Mike Huckabee’s role in pushing controversial beach access law

Thanks and agree. I've been reading this forum for long time, never had a desire to post until all the misinformation was being repeated in that disaster of a public hearing. My father was one of the top labor attorneys in the nation, I followed in his footsteps. He certainly would not approve of what's going on here.

2007? When did "customary use" first come on the radar do you recall? and by who?

I would also like to see HB631 repealed. Repeal would mean the end of customary use in Florida.

Shannon

When did customary use first discussed on the Emerald Coast?

Beach use is a supply and demand problem - and won't be resolved with customary use. 75% of Walton beaches are private property - supply. Started when Walton commissioners (and county administrator) did nothing to manage the logistics and infrastructure of all the tourist. Started when TDC was formed and tourist taxed $20,000,000 annually to pay for local businesses marketing, like Bud & Alley's, to bring tourist here, saving Dave Rauschkolb a ton of advertising money at tourist tax payer's expense - demand.

Started in 2002 when Destin tried customary use with Attorney David Theriaque and was told by the FL Attorney General, they'd have to do it parcel by parcel.
Advisory Legal Opinion - Regulation of dry sand portion of beach

October 2003 was an individual customary use case, Meyer v. Apollo. David Theriaque represent Meyer. The case was withdrawn.

August 2016 was an individual customary use case, New and Tippins v Bradford. David Theriaque represent New and Tippins. Bradford prevailed on Count I private easement and Tippens withdrew Count II customary use.

Walton BCC started 11 years ago.
http://www.clerkofcourts.co.walton.fl.us/document_center/Minutes/Regular_Meetings/20071009.pdf

2007-10-09 BCC Customary Use. Mr. Burke [County Attorney] discussed four options that should be considered for Walton County. Option one (1) is to do nothing and allow the private citizens to file suit. Option two (2) would be to adopt an ordinance establishing Customary Use definitions. This option could cause possible litigation. Option three (3) would be to file a class action law suit by the Board to determine whether the Doctrine of Customary Use applies. Mr. Burke did not recommend this option. Option four (4) would allow the Board to seek easements from private land owner for a Customary Use. This option may offer the property owner ad valorem tax relief and would probably be more successful. Mr. Burke suggested the Board review and to consider options two and four. Commissioner Comander made a motion to proceed with options two and four. Motion died for lack of second. 2007 BCC included Cindy Meadows, Larry Jones - now county administrator, and Sara Comander.

Started 2008 with County Administrator (2012 to present) and former Commissioner (2000 – 2012), Larry Jones’s Masters Thesis (incorrectly) concluded there was customary use on Walton private beaches. Primary reference David Theriaque. Larry Jones did not run for reelection in 2012 and was hired (no surprise) in 2013 as the County Administrator. Larry Jones has more influence as Walton Administrator than he ever did as an elected Commissioner, gets paid 3x more, does not have to get elected, and has worked against the best interests of private property owners since.

Started when Walton commissioner’s 2015 beach fortification failed because 94% of the beachfront owners figured out the Commissioners motive for beach storm damage reduction was to build up FL submerged lands seaward of the MHWL for public dry sand and owners rejected the 50+ year fortification easement and Erosion Control Line (ECL) on their littoral (by definition property touches the water) private property, creating previously private beachfront to beachview. Within months after beach fortification was rejected Commissioner Chapman starts customary use agenda.

Started when the Sheriff's 2015 beach trespass SOP 15-004 mandated property owners place surveyed Posted signs on their property boundaries to enforce trespass. "5. The property boundaries of the upland owners property are adequately marked on the ground indicating the boundary between the mean-high water line and their upland property." Owners did not ask to places signs on their property, just to enforce their Constitutional property rights.

Started October 25, 2016 when Commissioner Comander declared if customary use, “...took spending $40 MILLION to $50 MILLION in tax payer’s money ... if we [commissioners] have to, then we have to!” Sadly it’s not the commissioner’s personal money; if it was, the customary use vote likely would be very different.
Board of County Commissioners on 2016-10-25 9:00 AM - Regular Meeting - Oct 25th, 2016

2016 Walton commissioners hired David Theriaque as outside counsel ($425/hour) to prepare Walton commissioner’s customary use ordinance. Elected commissioners then declared customary use of private property April 2017 without due process. Five property owner groups then had to file a legal complaint against Walton County, as Plaintiffs with the burden to prove their Constitutionally protect private property rights were superior to old English common law customary use instead of Walton commissioners proving customary use in court with the burden of proof.

