Back to All About SoWal

Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

Reggie Gaskins avatar
Beach Lover
526,504 views2
upload_2019-4-25_8-30-52.jpeg
When you see a PCB or Destin bumper sticker, what thought immediately comes to mind? Probably same for all of us with any time spent here - nice, but it ain’t 30A! Do you remember why you started renting/visiting here? What was it? Remember when you bought your first 30A property? Why here?
Because it was DIFFERENT, right? Remember the words you used to describe it to family and friends as you invited them here? “Private” “Quiet” “Intimate” “Less crowded”. That wasn’t by accident. The entire genetic code of Sowal beaches is because of the private ownership and neighborhood beach personalities.
You could rent “private beach”. You could buy “private beach”. There wasn’t a free for all frat party atmosphere because of unlimited public beach access on the sands. That behavior was regulated by the privately owned property where such behavior was immediately squelched. And yet, by custom, no one was ever “Kicked off” of private beaches because owners don’t do that unless bad actors abuse the privilege.
Walton County has always had more than 50% PUBLIC beach. Still does. That hasn’t changed. There are now deliberately misleading fear tactics out there with scary words like “Quiet Title” and “Privatization”, neither of which have affected one single square inch of public beach, not one. Yet, the mob mentality, orchestrated by local carnival barkers eager for fame and notoriety, and dollars, have mislead the citizens and deliberately tried to divide the community in a shell game of Customary Use.
The fact is that the county outran the capabilities of local Commissioners to plan for growth 20 years ago, and we haven’t improved that talent to deal with it even yet. So the County, in failing to plan beach availability, tried to illegally claim private property as public, without following the laws requiring judicial oversight. The local Good Ol’ Boys overreached their authority and got caught by the adults in Tallahassee. So they then decides to sue 4,800 of Sowal citizens to take their property. That’s right, your tax money is being spent, and a lot of it, to SUE almost 5,000 of your neighbors, and steal what they agreed to purchase at a premium, and have a deed to prove it.
Don’t blame them please, they didn’t want or ask for this fight. They live here and care for these beaches just like you and me. Go meet them, they are truly the eclectic fabric of 30A. The signs they had to put up are just in defense of this new orchestrated public attack against them.
The bottom line is this: The minute you release the public to occupy all of Sowal beaches, you IMMEDIATELY get nasty Destin and PCB problems. How will you feel about that 30A sticker then? Nostalgic? Me too.

03BC6F35-C70B-476E-8581-BDFB287ECF68.jpeg

Replies

2,312
Auburn Fan avatar
Beach Lover
#802
Dave has been a member since 2005 and posted on a number of topics and has been active in giving back to the community including hosting the annual CVHN Hurricane Party. What’s your record?

I'm just an individual. Not a multimillion-dollar corporation, so it's unfair of you to make that comparison.

Look carefully to see who the true power broker is.
Beach Fanatic
#803
Here's my new favorite metric:

5- 4​

US Supreme Court
Knick v. Township of Scott, 17-647
June 21, 2019
This new ruling changes the way "takings claims" are litigated nationwide.
Property owners seeking just compensation now get the fast lane.
Beach Fanatic
#804
Months ago I suggested we all work together to find a solution everyone could live with. No, screamed the CU people we will never surrender. I said it would take 5 years and Cost 50 million dollars . Still no one wanted to even talk about a reasonable solution. Well now it will cost the county billions to buy the property if they lose plus the attorney fees. Beach front owners will have a fast track and people who would not compromise in any way will be sorry. We can blame the BCC for not trying to find a solution that could have stopped this avalanche and the people who said never surrender and never compromise. Very sad .
Beach Fanatic
#805
Months ago I suggested we all work together to find a solution everyone could live with. No, screamed the CU people we will never surrender. I said it would take 5 years and Cost 50 million dollars . Still no one wanted to even talk about a reasonable solution. Well now it will cost the county billions to buy the property if they lose plus the attorney fees. Beach front owners will have a fast track and people who would not compromise in any way will be sorry. We can blame the BCC for not trying to find a solution that could have stopped this avalanche and the people who said never surrender and never compromise. Very sad .
Have you met with Dave Rauschkolb? He has proffered a compromise solution.
Beach Fanatic
#806
Yes he and I have discussed this many times but he was not interested .
Beach Fanatic
#807
Yes he and I have discussed this many times but he was not interested .
He was not interested in his own compromise plan? Or did you have a particular problem with it?
BlueMtnBeachVagrant avatar
Beach Fanatic
#808
Have you met with Dave Rauschkolb? He has proffered a compromise solution.
Are you implying that Mr. and Mrs. No Compromise are offering a compromise? Don't think it's legit like most of your posts.
Beach Fanatic
#809
He was not interested in his own compromise plan? Or did you have a particular problem with it?
I have not seen his plan. I know Dave well and I like him.
Beach Fanatic
#810
He was not interested in his own compromise plan? Or did you have a particular problem with it?
I never saw his plan .
Dave Rauschkolb avatar
Beach Fanatic
#811
I never saw his plan .

