Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

I believe that we are stuck in idealism which is mired in political agenda. Teresa I hear you but disagree with you. Again. Not even our Supreme Court is removed from politics. Take the politics out and we are left with what do you want and are you willing to compromise. I can feel the response from both sides: "I want to be right!" Divisiveness is built into a two party political system and agenda will always be a factor . Emotion is a big part of human behavior and will always be a factor. So, here we are trying to solve problems with agenda and emotion. The more ideal and political we are, the less unity we will have in our communities. I hear both sides of this issue and understand why both sides believe they are right but I am certain that the 30A Legacy suffers when we lose our ability to compromise. It would be all peaches and cream if the court was quick to decide the issue and the side that loses "accepts" the court decision but we have become a society that no longer accepts. Just look at our Presidential elections. So what is my point? First, we as a society have to stop letting politics divide us. Second, we have to be respectful to each other. Third, we must compromise in a democracy. If your emotion and idealism gets the best of you then you are part of the problem. If you are disrespectful then you are even a bigger part of the problem. I would like for the beaches to be open and public for all people but people do not behave and there has to be rules (government). Our local government tried to solve the problem and failed because they did not find compromise. Probably not their fault because people no longer want compromise. They just want to be right...They just want what they want and when they want it...

Suppose I am giving you my opinion, like everyone else. I have come to a conclusion just because you have a certain belief it is not incumbent upon me to believe that way too. At the same time, expression of my opinion is not my intent to sway you from yours. I have not laid out a legal precedent to inform anyone as you have, ad nauseam, and as I have said, I am more than willing to wait for the courts to rule. I will be more than willing to accept its verdict even though I won't pretend it will be over, whichever way Judge Green rules. So to conclude this, I believe that customary use exist, I believe it will cost money to prove it, I believe my tax dollars will be used to litigate it, I think it sucks that there is a division within our community. Just my opinion.

OK. Ditto on opinions (glad to see Rauschkolb is still reading with his "Like" of your post. Still no answers to previous simple wrong or rights questions.)
You brought up the question "You remember when Governor Scott did this and what Senator Passidomo had to say? " and Fort Myers News-Press post. Then followed up an unclear statement about the Governor's or Senator's intent.
No one has implied you or anyone else must believe anything, I gave may opinion and explained why with variable information. Like it or not, take it or leave it. At least I can explain why with factual information; not because someone on social media said it.
But if you or the Commissioners do believe in something, that will cost Walton taxpayers many millions of dollars in litigation, can you or the Commissioners explain why?
You and the Commissioners do not have to explain anything but the credibility of your belief suffers. If you explain your belief, others who have not formed a belief or opinion have more information with facts, than baseless opinions.
So far I haven't heard anything but - I just believe. Not why the old English legal doctrine of customary use is superior to Constitutionally protected property rights.
Do the Commissioners have a CU case or not? If you or the Commissioners are going to take the advise of a $425 an hour attorney; what do you think the attorney is going to say? No, Commissioners you do not have a case? He gets $425/hr to litigate CU, win or lose, and nothing if he says Commissioners have no case. Just my opinion.

I believe that we are stuck in idealism which is mired in political agenda.

We hear you but I respectfully disagree. There are some principles, many embodied in the American Constitution, that in the 1700s English subjects thought an American Revolution was worth fighting and dying for - not just go to a court over or compromise. Private property rights and due process of law are key principles of the US Founding Fathers and authors of the Constitution. Why should BFOs compromise Constitutional principles (rights) because Commissioners and social media Believe an old English legal doctrine of public customary use is superior to those Constitutional principles? "Can't we all get along" (by compromising Constitutional principles) won't change that. Just explaining why me and many BFOs believe in the Constitution. You don't have to like it, or not like it.

