Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

It would appear the title of this thread is dead on arrival based on the recent posts. And, of course, most people think the only solution is via CUnCOURT anyway.

The compromises I suggested was a simple attempt to increase (bridge) access to the beach via private property until this CU mess gets settled one way or the other in court. If CU ultimately prevails, no harm, no foul. If CU ultimately fails, the county will have to get serious about purchasing private beach for public use, including parking. And it will be more expensive at that time.

But some can’t see past their own nose, wanting it all or nothing.

So now, I change my mind about supporting the concept of allowing the public to use the back part of our beach. It’s pretty obvious that it would be just another one of those no good deed goes unpunished. And I’m probably being a bit naive thinking that anyone would actually “appreciate” the effort.

It would appear the title of this thread is dead on arrival based on the recent posts. And, of course, most people think the only solution is via CUnCOURT anyway.

The compromises I suggested was a simple attempt to increase (bridge) access to the beach via private property until this CU mess gets settled one way or the other in court. If CU ultimately prevails, no harm, no foul. If CU ultimately fails, the county will have to get serious about purchasing private beach for public use, including parking. And it will be more expensive at that time.

But some can’t see past their own nose, wanting it all or nothing.

So now, I change my mind about supporting the concept of allowing the public to use the back part of our beach. It’s pretty obvious that it would be just another one of those no good deed goes unpunished. And I’m probably being a bit naive thinking that anyone would actually “appreciate” the effort.

How would you collect from people using your Beach? And would you give them a wristband?

Okay each time there seems to be a willingness to compromise (or at least have a decent conversation) someone (FBB this time) throws a wrench into the works. FBB I tend to agree with you on the property rights part of this argument but I strongly disagree with you on the humanity (greater good) part of this. You seem to be wrapped up tight on your and other property owners rights to own the beach. You could very well when this battle but in my opinion it will be the beginning of the end of your peace in enjoying this beautiful resource because I believe you to be a decent human. Peace and happiness is the goal right? There are good reasons "why" it is important to not just see this from your legal rights perspective. You pay property taxes and I get it, you believe that our Constitution is worth living and dying for and I get that but what I don't get is why you have such limited concern about what happens in a world that only cares about money and power and your version of being "right". Money to own a slice of a beautiful natural resource, build and obstruct views of that resource, possibly damage that resource and finally to chain off that resource because people do not always behave (hopefully that is a small percentage). Power to enforce your legal rights (most people have zero access to power). So if you were to understand what it is like for most people to not have money and power then you might could understand why CU supporters get all fired up and say things they shouldn't. Again, I agree with you about all the name calling tactics which are shameful and wrong and the hypocrisy that comes from that side which is wrong but you need to have some thick skin here and remember you wake up every morning to a view that 99% percent of us do not have. Of course some CU supporters also have money and power and it becomes a battle of who is right I guess but there is also power in numbers and you only have about 1% of those numbers. You can argue the math, you can argue that you earned that 1%, you can argue that you are legally right but you can not argue that you wake up every morning and fall asleep every night in paradise. IMHO you have a great opportunity here to show your generosity and drop the lawsuit knowing that you have won the battle of prosperity and goodness. Walton County should show their gratitude and in fairness give you a set of rules of beach behavior that people must follow or be removed from the beach. I have one question for both sides: why not settle this thing now before it is too late for peace and happiness...

Walton County should show their gratitude and in fairness give you a set of rules of beach behavior that people must follow or be removed from the beach

I have one question for both sides: why not settle this thing now before it is too late for peace and happiness...

The root of the problem is too many people in a sensitive ecosystem. Beach behavior is a symptom of the sense of entitlement and overcrowding. The rate of destruction of the 30A ecosystem will actually ACCELERATE if the BCC somehow manages to remove constitutional private property rights and turn our beaches into a free for all.

The main questions is how to control density management and who is allowed to control density management? The private property owners may feel if they have purchased deeded property then they have a right to control density management (in other words right of exclusion). The BCC may feel they want NO restrictions on density management (as indicated by the current beach ordinances). A sub set of density management includes parking, behavior, and beach equipment (some areas may have restrictions on beach equipment) but the very first issue that needs to be addressed is density management.

a great opportunity here to show your generosity and drop the lawsuit

mputnal - It is the BCC (PLANTIFF) that is the suing the property owners (DEFENDANTS). It is the PLANTIFF that must drop the lawsuit. The DEFENDANTS did file a motion to have the motion dismissed but that has not been ruled on yet. (Doc #789 of over 900 documents filed on the Clerk of Court web site case #2018CA0547).