That’s why the FL legislators enacted HB631 and should remain in place - NOT repealed. Read FL Sta 163.035 (HB 631). It does not affirm or deny customary use - only addresses the abuse of local elected governments police powers to declare customary use without due process.
Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

Repealing FS 163.035 (HB631) would NOT end customary use in FL but place beachfront owners in court as Plaintiffs - NOT Defendants. Even local FL Rep Brad Drake, customary use advocate, voted for HB631.

Lake View Too, When you buy a piece of property, you purchase a bundle of rights. Just because you assume you have the right of exclusion, doesn't mean you have that right. [Yes it does unless a court, not elected politicians, say otherwise] The doctrine of customary use of beachfront has been a common right [not a common "right" - unless a court rules it so first] established a thousand years ago, in English law, [we are Americans with a Constitution that protects property rights] well before any of this land was ever platted, and reinforced in Florida law in 1974 with the Daytona vs. Tona-Rama case [Tona-Rama was a prescriptive easement case on 225 square feet of commercial private beach that failed. The FSC court, on their own, applied customary use to justify not removing an amusement tower (Space Needle) on a beach pier without any customary use evidence presented!]. Some verbiage from that decision: "There is probably no custom more universal, more natural or more ancient, on the sea-coasts, not only of the United States, but of the world, than that of bathing in the salt waters of the ocean and the enjoyment of the wholesome recreation incident thereto. The lure of the ocean is universal; to battle with its refreshing breakers a delight. Many are they who have felt the lifegiving touch of its healing waters and its clear dustfree air. Appearing constantly to change, it remains ever essentially the same. It is our view that the sporadic exercise of authority and dominion by the owners over the parcel in question was not sufficient to preserve their rights as against the prescriptive rights which accrued to the benefit of the public by its use of the beach area." City of Daytona Beach v. Tona-Rama, Inc., 271 So. 2d 765, p. 767 [There is is no old English common law doctrine that takes rights that is superior to the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights protection of private property rights]. The land grab, that is being perpetrated by a mob of big money BFO's [I'm not in a mob and I work for what we have just like you - vilification of property owners that have what you want makes owners only want to protect our property rights even more], is an illegal taking of almost everyone's land values [Okaloosa to the west and Bay County to the east do not have customary use and their land values are as high or higher than Walton's - fake fact], not to mention a crushing of the collective soul of our community [that opinion should be directed at the Walton commissioners and their failure to manage Walton growth and respecting private property rights].

I have a shirt with a slogan on front and the slogan's acronym on the back followed by "Love Private Beaches".

Customary Use Not Trespassing in Sowal

This is highly offensive and it's unbelievable that the moderator found this funny.

Shannon

This is highly offensive and it's unbelievable that the moderator found this funny.

Shannon

I think that this disgusting acronym being found funny by a moderator just speaks volumes about that moderator. When people do not have the facts to back up an argument they apparently must bring emotion into play. I am new to sowal and find this very disturbing that the moderator professes community and tolerance yet thinks this is somehow funny. That acronym is one of the most repugnant and vile in the English language. The moderator owes all an apology for not taking that down.

.........When people do not have the facts to back up an argument they apparently must bring emotion into play........

Welcome to SoWal.com and to the human race where many truly believe their emotions trump the U.S. Constitution.

It is a sad state of affairs that in general, GFOs and the rest of the county have so much in common but far too many have personalized and hyperbolized the debacle that now exists in Walton County. I have non-GFO friends (but not all) who think the beach should be public. I understand their viewpoint. Repeatedly, I state there are two sides and that it will be decided in court. One’s opinion simply (usually) depends on which side of the railroad tracks one is on.

I have ex-GFO friends who purchased bay front property to get away from the “abuse of beach front private property” by the public. I know, “Yay! Good riddance.” But the new replacement GFOs will likely continue the challenge to the county. And I tell the new BFOs (bay front owners) that there is no guarantee they have escaped the CU fallout by being at the bay. If beachfront CU is successful, where does CU end?

I truly believe the U.S. Constitution will ultimately protect private property rights in the end from the very ambiguous test thresholds of customary use. If not, we’ve got much bigger problems.

Grace Daniell’s post was spot-on regarding what really is driving CU. And I’ve mentioned this same idea in previous posts. Too bad, many people can’t see that. And because of that, if CU prevails, Walton County beaches (outside of the already developed beaches such as Seaside, Rosemary, Watercolor, Alys, etc.) will experience a growth that will change what we ALL (except developers, real estate agents, restauranteers, etc.) are trying to prevent...becoming Destin and Panama City.