OK. Ditto on opinions (glad to see Rauschkolb is still reading with his "Like" of your post. Still no answers to previous simple wrong or rights questions.)
You brought up the question "You remember when Governor Scott did this and what Senator Passidomo had to say? " and Fort Myers News-Press post. Then followed up an unclear statement about the Governor's or Senator's intent.
No one has implied you or anyone else must believe anything, I gave may opinion and explained why with variable information. Like it or not, take it or leave it. At least I can explain why with factual information; not because someone on social media said it.
But if you or the Commissioners do believe in something, that will cost Walton taxpayers many millions of dollars in litigation, can you or the Commissioners explain why?
You and the Commissioners do not have to explain anything but the credibility of your belief suffers. If you explain your belief, others who have not formed a belief or opinion have more information with facts, than baseless opinions.
So far I haven't heard anything but - I just believe. Not why the old English legal doctrine of customary use is superior to Constitutionally protected property rights.
Do the Commissioners have a CU case or not? If you or the Commissioners are going to take the advise of a $425 an hour attorney; what do you think the attorney is going to say? No, Commissioners you do not have a case? He gets $425/hr to litigate CU, win or lose, and nothing if he says Commissioners have no case. Just my opinion.

@Bob Wells is very thoughtful and articulate. He is like most locals and Beach lovers. We desire to enjoy the beach as we always have and respect the environment and property rights.
You and your cohort on this forum are obvious in your contemp and self righteousness. Your constant axe grinding against a couple of outspoken Customary Use activists shows your true colors. It's obvious your feelings are hurt and you are lashing out but it just makes you look bad. And cowardly.

I hear what you are saying and I respect your opinion, I respect our Constitution, I respect our Founding Fathers and the sacrifices that were made. I am not a legal scholar by any stretch of the imagination but wasn't the Constitution a compromise of principles and followed by about 26 or 27 amendments? Why are you not willing to compromise your principle? Why are people like Dave and Teresa not willing to compromise their principle? I believe all of you are respectful people but it only takes one person to use a word like "cowardly" or worse and all hell breaks loose. The politics has made our skin very thin and our words very inflammatory. When we fight for pure principle we will lose our humanity. I see both sides going down the path of ruining our 30A legacy. Both sides need to figure out if your principle is worth the loss of our humanity...I know this because I am guilty of hanging on to principle too long...

We hear you but I respectfully disagree. There are some principles, many embodied in the American Constitution, that in the 1700s English subjects thought an American Revolution was worth fighting and dying for - not just go to a court over or compromise. Private property rights and due process of law are key principles of the US Founding Fathers and authors of the Constitution. Why should BFOs compromise Constitutional principles (rights) because Commissioners and social media Believe an old English legal doctrine of public customary use is superior to those Constitutional principles? "Can't we all get along" (by compromising Constitutional principles) won't change that. Just explaining why me and many BFOs believe in the Constitution. You don't have to like it, or not like it.

ou

@Bob Wells is very thoughtful and articulate. He is like most locals and Beach lovers. We desire to enjoy the beach as we always have and respect the environment and property rights.
You and your cohort on this forum are obvious in your contemp and self righteousness. Your constant axe grinding against a couple of outspoken Customary Use activists shows your true colors. It's obvious your feelings are hurt and you are lashing out but it just makes you look bad. And cowardly.

Dawn, "Cowardly"? "your contempt and self righteousness."? "axe grinding against a couple of outspoken Customary Use activists"? "feelings are hurt and you are lashing out"? " makes you look bad"?
Really? What happened to SoWal's rules, paraphrasing; Stick to the topic and don't attack the person?
I understand you and others don't like or agree with property rights positions and facts. Makes CU positions not look very credable. I understand you don't like the persons, given your posts, who have a different belief, because you're right and they are wrong. Sticks and Stones. Cast the first stone. Come to mind - again.

What have you added the the threads discourse??? Then dispute the facts with your own alternative facts. BFOs are "locals and Beach lovers". BFOs "desire to enjoy the beach as we [BFOs] always have and respect the environment and property rights [BFOs paid a premium on for the title to the MHWL and pay taxes on (not the public)."