Even if the lawsuit is dropped we still must address density management to slow down the destruction of our 30A ecosystem.

Yes, I agree about the problem with density, infrastructure and behavior and there needs to be an intelligent management of such. We need good leaders. Not lawsuits. Our community is at stake. I am concerned that we get so caught up in being "right" that we lose sight of community. Maybe we should go back to the basics of exactly what "community" means. It seems as if both sides just want to be right then it becomes more about principles and ideals. If community means something then both sides will need to compromise. I think it should be more about community and less about principles or ideals. The issues aren't ridiculous but to ignore the bitterness that will fester in our community because both sides are hell bent on being right then well that is ridiculous! Both sides will need to compromise and settle the lawsuit. Plantiff please compromise and settle with the defendant! Defendant please compromise and settle with the plantiff! Please do it now...

How would you collect from people using your Beach? And would you give them a wristband?

The public would have had access to the back part of the beach. The county would have compensated with reduced taxes while in effect. No wristband necessary. And importantly, the whole “deal” could be cancelled at any time if it didn’t work out (enforcement).

Please do it now...

mputnal, thank you very much for your post.

In the "Ole Days" if someone used private property, they either rented the house on that property, or only a few people used the private property without any beach equipment (as shown in the early photos of beach use). IF they were asked to leave they did. But for the MOST PART, if there were only a few people, with minimal beach equipment (no day camping), and they were respectful, they were not asked to leave the property and everyone got along.

BUT the property owner had the right to ask people to move (right of exclusion) and they moved if asked. THAT IS ANCIENT CUSTOMARY USE ON 30A.

Now we have lawyers being asked to moved off private property by uniformed police officers and they refuse, and then post videos to encourage others to ignore the officers. So much for the Florida Lawyer Oath of Admission to respect officers. This is very recent entitlement use and NOTHING to do with ancient customary use.

Now we have 4 million tourists and an ecosystem that is under rapid destruction. We absolutely can NOT wait 10 years.

This is a crisis and we are destroying 30A. EVEN IF the lawsuit is dropped, if we don't make some radical changes to density management then 30A will be destroyed.

I totally agree with you. We need REAL leaders on the BCC to step up that have the long term 30A ecosystem as the primary objective and not the short term gain of a few people that will result in 30A destruction.

Our community is at stake. I am concerned that we get so caught up in being "right" that we lose sight of community.

Let’s be honest here about “community”. Most everything south of 98 caters to tourists and the dollars they bring. There’s not much sense of community down here IMHO when your neighbors change on a weekly basis. And I don’t think our beach town is unique in that regard.

I think we lost much of our “Legacy” years ago when the TDC became wildly successful in overmarketing the area, exerting more and more pressure via imcreased off beach development on a finite resource, the beach. And now private property owners are pushing back with the only thing they have, private property rights as most can’t vote since they don’t live here. You know, taxation without representation.

Let’s be honest here about “community”. Most everything south of 98 caters to tourists and the dollars they bring. There’s not much sense of community down here IMHO when your neighbors change on a weekly basis. And I don’t think our beach town is unique in that regard.

I think we lost much of our “Legacy” years ago when the TDC became wildly successful in overmarketing the area, exerting more and more pressure via imcreased off beach development on a finite resource, the beach. And now private property owners are pushing back with the only thing they have, private property rights as most can’t vote since they don’t live here. You know, taxation without representation.

We have great community and great people with lots going on that doesn't involve tourists. Granted it is mostly either family based (schools and church centered) or young people who like to do stuff outdoors and socialize at events and bars.
Business is tourist based but the business community is something else. It is not the heart and soul of SoWal. The people are. Sad that you are so angry and at odds with people who live here and love SoWal.

We have great community and great people with lots going on that doesn't involve tourists. Granted it is mostly either family based (schools and church centered) or young people who like to do stuff outdoors and socialize at events and bars.
Business is tourist based but the business community is something else. It is not the heart and soul of SoWal. The people are. Sad that you are so angry and at odds with people who live here and love SoWal.