Is it really behavior that caused the CU vs Private beach issue?
Discussion in 'Local Government and Groups' started by Dave Rauschkolb, Jun 6, 2019.
  1. The tragedy here is that a handful of influential politicians, beachfront owners and lawyers first stopped beach nourishment then stopped Customary Use through House Bill631. As a result, our beach community has been altered with extremely negative consequences.

    There is no escaping the fact that property values near the beaches are higher because of their close proximity to the beach. Beachfront owners pay for the view and convenience of having the water steps from their homes. Homes closer but not on the beach have little less value because of the convenience of having the water and beach a short walk from their homes. Homes that require a short drive are less valuable for that reason and homes that require a longer drive are worth less.

    So, two values, both quality of life and financial values are tied directly to the shared beach and those homes closest to the beach. Shared is the operative word and beach is THE place that determines value on all levels. That is to say balance and shared value for all is optimal for everyone who is invested in our community. Beachfront owners have the advantage of view and the closest proximity.

    Beachfront owners have prominently stated the cause of all this is bad behavior on the our beaches. So, if the real issue is behavior let's work together to reign in the behavior, set some new more impactful rules and begin sharing the beaches again; all of the beaches again from dune line to water line.

    If that is the compromise then that is the only compromise I can see. Fix the behavior and share the beaches. But once you start talking property rights and applying them to a beach and excluding people from that beach you have lost me. You all have been asking for compromise. If the behavior really is the problem let's address it, take down the signs and reset and restore the balance for the betterment of our community. Any takers?
BlueMtnBeachVagrant avatar
Beach Fanatic
#812
From Dave Rauschkolb:
“So, if the real issue is behavior let's work together to reign in the behavior, set some rules and begin sharing the beaches again; all of the beaches again from dune line to water line. If that is the compromise then that is the only compromise I can see. Fix the behavior and share the beaches. I am full of ideas.”
Maybe full of something else.

Dave says the above here
Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

And Dave DOUBLE DOWNS here
Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

And then Dave TRIPLE DOWNS HERE
Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

Compromise? You’ve got to be joking!! Simply “reign in bad behavior” and take over private property with absolutely no compensation??

If anyone thinks that Dave Rauschkolb or Daniel Uhlfelder ever seriously looked for a strategy to “compromise” this terrible situation brought on by the BCC and CU proponents, well...never mind. They’ve repeatedly stated they will not accept compromise, i.e. Mr. and Mrs. No Compromise.

CUnCOURT

Edit...I just saw Dave’s previous post AFTER I worked on this post. Well at least he’s consistent.

Aw, what the heck.....
And then Dave QUADRUPLE DOWNS HERE
Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

Edited

Auburn Fan avatar
Beach Lover
#815
Jim, that was just description of how Dave would like to control the use of the beach if he had control. (Along with the cotton candy lengthy description of why his affluent neighborhood is justified in blocking the public's access to God's beautiful shoreline.)

Dave is not an elected official. He is not even in the position of offering a compromise. Rauschkolb merely represents a powerful multi-million dollar corporation who stands to gain significantly if the floodgates of beach use are opened.... As long as it's not his neighborhood.
BlueMtnBeachVagrant avatar
Beach Fanatic
#816
His plan is outlined here:
Access and use, convenience advantages & solutions for housekeeping on our beach
I read the referenced post a 3rd time and still don’t see any compromise at all - only a reference to cows and cow pastures (and by inference, the “BS” associated with the cow pastures) and beach ambassadors. Otherwise Dave Rauschkolb desires that the public, whose numbers continue to grow and grow thanks to TDC marketing and resulting off beach development, is allowed full access to private property without any compensation whatsoever.