I don't have an axe to grind against "a couple of out spoken CU activist". Just their positions against Constitutionally protected private property rights and how that will cost tax payers and BFOs many millions of dollars and get nothing but the BFO legal bills, inciting the masses on antisocial media to bully, shout-down, name call, ... anything but debate the positions with facts. Heck no one will even answer the simple Yes/No, True/False, Right/Wrong questions asked previously.
#530 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy
#539 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy
#697 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy
#710 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

I have not called posters “Komrades”. Deispicable. "condecending and derogitory". Propaganda. "ridiculous ... ridiculous and silly." "full of it. bombardment of total and complete BS". "narcissism, anger management problems, and delusions of grandeur ... angry buffoon". "dishonest ... dishonest and disrespectful ... propaganda". "morally right ... arrogance ... bullshit ... insulting ... propaganda". There's more but I think you get the idea. Or called anyone cowards or questioned anyone's morals; “ ... is morally wrong and anti-human ...”. You have. Makes me wonder what you would or have posted on social media where there are no rules? Because how can everyone behind a closed FB page be wrong?
#493 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

SoWal Rules. SoWal forum rules & general info
"Everyone is welcome to post on our free and open forum as long as simple rules are followed." #431 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy
"I am only concerned that you follow rules and treat people here with respect." "Please stick to attacking the topic and not the people." #635 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

SoWal forum rules & general info
"While debating and discussion is encouraged, we will not tolerate rudeness, insulting posts, personal attacks..."
"Tell us what your purpose is, what you think, why you are posting, whether you are trying to spur an action, simply inform, or start a conversation, etc. Otherwise it is considered spam."
"Resorting to personal attacks or name calling will not be tolerated."
"No community is perfect and we want to be able to discuss real issues, but without being rude or disrespectful."
"Four Agreements", written by Don Miguel Ruiz, a Toltec Indian;
BE IMPECCABLE WITH YOUR WORD
DON'T TAKE ANYTHING PERSONALLY.
DON'T MAKE ASSUMPTIONS.
ALWAYS DO YOUR BEST.

Terms Of Service
3.2 (a) Be courteous.
3.2 (b) Use respectful language.
3.2 (c) Debate, but don't attack.

So, looks like your public relations campaign ain't doing so good. Maybe it's the title of this thread that is insulting a whole community of good people...

So, looks like your public relations campaign ain't doing so good. Maybe it's the title of this thread that is insulting a whole community of good people...

Definitely not insulting to thousands of beach front private poperty owners.

Wow! I'm gone a few days and this thread continues to thrive! Lots of information here for those who are interested. At least they have the opportunity to research for themselves if they are open minded. If people just want info that agrees with their perspective, nothing anyone else says will matter anyway. For those of us who see both sides and are somewhat on the fence, I found it quite interesting and educational. I've researched quite a bit of the information on here to double check things and found FBB's (and some others as well) information quite credible. Thanks to those who provided reliable, unbiased sources to verify. Naturally opinions are like ********, everybody has one, so it seems I don't need to waste time on those. I must say, though that it is good to know the folks that aren't interested in facts, just their own opinions. No point in debating with them.

Definitely not insulting to thousands of beach front private poperty owners.

My point is this: clearly you started and contributed to this thread to change people’s hearts and minds (the hundreds of thousands). Do you really think you came at it the right way with your arrogance and false slogans?

@Bob Wells said to @FloridaBeachBum, “I have not laid out a legal precedent to inform anyone as you have, ad nauseam, and as I have said, I am more than willing to wait for the courts to rule.”

As much of a private property rights proponent as I’ve been here over a decade, I concede that @FloridaBeachBum is and has been a very prolific poster regarding private property rights. The vast majority of his posts are chocked full of supportive and substantiating facts that I believe must feel like kryptonite to CU advocates who have a closed mind.