At least your post started with a good tone and made me think. But then I saw the final sentence.

BTW, did you ever apologize for your very mean spirited comment to @FloridaBeachBum ? You said, “Right or wrong you're a bad neighbor and bad for our community.”

Admins, can you just create a thread called "CU/Private Property Debate" and let FBB, Blue Mountain Vagrant and the CU proponents who want to argue HAVE AT IT. Once the thread is created, just move the "I have to be right" posts to that thread?

There has to be a forum, a little bitty thread where people seeking positive solutions can discuss.

There has to be a forum, a little bitty thread where people seeking positive solutions can discuss.

Emerald Drifter - What are your proposed positive solutions that do not include removal of constitutional property rights that we can discuss? Save the question on removing constitutional property rights (right of exclusion) for the court since it is abundantly clear that neither side is going to compromise on that one. But surely you have positive solutions outside of that?

Is the 30A ecosystem your number one priority or something else? What are your top priorities?

I liked mputal proposal to get some leaders on the BCC, in particular leadership for the protection of our unique 30A ecosystem. Who do you think on the BCC is the current strongest leader for 30A ecosystem protection? How do we encourage him/her? Who is the weakest on protecting the 30A ecosystem and how do we change that? Three of the BCC positions are open in the next election. I personally think Bill Fletcher would have (and still would) make a great member of the BCC. Shame he was thrown under the bus because he was willing to think about a compromise and keep the county out of the courts. Makes me wonder what would have happened if he was elected?

I fully believe the core issue is managed beach density. How do we REDUCE 4 millions tourists on the beach to a level that can be sustained without destruction of the 30A ecosystem? What is that level and how do you regulate it?

I believe both sides could support Ancient Customary Use defined a few posts ago. Entitlement use is different.

Let's see if we can have a positive conversation by leaving entitlement use out of it.

What common ground can we discuss in a positive way?

The public would have had access to the back part of the beach. The county would have compensated with reduced taxes while in effect. No wristband necessary. And importantly, the whole “deal” could be cancelled at any time if it didn’t work out (enforcement).

“The back of the beach”

Sounds like “the back of the bus” I think you have it ass backwards; reminiscent of a vile era in our history.

From the dune line to the waterline and following whatever county rules that exist with enforcement. That’s how it used to be and how it should be.

One advantage of beach renourishment a la Bay County is the wider beaches that put the swimmers and beachgoers further away from the homes=more privacy for the homes.

Dave, if you are willing, let's go through some issues I've heard from BPOs. Do you see a way for BPOs to have ANY priority position on their deeded beachfront?

What common ground can we discuss in a positive way?

Great post Stone Cold. I understand that this forum will/may be seen by decision makers and to that end, let's consider this an ongoing town hall of sorts where ideas can be discussed. I will try and answer your questions within your comments. Hope this works. (Click the quoted post below and it will expand. Did not mean to write a novel!!)

Emerald Drifter - What are your proposed positive solutions that do not include removal of constitutional property rights that we can discuss? Save the question on removing constitutional property rights (right of exclusion) for the court since it is abundantly clear that neither side is going to compromise on that one. But surely you have positive solutions outside of that? First and foremost, removing or severely limiting commercial vendor chairs from the beach will remove a lot of pressure and open up space for the public. I understand that some of these guys have been doing this a while, but this county is absolutely booming; there are many other avenues for entrepreneurial minds to build a business here.

Is the 30A ecosystem your number one priority or something else? Yes, you can say that. More specifically, the coastal dune lakes and our state forest land and protecting them from encroachment. What are your top priorities? Preservation of what we have and what made people fall in love with SoWal. I was not a preservationist until I moved here 12 years ago. When property IS developed, approach it like Seaside, and St. Joe properties have done. Preserve as much of the local flora as possible. It is unique.