I don’t have much faith in the county government (and those with influence) to prevent this. But GFOs are not going to make it easy for the county to steer us down this uncontrolled growth curve by rolling over and letting our property be confiscated with no compensation under the guise of public good. To them, it’s all about opening the development flood gates.

I’ll say it again, if you love wide open public beaches and are disheartened because of the current situation, simply move to Panama City or Destin. Heck even Miramar in Walton County and to the west is public. You have a choice. Oh yeah, we also have public beaches (except for the 50% GIVEN to vendors by the BCC) ....but not much parking. That’s another story.

I believe in Customary Use. I also believe it will be decided by the Courts and whatever side happens to win the legal challenge we all lose because of the arrogance and bitterness it has brought out in us all. But hey this is our society now. So everyone get your digs in because the superiority of our cause is more righteous than the others, no matter what side of the debate you are on. Just my opinion!

I think that this disgusting acronym being found funny by a moderator just speaks volumes about that moderator. When people do not have the facts to back up an argument they apparently must bring emotion into play. I am new to sowal and find this very disturbing that the moderator professes community and tolerance yet thinks this is somehow funny. That acronym is one of the most repugnant and vile in the English language. The moderator owes all an apology for not taking that down.

Lighten up Francis.

Lighten up Francis.

The response to basically calling someone a c-word, and to his pride in wearing it over his red neck, isn't "lighten up." It's kindly take yourself to the kind of beach community where people feel good about such misogynistic, lowbrow behavior.

I believe in Customary Use. I also believe it will be decided by the Courts and whatever side happens to win the legal challenge we all lose because of the arrogance and bitterness it has brought out in us all. But hey this is our society now. So everyone get your digs in because the superiority of our cause is more righteous than the others, no matter what side of the debate you are on. Just my opinion!

Bob, it only takes millions of Walton tax payers money to find out which is position is superior. Have you read old English Blackstone Commentaries on custom Walton has based millions of tax payers money on? If owner private property rights prevail, Walton will likely pay the beachfront owner's legal cost as well, do you think the commissioners that voted for or voted to continue customary use litigation should then resign?

Bob, it only takes millions of Walton tax payers money to find out which is position is superior. Have you read old English Blackstone Commentaries on custom Walton has based millions of tax payers money on? If owner private property rights prevail, Walton will likely pay the beachfront owner's legal cost as well, do you think the commissioners that voted for or voted to continue customary use litigation should then resign?

No. As with any politician who attempts to do the job they are elected to do, someone is always going to disagree with them. I hope that they continue the fight for customary use. If in the end customary use prevails are you going to quit fighting it?

The response to basically calling someone a c-word, and to his pride in wearing it over his red neck, isn't "lighten up." It's kindly take yourself to the kind of beach community where people feel good about such misogynistic, lowbrow behavior.

Where is it?

The response to basically calling someone a c-word, and to his pride in wearing it over his red neck, isn't "lighten up." It's kindly take yourself to the kind of beach community where people feel good about such misogynistic, lowbrow behavior.

I don’t post much, but I do find it funny that someone would move to an area referred to as the redneck riviera, for I don’t know at least 60 years, but apparently doesn’t like rednecks.

This is highly offensive and it's unbelievable that the moderator found this funny.

Shannon

I,m a recently relocated 55 yr old male with no axe to grind and I find the post offensive to all females!! . And I find the term redneck as offensive as well... Respect all!!!

Where is it?

Here is the post.

Shannon

Not what he meant

Was being sarcastic

Nope. Want to know where that place is.

Here is the post.

Shannon

Profanity against forum rules.

No. As with any politician who attempts to do the job they are elected to do, someone is always going to disagree with them. I hope that they continue the fight for customary use. If in the end customary use prevails are you going to quit fighting it?

Bob, this is not about a “disagreement”. The difference between my opinion and the commissioner’s opinion, if the commissioners opinion is wrong it cost all tax payers multi-millions of dollar$$$.

If a business CEO or board of directors inserted their personal feelings and agenda into an investment that then cost the stockholders multi-millions of dollars in litigation, zero return, and a decades of ill will; what do you think the consequence would be for that CEO? They would or should be terminated or resign. The stockholders would also have recourse in the courts to recoup money lost for negligent CEO decisions.