And just because you’ve stated you’ll wait for the courts (over and over) to rule doesn’t give you a pass to factually challenge any of @FloridaBeachBum’s posts (or some of mine).

Even though you’d like to think you’re a step above some of the CU unfounded attacks and name calling in this thread, I don’t see you condemning any of it.

Oh yeah, developers, restauranteers, real estate organizations, etc., mostly don’t care about that things like that.

My point is this: clearly you started and contributed to this thread to change people’s hearts and minds (the hundreds of thousands). Do you really thing you came at it the right way with your arrogance and false slogans?

Much much better with facts than with you calling me an ahole and arrogant. BTW, I didn’t start this thread.

Much much better with facts than with you calling me an ahole and arrogant. BTW, I didn’t start this thread.

You were the fourth poster with glowing reviews for Reggie. Basically, a founding father. I apologized for the ahole statement.

Please add No bloviating to the rules.

My point is this: clearly you started and contributed to this thread to change people’s hearts and minds (the hundreds of thousands).

Can you refer to one post on the thread as the basis of your point, where anyone has stated any intention that was "clearly ... to change people’s hearts and minds"?
To the contrary the only intentions I, or anyone else that I recall, have stated was to present verifiable, factual property rights information or to dispute baseless CU myths -- so that other BFOs and those that may not yet have formed an opinion on CU or property rights would have facts and not fictions to consider.

If you can not refer to any posts on this thread of anyone's intent to "clearly ... to change people’s hearts and minds" other than your baseless opinion, your point is wrong or you are a mind reader. But you are entitled to your conspiracy theory opinions that again add nothing of substance to the discourse.

#47 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy This post was created for honest discussion and transparency
#73 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy only honest discussion for a change.
#89 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy I look forward to our constructive discussion.
#102 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy Nobody, certainly not I, am trying to change anyone’s mind. I am trying to present factual information that is very aggressively kept from the public everywhere else.
#164 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy If just one of those 4,671 owners learn sometime from a property owner with real property skin in the game, that'd be great.
#734 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy I do the work to educate myself of the facts,... and share with those who support the Constitution and want to understand the facts.

Is Reggie still banned? What rules did he violate? It seems there have been a lot of bad manners on this thread. Can an admin please respond?

Is Reggie still banned? What rules did he violate? It seems there have been a lot of bad manners on this thread. Can an admin please respond?

Asked and answered in this thread. If you have a problem send a DM.

With all due respect:
Reggie created perhaps the most profitable thread SoWal has seen in recent history, as far as 30,000 plus views and 800 comments. Surely a boost for ad revenues and market penetration? His unique way of asking questions sparked great, sometimes heated, dialogue that is quite relevant and compelling.
Admins say he was "temporarily" banned. But the creator of this epic thread is still being censored from participation, when others are breaking many more rules than Reggie ever did. He hit a nerve, a personal one, we get it. Bad decision. But telling us that he was temporarily banned, and then keeping him silenced, while allowing worse breeches, do not align. WWRD

Asked and answered in this thread. If you have a problem send a DM.

BeachSandpiper question was not addressed to EZ4144 but to Admin. Are you the forum enforcer now?
Can the SoWal Staff speak or not speak for themselves? I'm guessing there will be no reply as is the Staff's choice.
Question was Is Reggie STILL banned? Not your decision unless you are SoWal Staff. EZ4144 do you know the answer to that question for a fact? I'm guessing NOT.
If the ban was for bad manners - there have been many from CU advocates that have been listed previously.