I liked mputal proposal to get some leaders on the BCC, in particular leadership for the protection of our unique 30A ecosystem. We have to. And with the number of residents (voters) who are moving to/reside south of the bay are increasing. Too much to go into here about how voting is structured in Walton County to preserve north of the bay as the power center, but this will change as more and more people move into SoWal. (someone who has lived her much longer than I can offer an explanation on this). Who do you think on the BCC is the current strongest leader for 30A ecosystem protection? Commissioner Nipper, no doubt. And she alone (heroically) proved this when she made a stand in regards to holding the county accountable regarding the county's stormwater runoff train wreck in the Sandestin area. How do we encourage him/her? A kind word/email/phone call? Sharing your ideas for solutions? Who is the weakest on protecting the 30A ecosystem and how do we change that? Three of the BCC positions are open in the next election. I personally think Bill Fletcher would have (and still would) make a great member of the BCC. I agree. I do not know him personally, but I think he is a leader in the truest sense. Shame he was thrown under the bus because he was willing to think about a compromise and keep the county out of the courts. Makes me wonder what would have happened if he was elected?

I fully believe the core issue is managed beach density. How do we REDUCE 4 millions tourists on the beach to a level that can be sustained without destruction of the 30A ecosystem? Short answer right now, I don't know. But I notice other areas struggling with the exact same issues we are dealing with: Sedona, Arizona is dealing with the exact same issues we are. Massive numbers of folks, traffic, bigger and bigger development, mini hotels, no long term affordable rentals due to short term/Air BnB. Also, most national parks are dealing with way too many people. Zion National Park, for example, does not allow individual vehicles from May to October (I think). Shuttles only and only park shuttles. Park and ride. What is that level and how do you regulate it? Less than now? How to regulate it? I think it will be economic forces, national level, that will reduce the masses, but thats a different discussion.

I believe both sides could support Ancient Customary Use defined a few posts ago. Entitlement use is different. Although I have only lived here full time 12 years, I have been visiting since the 70s. There has been an unspoken, understood idea of the everyone using the beach in a respectful way. Respectful to the upland owner and respectful to the beach itself and the beach wildlife. I believe that when we residents bring mutual respect back into our actions and discussions that much of the quarreling, conflict, and discord will come down a notch or two. Further, we must demand this from our visitors. They are more than welcome here, but they need to respect our home.

Let's see if we can have a positive conversation by leaving entitlement use out of it.

What common ground can we discuss in a positive way?

These are some random ideas, observations, and opinions. I know there are brighter minds than mine that can offer more in the way of coming together.. life is too short to battle constantly, especially in beautiful SoWal..

Please, Stone Cold, I want to hear your ideas. If you were King of the County , what would you do?

Please, Stone Cold, I want to hear your ideas. If you were King of the County , what would you do?

Emerald Drifter, thank you so very much for your constructive post. Great question. Here are my top 10 created for discussion that I am sure will evolve.

"Make 30A Charming" List.

1. Enforce rental occupancy limits and regulate short term rental density.

2. Develop a formal BCC Mission Statement with #1 priority to protect / promote our unique and sensitive 30A ecosystem. Judge every BCC action against our county motto of Pride, Preservation, Conservation.

3. Stop the BCC from changing long term land development plans. We are destroying our wetlands and environmental conservation areas and converting them to housing developments for huge profits for a few power brokers with huge environment costs for the rest of us.

4. Demand leadership and accountability from the BCC. I agree with your assessment that Melanie Nipper is the one commissioner that is consistently trying to do the right thing.

5. Code enforcement must report to BCC and not the TDC. The beach activities ordinance must be thoroughly understood by the tourists and enforced by code enforcement.

6. BCC must formally approve lawsuit budget and decision gates. The county needs to be run like a true business. Provide regular actual expenditure updates to the public.

7. The BCC must educate the beach going public. Each Regional Access should have an attendant during high season. Flyers should be available for each rental which include behavior expectations and major ordinances (such as beach equipment, set back, dog regulations, trash, alcohol, etc). Tell tourists to move if they are asked to move by uniformed police officers. Include phone numbers for Tourists to call Beach Enforcement and emergency numbers. This should include a formal statement by the BCC against Entitlement Use until Judge Green rules Florida and US Constitutional Property Rights do not include the right of exclusion for beach front properties owners. We must have signage on roads directing tourist to beach accesses, including the state parks, and signage at each access. Each regional beach access needs informative web link on google maps with direct link to the list of rules from google maps location. Use a portion of our advertising budget on education and infrastructure. Allocate advertising dollars to increase amount of money spent per tourist instead of number of tourists.