And he also admits, he’s “protected” at Watersound because of inconvenient access to their beach.

I just don’t get how people can profess one thing and live another.

com·pro·mise
/ˈkämprəˌmīz/
noun
  1. an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.

Beach Lover
#817
I read the referenced post a 3rd time and still don’t see any compromise at all - only a reference to cows and cow pastures (and by inference, the “BS” associated with the cow pastures) and beach ambassadors. Otherwise Dave Rauschkolb desires that the public, whose numbers continue to grow and grow thanks to TDC marketing and resulting off beach development, is allowed full access to private property without any compensation whatsoever.

And he also admits, he’s “protected” at Watersound because of inconvenient access to their beach.

I just don’t get how people can profess one thing and live another.

com·pro·mise
/ˈkämprəˌmīz/
noun
  1. an agreement or a settlement of a dispute that is reached by each side making concessions.
I live in SoWal and desire open beaches. But they're not. And a lot of them are inconvenient.
Reggie Gaskins avatar
Beach LoverAuthor
#818
Our old guys club has been watching this thread develop from the sidelines.

Here's the 3 questions we keep asking. So maybe someone can answer them with some honest answers.

How is an entitlement mentality of the public being promised someone else's private property, for free, NOT Socialism?

Why does no one point out that this guy, who lives and works on restricted private beaches, with his picture all over the place, publishes all of this creative writing that is all based on totally false premise, fantasies, nothing factual at all about it, entirely wishful thinking?

How does the obvious propaganda and dishonest behavior by 4 or 5 little agitators on social media not result in swift legal recourse and stiff penalties for malicious activist misdeeds?

Us old guys would appreciate real answers, not the childish replies we keep seeing here.
Auburn Fan avatar
Beach Lover
#819
I live in SoWal and desire open beaches. But they're not. And a lot of them are inconvenient.

Inconvenient?

Here's one thought:

Perhaps you should talk to Rauschkolb about campaigning for Surf Rider to sue Watersound for eminent domain to open up a public street transecting that neighborhood so the public has access to that gorgeous beach that is calling the public's name.
Surfrider is all over breaking up enclaves for the super rich.
No parking you say? No problem. Uber is the answer of the future day-tripping day-camper.
And by the way, day-trippers won't be contributing to the lucrative bed tax that helps pay for the exponentially growing county services required to manage the hordes of additional tourists that are growing worldwide.

Heres another (sarcastic) thought:

"Oh hey, yeah, let's just sue thousands of homeowners, costing each of them thousands of dollars to defend the rights that came with their property when they bought it, because there's a group of us, stirred up by some emotional keyboard warriors, who now fear that we might be inconvenienced when we want to go sunbathe."
Jimmy T avatar
Beach Fanatic
#820
Saw an article in the news this morning that the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Friday that property owners can go directly to federal court with claims that state and local regulations effectively deprive landowners of the use of their property.

Curious if it has any implications for the CU battle.
Beach Lover
#821
Is it really behavior that caused the CU vs Private beach issue?

Poor Beach Behavior is not the cause of the "CU vs Private beach issue" but (IMO) a result of Entitlement Use vs the Property Owners perceived Right of Exclusion.

The "Private Beach Issue" is a perception of private property owners that they have constitutional property rights, in particular Right of Exclusion for deeded land they purchased vs some citizens perception that constitutional private property rights don't exist if you happen to buy property in certain areas, even if the property has been owned by the family for generations.

You can try to improve behavior, which would be great, but still have unresolved issues of Entitlement Use vs Right of Exclusion. I used the word "perceived" since both sides don't agree on what might be considered "Constitutional Property Rights" and "Right of Exclusion" and waiting on Judge Green to make a ruling.

Behavior is hard to control if a person does not want to be controlled and there are no repercussions for poor behavior. Similar to someone making a video of a person running through kids playing soccer at Seaside (apparently nude), then running by a beach bar on a public beach, where he is shot by a sniper and dies. Someone can say they are "against that behavior and against someone that would make and post that video" but they don't control video makers behavior, nor do they have the ability to remove the video from social media.