But it’s all Walton property-tax payer’s millions; it’s not commissioner’s money. There are no consequences. You think Walton attorney David Theriaqu is going to tell the commissioners they do not have a great case? Theriaqu gets his $425/hr and $0 if the commissioners reconsider. So Theriaqu has zero wins on three individual Walton customary use cases over the years.

At worse the commissioners get voted out of office or get hired as the County Administrator for more money and the tax payer keeps on paying. This is about consequences for costing tax payers many MILLIONS of dollars and could get nothing but ill will. That's not doing their job.

If you or commissioners are so sure common law customary use is superior to private property rights would you risk your own money? Hundreds of beachfront owners will. If it was commissioners own money do you think the votes to litigate would be the same? I doubt it. Commissioners should at least be be accountable and resign. Maybe Walton voters would vote for commissioners that have experience running a $171,400,000 organization and investing tax payers dollars that will have a return on investment. I can dream too.

Bob, this is not about a “disagreement”. The difference between my opinion and the commissioner’s opinion, if the commissioners opinion is wrong it cost all tax payers multi-millions of dollar$$$.

If a business CEO or board of directors inserted their personal feelings and agenda into an investment that then cost the stockholders multi-millions of dollars in litigation, zero return, and a decades of ill will; what do you think the consequence would be for that CEO? They would or should be terminated or resign. The stockholders would also have recourse in the courts to recoup money lost for negligent CEO decisions.

But it’s all Walton property-tax payer’s millions; it’s not commissioner’s money. There are no consequences. You think Walton attorney David Theriaqu is going to tell the commissioners they do not have a great case? Theriaqu gets his $425/hr and $0 if the commissioners reconsider. So Theriaqu has zero wins on three individual Walton customary use cases over the years.

At worse the commissioners get voted out of office or get hired as the County Administrator for more money and the tax payer keeps on paying. This is about consequences for costing tax payers many MILLIONS of dollars and could get nothing but ill will. That's not doing their job.

If you or commissioners are so sure common law customary use is superior to private property rights would you risk your own money? Hundreds of beachfront owners will. If it was commissioners own money do you think the votes to litigate would be the same? I doubt it. Commissioners should at least be be accountable and resign. Maybe Walton voters would vote for commissioners that have experience running a $171,400,000 organization and investing tax payers dollars that will have a return on investment. I can dream too.

You asked a specific question and I gave you a specific answer. If you choose to bring the corporate world into this for failures, let us discuss this. When Financial Institutions were having failures who was it that bailed them out? Those CEOs with their Golden Parachutes weren't going hungry. Sure they lost their jobs but I will bet those folks further down the chain were taking a huge hit when the Corporate Office had to figure out who else needed to be let go to pay for it. That guy who answers the phone to answer question probably went looking for a job. The lack of Customary Use will negatively affect tourism which will affect employment opportunities. That is a failure on our leaders selling our area to business. If we had spent money to advertise to business like we have to tourist we may have a more balanced economy. Let me ask you this, how long have you lived here? Are you a beachfront property owner? If yes, since you lived here, how many times prior to 2015 have you called the law to have people removed from the beach near your home? I want you to understand, I am not attempting to be disrespectful and I am not going to get in the name calling, so lets be clear if this conversation starts to deteriorate by supporters of either side I will not be involved. You also didn't answer my question, if those who own homes overlooking the beach lose in the courts, are you calling it quits?

The lack of Customary Use will negatively affect tourism which will affect employment opportunities.

Bob, you did give a specific answer that you would not hold commissioners accountable. Then made a leap from accountability to golden parachutes and some person answering the phone.
Your point I think is “The lack of Customary Use will negatively affect tourism which will affect employment opportunities.”

Give me some evidence - some facts that without customary use Walton local economy will be devastated.

Here’s my facts; it’s been reported that 60% for FL coast is private property. Every Florida coastal county but 2 do NOT have customary use, including the counties on both sides of Walton, Okaloosa and Bay. Even before April 17, 2017 declared customary use ordinance and after July 2018 Walton’s economy and property values have gone up. Ask bob bob, he posted July bed tax was up 4% over 2017. Bed tax has been up each year for many years including years before Walton commissioners declared custom on private property and now after.

That Walton’s economy will collapse sounds more like opinion and fear mongering for your and the commissioner’s customary use agenda, not facts. You don’t run a business or a county, well, on supposition and opinions. It's supply and demand - private owners earned what they have - the supply - and you just can't take property rights you want or create a story that owner's never owned it.