8. Chair vending during high season limited to only TDC at Regional Beaches (no 3rd party vendors on public beach during high season). Use only ATTENDED chair vendor points and limit the number of chair rentals available at each Regional Access. Rental beach equipment in public beach areas by the hour (not the day) and don’t set up until people are at the beach and take them down when they leave.

9. The BCC must develop a public information and forum page that allows for community constructive discussion. Stop the organized harassment on social media.

10. Density Management – Limit number of people on beach to the extent that infrastructure can accommodate. This one is a tough one and counter intuitive. Loud outspoken investors want more tourists and preach that reducing number of tourists will hurt our economy. The silent majority and 30A ecosystem suffers from hordes of unregulated, unmanaged tourists. We already have more tourists than can be handled by the infrastructure and this is destroying the 30A charm. Focus on quality and not quantity.

Emerald Drifter - Do you and I have any common ground on any of the items above? If so let's discuss those first and then move to discuss the areas of disagreement next.

Good list but please use "South Walton" or "SoWal" - "30A" is too limiting and too touristy. We need to protect all of South Walton, not just the coastal road, or just the beach strip. We have wonderful rivers, creeks, bay, forests, wetlands, etc. Also "South Walton" covers Inlet Beach and Miramar Beach, Point Washington and Freeport - can't leave them out.

“The back of the beach”

Sounds like “the back of the bus” I think you have it ass backwards; reminiscent of a vile era in our history.

Not everyone can afford the luxury of living behind the private locked gates of segregation.

“The back of the beach”

Sounds like “the back of the bus” I think you have it ass backwards; reminiscent of a vile era in our history.

From the dune line to the waterline and following whatever county rules that exist with enforcement. That’s how it used to be and how it should be.

Oh great. I suggested a possible compromise to share the lightly used part of our private beach and you mix me in with white supremists. You and Uhlfelder do seem to share in those tendencies.

But I guess that’s what expected based on your well known NO COMPROMISE posture.

BTW, your comment hardly offends as it was directed at just me. Uhlfelder’s, on the other hand, should offend each and everyone of us based on its content AND that it was aimed at each and every BFO in the county who simply desire to protect their private property (thousands of “community” members) guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution - still nothing but crickets from you.


“That’s how it used to be...”. Again more mistruths from you. It only existed for a very short period of time when the county claimed a taking without due process or compensation. I know that’s a concept that you and other CU folks just seem to love when it’s not your property.

So, in the end, you have more than established that you really don’t want to seek a solution addressed by the title of this thread other than your brilliant idea of attempting to modify the behavior of millions of tourists - what a pipe dream.

Emerald Drifter, thank you so very much for your constructive post. Great question. Here are my top 10 created for discussion that I am sure will evolve.
"Make 30A Charming" List.

Good forum discourse. Keep it up with credible facts. I’d just add that in free market terms; public beach use supply-and-demand = Density management. As the demand goes up the costs of access goes up. Or you get “beach spreading” resulting in the Tragedy of the [Beach] Commons, and uninvited public use on private property - and the legal consequences. Until the demand is managed (stop TDC $20M a year marketing to start) CU is but a temporary bad long term political policy; because the beach supply is fixed and 50%+ is privately owned. Look at California’s coastal solutions - big government and decades of litigation. Wonder how much infrastructure you could buy and do instead of CU litigation and respecting BFOs property rights?

Okay each time there seems to be a willingness to compromise (or at least have a decent conversation) someone (FBB this time) throws a wrench into the works.

mputnal, it’s taken a while to get to your posts. I’m not retired or wealthy enough to have time to be able to post constantly here or social media whenever I want. But I make the time to share with other BFOs and Constitution believers the facts I’ve learned because there is very little facts out there. The majority of misinformation is just; I believe in CU, without the why anyone believes CU, other than the mass majority and “greater good” rules. In America “Well, that’s not the way it works.” Who determines the “greater good” anyway?

I don’t see my positions as “throwing monkey wrenches” but “consider myself to be a realist.” I do want to discuss your two posts to me. First the previous post before the thread was locked #934 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy and your post from this thread #51 What if we focused on solving the problem, instead of wasting time and money on a lost CU cause?.