If there are no enforceable rules and a free for all, then behavior can not be controlled. Anyone on this forum ever raise a teenager? The poor beach behavior is a result, not a cause. If people with poor behavior were removed from the beach, their behavior, and the behavior of those around them, would change (assuming they wanted to stay on the beach). Like a football game that has referees that won't enforce rules or call penalties. Soon the game is out of control and players get hurt, some for life. Both teams keep pushing the limits, and when they find there are no enforceable limits, people get hurt. Some blame the players, others blame the coaches, others blame the people that make the rules, but still the game gets out of control if the referees don't enforce established rules.

The Sherriff says he won't enforce trespassing laws. TDC won't enforce ordinances, in particular that no beach equipment can be within 15 feet of the water line, Lawyers won't obey the Sherriff asking them to move off private property and instead make videos encouraging the public to disobey requests by uniformed police and ignore beach ordinances and permit requirements. Some CU "leaders" have encouraged destruction of signs and private property. If the Sherriff said he would not enforce speeding limits in front of Butler Elementary, people would speed and children would get hurt. Some could say they use to drive as fast as they wanted on that road before the school was built and they have a "Right" to speed since no one will stop them.

IMO the sense of Entitlement is one of the root causes of the behavior issues on the beach along with the lack of Density Management, too many people wanting unlimited access without restrictions to a limited resource. If there were only a few people wanting to go the 30A beaches like 20 years ago, there would be no issues. There are issues because we have more tourists that can be accommodated with our limited resources and because of that our sensitive and unique ecosystem is being destroyed.

30A Legacy...

Edited

Dave Rauschkolb avatar
Beach Fanatic
#8226
So is it Reggie Gaskins, Stone Cold J, or whatever your name is? It appears your Mis-spelling of the word "Sherriff" may be very telling... and reeks of desperation to be heard. It appears Reggie has reanimated into Stone Cold J. I suspected the writing style and tenor was similar but the misspelling giveaway was obvious. Such effort to remain anonymous and get your message out there. Why not stand out in the sunshine and speak as you truly are?? So sad to have to hide in shadows. What are you afraid of? Why not speak as the person you actually are?

DETAIL OF Reggie Gaskins POST WITH MISSPELLING OF "SHERRIFF" :
Screen Shot 2019-06-22 at 4.31.53 PM.png

FULL POST WITH THE DETAIL FROM ABOVE
Screen Shot 2019-06-22 at 4.32.02 PM.png



Detail of Stone Cold J's most recent post with exact same Mis-spelling of "Sherriff"

Screen Shot 2019-06-22 at 4.32.51 PM.png
FULL IMAGE OF MOST RECENT POSTING FROM STONE COLD J WITH SAME MISSPELLING OF "SHERRIFF"

Screen Shot 2019-06-22 at 4.33.06 PM.png

image.png

image.png

Edited

BlueMtnBeachVagrant avatar
Beach Fanatic
#823
Us old guys would appreciate real answers, not the childish replies we keep seeing here.
And the rest of us too. I’m in denial. :lol: BTW, I think we’re in agreement that we shouldn’t “hold our breath” waiting - definitely hazardous to your health.
BlueMtnBeachVagrant avatar
Beach Fanatic
#824
I shot the sherriff, but I didn’t shoot the deputee.
You caught me!
Auburn Fan avatar
Beach Lover
#825
Next time I talk to Mike, I will confirm how often that word gets misspelled. The real desperation was exhibited by your feeble attempt to distract from the genuinely compelling arguments presented by both posters, and your inability to reasonably answer any of the questions presented in this thread with sound facts. But thanks for the hearty laugh, Dave. :floor:

Sheriff’s long-awaited memorial includes unfortunate misspelling

Edited

Dave Rauschkolb avatar
Beach Fanatic
#826
Next time I talk to Mike, I will confirm how often that word gets misspelled. The real desperation was exhibited by your feeble attempt to distract from the genuinely compelling arguments presented by both posters, and your inability to reasonably answer any of the questions presented in this thread with sound facts. But thanks for the hearty laugh. :floor:

Sheriff’s long-awaited memorial includes unfortunate misspelling


No, all of your group’s anonymity speaks volumes not owning up to your own thoughts and words as your own. That is what has me laughing. Such lengths are taken to remain anonymous. You all don’t seem to understand that your anonymity dilutes your legitimacy and integrity.

Checking your forum account

Please wait while we verify your forum account.

New posts