With all due respect:
Reggie created perhaps the most profitable thread SoWal has seen in recent history, as far as 30,000 plus views and 800 comments. Surely a boost for ad revenues and market penetration? His unique way of asking questions sparked great, sometimes heated, dialogue that is quite relevant and compelling.
Admins say he was "temporarily" banned. But the creator of this epic thread is still being censored from participation, when others are breaking many more rules than Reggie ever did. He hit a nerve, a personal one, we get it. Bad decision. But telling us that he was temporarily banned, and then keeping him silenced, while allowing worse breeches, do not align. WWRD

Epic? I don't think so. The metrics show 8 to 10 Private Property rights advocates posting and talking mainly to themselves and 11 or 12 CU advocates commenting as well. Most of the comments are from the 8 or 10 PPR advocates. It's the truth. That's why I used the term "echo chamber." But, it's good for you folks to have a place to voice your beliefs. But 25 people, I would not call "epic" if its pretty much the same folks.

Epic? I don't think so. The metrics show 8 to 10 Private Property rights advocates posting and talking mainly to themselves and 11 or 12 CU advocates commenting as well. Most of the comments are from the 8 or 10 PPR advocates. It's the truth. That's why I used the term "echo chamber." But, it's good for you folks to have a place to voice your beliefs. But 25 people, I would not call "epic" if its pretty much the same folks.

SoWal Topics
"Is it really behavior that caused the CU vs Private beach issue?" 8 Replies and 848 views even with the antisocial media promotion.
"Governor, please Veto House Bill five." 0 Replies and 216 views.

As a SoWal topic to those BFOs and many others interested in understanding the property right facts from the CU fictions. The refusal to address any CU questions of interest, except for BFOs to go pound sand, and all the other derogatory BFO name calling?
"Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy", 795 Replies including you and 30,526 views and counting! Relatively speaking - seems EPIC.

Simple Yes or No; do you think I'd be allowed to post on the "Walton County Ideas for Visioning and Quality of Life" Facebook? Won't hold my breath.

What other in-credible contributions do you have to add to the public customary use of private property discourse?

This forum was never about profit or views. It is about people who love our community and love the beach. WE built it and WE regulate it and jerks are not welcome here. It has helped millions of people answered thousands of questions. That the community appreciates this forum and sees value is great. To bring up profit is very revealing about this thread and jerk posters' motives. Shame on you!

Kudos to true SoWal supporters and GOOD citizens who share love and the beach. Let us not forget that most beachfront owners are Beach lovers and are happy to share. The few vocal jerks on here do not represent our community or our values. You are making us look bad and you should go away.

Epic? I don't think so. The metrics show 8 to 10 Private Property rights advocates posting and talking mainly to themselves and 11 or 12 CU advocates commenting as well. Most of the comments are from the 8 or 10 PPR advocates. It's the truth. That's why I used the term "echo chamber." But, it's good for you folks to have a place to voice your beliefs. But 25 people, I would not call "epic" if its pretty much the same folks.

Epic post Dave!

I have a strong feeling the Whiners on this thread have been banned from other internet sites. I think this thread should be locked or deleted.

This forum was never about profit or views. It is about people who love our community and love the beach. WE built it and WE regulate it and jerks are not welcome here. It has helped millions of people answered thousands of questions. That the community appreciates this forum and sees value is great. To bring up profit is very revealing about this thread and jerk posters' motives. Shame on you!

Kudos to true SoWal supporters and GOOD citizens who share love and the beach. Let us not forget that most beachfront owners are Beach lovers and are happy to share. The few vocal jerks on here do not represent our community or our values. You are making us look bad and you should go away.

I guess the insults of "jerks" are an improvement over "cowardly" and "morally wrong and anti-human". Shame on You madam!
If you want to add any CU credibility to the thread answer any of the previous questions asked on this thread. If BFOs are jerks for asking the hard questions and presenting facts - so be it.

Who's WE? Not all BFOs? Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy
Our family has been here before there was a Seaside. I've stated before that we have shared OUR private beach; but no more since the litigation and antisocial media campaign. BFOs loved the beach enough to invested, live, and helped build the local economy and community as much or more as anyone else. More so than the Commissioner's TDC. How long have you been here and what have you contributed?