Preamble. You bring up Deep philosophical subjects, IMO, to a narrow discussion about property rights and public use of private property. Narrow because we could go off subject quickly if you want to delve into “human” philosophy, morals, ethics, political, social, and legal theory, etc. and I understand the attention spans for such discussions are in seconds (or nanoseconds). I’d like to address your posts in parts as I have time. I’m not a philosophy or political science major or attorney, but I have been around and I do homework so I can make informed decisions; not based on in-credible social media fallacies and fancy baseless internet slides.
But in reply to your posts...

#934 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
“As long as I am respectful to other humans I have a human right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. That is the only reason we have a Constitution!”
That is a broad deep philosophical and political statement about the human condition.

“respectful to other humans” sounds like the “Golden Rule” expressed in many social cultures over history. OK, but respect and the Golden Rule are expected “human” behavior towards others and does not convey any special rights to you/anyone because you/anyone do what is expected. If you don’t; your rights could be taken by the Government as a consequence and punishment - after due process of law protected by the US Constitution.

The Declaration of Independence (US DoI), not the Constitution, says “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” But let’s not get too side tracked with “all men are created equal” when many signers owned slaves, or what about Women, or the theological origin of unalienable Rights. Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness - Wikipedia

What is the intent and meaning of “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”? What is the meaning of life? It is a philosophical statement based on western human history in Europe. Human society decides, by our actions and laws. Every human has an opinion that is based on their own world view and political agenda what “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” is. What the courts have held is that some rights are superior and can not interfere with other rights. Freedom to speech does not include yelling FIRE in a theater.

Is historical old English “public customary use” of private property common law superior to Constitutional due-process and private property rights BFOs have had since 1776 and have today? Only the courts, not 5 elected politicians, can determine that based on factual legal CU evidence. That’s why 84% of the FL legislators passed the “criminal” 2018 HB631 and the Governor signed creating FS163.035 BFO due-process law. A law that changes nothing about the English doctrine of customary use. FS163.035 stops any other FL county from illegally avoiding BFO due-process by doing what the Walton Commissioners incompetently did to BFOs before April 1, 2017. BFOs are CU Defendants with ALL private property rights and have to prove nor compromise nothing. That is and has been the status-quo. Commissioners are litigating CU to legally change the BFOs property right status-quo.

Can the CU Commissioners (Plaintiff) with the de-novo burden of proof not litigate against 1,193 beachfront parcels and 4,671 BFOs with tax payers millions, have the political will to find a different political solution other than litigate CU (compromise)? Yes; but since 2007 past and present Commissioners have NOT shown any leadership or political will. Only an inept legal solution to shift the public demand for beaches to private BFOs property by force with CU litigation[1]. I and at least 650+ BFOs and 33 BFO attorneys do not expect the Commissioners to respect or accept BFOs property rights or expect antisocial media to NOT continue to vilify BFOs with conspiracies and misinformation - until a court rules. The alternative to litigation is Commissioners and CU believers would have to respect and accept that BFOs have ALL the bundle of property rights; including private use and enjoyment, that may exercise if BFOs so choose. The Commissioners’ Customary Use Committee, vice chaired by Mike Huckabee, made suggestions. Mike Huckabee has had suggestions. BMBV has made suggestions. To no avail.

Many define unalienable or inalienable Rights as; that which cannot be given away, taken away, or denied - that limited, unobtrusive, not-intrusive Governments are create by the Governed/citizens to protect our unalienable rights -- not to be governed by a Despot or King/Queen by “divine right”. US DoI “The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.” Then lists 27 injuries by the King.

Today is the Fourth of July. The United States of America’s Independence day from England 243 years ago. A long time but not “ancient” by any historical “customary” legal standard.

When was the last time anyone read the Declaration of Independence that rejected English rule and many English common laws, as expressed in the Constitution? Declaration of Independence: A Transcription
U.S. Constitution: Table Of Contents

If anyone disagrees say why. Should have credible facts; not shout downs and disrespectful name calling.

Have to go. Sorry for the length. Hard to explain credibly with sound-bite bullets. Maybe next time; “The truth of the matter is that many beach front property owners built structures that block the view of a natural resource that everyone has a right to whether it is with the sense of human sight or touch”. Thanks.

[1] For example former Commissioner and County Administrator Larry Jones wrote his 2008 Master’s paper explaining why CU exists, not if CU exists.

Good list but please use "South Walton" or "SoWal"

Thank you Truman and I agree and will refer to the list as "Make SoWal Charming".

Any of those items you strongly agree?