familiar with the Property Appraiser and Clerk of Court websites. Of course it is in the deed. That is the whole problem. BUT gulf-front owners in the past by and large did not regard the beach in front of their homes as "private" to the point that nobody else could be there.
It is the same change of spirit that causes rustic concrete block beach houses, that have withstood decades of beach life, to be replaced by mega-houses. Sure, that is another topic entirely but it exemplifies the change in attitude.
Beach Lover
I am extremely familiar with the Property Appraiser and Clerk of Court websites. Of course it is in the deed. That is the whole problem. BUT gulf-front owners in the past by and large did not regard the beach in front of their homes as "private" to the point that nobody else could be there.
It is the same change of spirit that causes rustic concrete block beach houses, that have withstood decades of beach life, to be replaced by mega-houses. Sure, that is another topic entirely but it exemplifies the change in attitude.
You still don't get it. It's about entire neighborhoods and new developments claiming these private properties as their property to use paying zero taxes on. It's a strategy by the TDC to support more development, a lot more development to North of 30A.
Beach Fanatic
I am extremely familiar with the Property Appraiser and Clerk of Court websites. Of course it is in the deed. That is the whole problem. BUT gulf-front owners in the past by and large did not regard the beach in front of their homes as "private" to the point that nobody else could be there.
It is the same change of spirit that causes rustic concrete block beach houses, that have withstood decades of beach life, to be replaced by mega-houses. Sure, that is another topic entirely but it exemplifies the change in attitude.
I believe there is also a change in demographic that goes along with the attitude.
Beach Fanatic
That's simply not true. I have photos of private beach signs that are 30-40 years old. There are deeds and restrictions from developers that private beaches are dedicated to the exclusive use of the residents and owners of the property. Seaside has had private beaches since 1981... others back into the 1970's.
Many walkovers have "private" and "no trespassing" signs on them to this very day. Customary use does not change private walkovers.
You are confusing informal use by a few locals, with hordes of tourists overtaking a private beach. Walton county's customary use ordinance is in place for the main purpose to facilitate the hordes of tourists and new development by overturning private property for public use. Follow the money.
Beach Fanatic
I am extremely familiar with the Property Appraiser and Clerk of Court websites. Of course it is in the deed. That is the whole problem. BUT gulf-front owners in the past by and large did not regard the beach in front of their homes as "private" to the point that nobody else could be there.
It is the same change of spirit that causes rustic concrete block beach houses, that have withstood decades of beach life, to be replaced by mega-houses. Sure, that is another topic entirely but it exemplifies the change in attitude.
No question that there are some beachfront owners who want to exclude everyone, but I'm sure that the ones who are willing to share with respectful beachgoers get really tired of being lumped together with ones who want total exclusion. Nobody likes to have their rights unilaterally usurped, which is what the customary use ordinance did, but that doesn't mean that there aren't beachfront owners who did, would, and will still share. I recall Gov. Huckabee suggesting trying a beach share program, but that was pretty much dismissed without any real consideration. The whole point of my FEARMONGERING post (above) was that all the divisiveness and stereotyping is making it MORE likely that beachfront owners feel persecuted when they have done nothing to exclude respectful beachgoers from being on the beach in front of their homes within reasonable limitations (like walking, swimming, sunbathing; minimal and reasonable uses). Attitudes have not just changed on the beachfront owner side, they have also changed with the general public. Again, the blame game doesn't help. Some common sense rules and etiquette on the beach would go along way toward healing and bringing some peace back to the beach.
I suspect that resort areas and condo associations have the most difficult time with trying to share their beaches because they already have a considerable number of people who share use of limited beachfront. Single family owners would likely be much more amenable if they had at least some portion of their beachfront linear footage that they could actually reserve for their family and guests. For owners who rent, whether it be resort areas, condos, single family, etc., it is understandable that they would like a section of beach in front of the property they are renting for however $$$$/week they are paying.
It would be great if people would offer up some suggestions/remedies. Maybe if enough people change from focusing on problems and focus on potential solutions, something could be worked out.
Edited
Beach Fanatic
You still don't get it. It's about entire neighborhoods and new developments claiming these private properties as their property to use paying zero taxes on. It's a strategy by the TDC to support more development, a lot more development to North of 30A.
What do you mean "It's about entire neighborhoods and new developments claiming these private properties as their property to use paying zero taxes on." Do you mean they are claiming deeded property as theirs meaning the public is claiming it? Don't mean to be dense, but I don't quite understand what/where you are referring to.
Beach Fanatic
What do you mean "It's about entire neighborhoods and new developments claiming these private properties as their property to use paying zero taxes on." Do you mean they are claiming deeded property as theirs meaning the public is claiming it? Don't mean to be dense, but I don't quite understand what/where you are referring to.