Even if true the commissioners would be responsible, not the property owners, for the house of cards (and local economy) the commissioners (and developers and REALTORS) built, based on more than a hundred MILLION of dollars of TDC tax payer money over 20 years telling tourist to come to Walton’s 26 miles of public beaches (except it’s about 75% private beaches). And don’t worry about being respectful or that trash you left behind since beachfront owners were gracious enough to share their property with you over the decades.

Why does it matter how long I or anyone else have lived here or if I’m a beachfront owner!? Does that give a person some special knowledge of the law or facts that's different in Walton? If you have read my previous posts you’d know. Since 2015 how any times has the Sheriff been called for trespass and removed ANYONE from private property? I’d guess the Sheriff has been called many times and no one’s been removed. I’ve been here long enough to know the elected Sheriff has made a political decision not to enforce the law that protects property owners right to private and peaceful enjoyment of their property. Even when owners have complied with the Sheriff’s onerous trespass standard operating procedure and or his made-up arbitrary “wet sand” property boundary. Even if you trespass and destroy court approved signs on private property you will not be charged with trespass.

You didn’t answer my previous question; have you read Blackstone’s Commentary of old English common law custom and it’s criteria? I’m sure our understanding of how ancient custom applies to Walton today 253 years later will differ but have you read it? It’s the foundation of all American customary use. Have you read the Constitution Bill of Rights 5th Amendment - rejecting much of that old English common law - and is the law of the land in the United States of America? It’s only tax payers money to litigate - would the commissioners or you spend your own money to litigate for public customary use on private property? Beachfront owners will. If private property rights prevail the least the commissioners should do is resign and hopefully voters will wake up and elect competent experience people to lead Walton County and spend their $171,400,000 wisely. It’s one thing to repair a road and another to litigate millions of tax payer dollars on Constitutional litigation that could have repaired that road and may result in nothing but ill will for a long time to come.

Bob, I know reason will not change your and Teresa and other vocal customary use supporter’s opinions. I post so other property owners have some facts from someone who has done some homework and to know they are not alone on protecting their property rights, for others who don’t know what old English common law custom is and isn't but want to understand more about it, have some facts, and not rely on the emotional calls of "your sand is my sand" of people here, social media, or the papers. And hopefully join the many other beachfront owners to seek legal advice and help protect their Constitutionally protected property rights in court as well.

Stop the Huckabee conspiracy theories unless you have some evidence and facts. Huckabee is entitled to his opinions as a private citizens just like you, me, or Teresa. The article Teresa posted states his opinion as did many other beachfront owners.

Santa Rosa Beach attorney Daniel Uhlfelder, a leader of Florida Beaches for All, a local group that wants to preserve beach use, said Huckabee's view is wrong. "It's not a private property rights issue," Uhlfelder said. "It's about the use of beaches."
You mean the use of the beaches, which is fee simple property with title and a deed and a bundle of property rights - the most important one being private use and enjoyment, is not a property rights issue!? I don't think I'd seek out Uhlfelder's legal advice.

@FloridaBeachBum I agree with you that Huckabee has a right to his opinion regarding customary use. There is no conspiracy to my knowledge. Just proof that he moved here to the beautiful beaches of South Walton Florida. Then over time decided that his beach front needed to be protected from the public. Not a neighborly thing to do in the opinion of many who live, play, work and visit here. The community has a lot of questions about his motivations and involvement. And they have a right to not be happy with his stance.

I stand with our community as always. I am in awe of the outpouring of local people, leaders, volunteers and all of the energy that we are witnessing in response to Customary Use. I also appreciate hearing from you and other beach front owners. All voices are important. I hope we can be kind and respectful of one another throughout this process. We are all here together. I am seeing some desperate people being petty and unproductive. Slamming their neighbors. That's truly unfortunate.

I'm sorry to see the issue become so politicized by using the private property rights angle. I agree with Daniel and Florida Beaches For All that it is about use of our beaches. Other coastal communities don't face our battle for the beaches. Because customary use is just a normal everyday thing whether they call it that or not. Those communities know that they are ultimately responsible for protecting access to the beaches and also preserving those beaches for all time. The health of their coastal environment and economy depends on it.

@FloridaBeachBum I agree with you that Huckabee has a right to his opinion regarding customary use. There is no conspiracy to my knowledge...

I'm sorry to see the issue become so politicized by using the private property rights angle.

Private property rights is NOT an "angle". It's a right that the founders of the united States of America valued and protected from Governments like Walton.