Nevermind, I think I see now. Key words being "to use". They aren't claiming they own it, but claim it is theirs to use without paying the beachfront taxes. Very true.
Beach Lover
#437
Document from 1977
Beach Lover
#442
Document from 1977
Rosemary Beach 1995 ...
Beach Fanatic
Rosemary Beach 1995 ...That's very clear!
View attachment 69935
Beach Fanatic
Document from 1977Not 30 years old photos. Not sure what would prove if they were a hundred years old. Making a beach private is the ultimate in human greed.
Beach Fanatic
Document from 1977
Not 30 years old photos. Not sure what would prove if they were a hundred years old. Making a beach private is the ultimate in human greed.
It is unfortunate that Walton County allowed deeds to include the beach, but persecuting beachfront owners because they are trying to protect rights that they believe they had when they bought the property (and paid dearly for it) is misplaced IMO. It is interesting in this County that decisions are made that affect people, sometimes dramatically, without any real regard for those impacts. It happens with development all the time. We are a country of laws (supposedly). If the privately deeded beaches meet the criteria for customary use, why is everyone so afraid of due process that would support that? Unless you don't like your property rights, I hope you don't have any property that the public wants or you, too, may have some of your rights to that property unilaterally stripped from you.
Beach Lover
Not 30 years old photos. Not sure what would prove if they were a hundred years old. Making a beach private is the ultimate in human greed.
Some of them are - 30 years ago is 1988. I have 40 year old photos... just don't have them scanned ...
And they don't NEED to be 30 years old or 100 year old to disprove uninterrupted use. Anything prior to 2016. What about the legal documents - do you dispute those as well?
Are you suggesting there is no beach that you have access to in Walton county?
What about buying an island? How about a mountain top? Or a property on a river bank? What about a forest? Where do YOU live? Maybe I would enjoy that particular piece of property and think it's greedy for you to hog it all to yourself. I really like your car - can I use whenever I want?
"Ultimate greed" --- this kind of statement is one of a zealot or a hypocrite.
Let me ask you - do you agree that if the county by decree mandates the public can use what was once a private piece of property - then the property owner should not have to pay taxes on that land? Or is that okay with you as long as you get your way? You want the property owner to pay for it, and pay annual taxes on it - and let you use it for free - if they don't like it then they are just being "greedy"?
What are your thoughts on a state park charging admission? If you have no problem with that - then why can't private beach front property owners charge for the public to use their property?
Edited
Beach Lover
It is unfortunate that Walton County allowed deeds to include the beach, but persecuting beachfront owners because they are trying to protect rights that they believe they had when they bought the property (and paid dearly for it) is misplaced IMO. It is interesting in this County that decisions are made that affect people, sometimes dramatically, without any real regard for those impacts. It happens with development all the time. We are a country of laws (supposedly). If the privately deeded beaches meet the criteria for customary use, why is everyone so afraid of due process that would support that? Unless you don't like your property rights, I hope you don't have any property that the public wants or you, too, may have some of your rights to that property unilaterally stripped from you.
"Unfortunate" applies an emotion to property ownership which is legal or illegal - that's all. There was no "act" to turn this private property to be owned by the county. So unless a portion of the parcel was dedicated to the public (and many of them did - see Sand Cliffs plat for an example), or the county purchased it, or it was donated, there is nothing to change the deed boundaries. When an owner puts it up for sale, that's the time for all these zealots or the county to buy it and change the deed to dedicate the beach to the county.
The rallying cry that it's "greedy" for someone to own the beach - yet there ALWAYS is an owner of the beach.
After all this is not "public property with no owner" - what is called a public beach IS owned by someone --- it all belongs to "the county". So much for the "my sand and your sand" phony claim. You notice the county won't really get into the discussion that *they* own the beach and therefore they can close down the beach. It's an amazing illusion.
BTW - what's going to stand everyone on their head is when the county at some point in time, decides to charge for beach use, or takes alcohol off the beach.
Edited
Beach FanaticAuthor
Beach Lover
www.nwfdailynews.com/news/20180303/walton-customary-use-ordinance-appears-safe-for-now
So we all will fight, spend millions of dollars in attorney fees again. Who will be the "defendant" protecting private property owners when Walton County takes this sweeping ordinance before a judge? Or will the judge simply say "ok sounds good for all the beaches" after he sees that high school power point presentation?
HB-631 was aligned with Reynolds in that customary had to be determined on a per parcel basis. It's only right and fair.
This was a huge mistake in changing SB-804 to not require due process for the property owner.
Senator Gainer and Rep. Drake really killed this bill.
Edited
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.