Back to All About SoWal

Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

Reggie Gaskins avatar
Beach Lover
526,499 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
Alex Miles avatar
Beach Comber
#2127
... I think this thread was hoping to create a divide between us. Many words being tossed around like socialist and capitalist are used in political theater to divide people. We should resist being divided because it makes it just too easy for those who abuse power...

Wanna know what divides people?
Suing their a$$!
Yeah. Lawsuits tend to cause division.
Beach Fanatic
#2128
Am, I thought you wanted due process? Now you say you don't!?! I also think you are the one who said that the sandy beach is not Realestate right? The solid ground underneath is used how again? So what a$$ are you talking about? Maybe your unhappiness is misplaced. Talk to your representatives.
Beach Comber
#2129
DanaMarie, yes we do agree on something :) Probably on many things! I do not disrespect your opinions and your beliefs. I think this thread was hoping to create a divide between us. Many words being tossed around like socialist and capitalist are used in political theater to divide people. We should resist being divided because it makes it just too easy for those who abuse power. Think of power like an entitlement. Think of who benefits most from entitlements. Who holds the most power from entitlements like tax breaks, tax loop holes, corporate welfare etc.? Not the working class. Not the middle class. I am not a socialist and hope that we all wake up before there it is too late. I assume that you and I are both registered republicans but I do not let anyone speak for me not even my party. I am very disappointed in my party. Actually neither party has represented the middle class for a long time IMO. My only message about politics is to think for yourself and have a voice.
Beach Comber
#2130
I don’t believe this thread was started in order to create division. I believe it was intended to foster conversation, which it has. I believe it was intended to provide a voice to both sides of the customary use issue. And it has. As for division, you say that words such as “socialist” and “capitalist” are used in order to divide people. But what about words like “elite wealth”, “power broker” and “abuse of power”? Or telling people that they can’t handle the truth or don’t want to know the truth, just because their opinion is different than yours? Or saying that those who want to exercise their private property rights, or believe in another’s ability to do so, are thinking with their money, abuse power, have elite wealth, don’t have anyone’s best interests in mind other than their own, believe in their greatness, etc… I could go on. Aren’t those statements divisive?

I personally don’t have any power to abuse. I don’t have elite wealth. I do have other’s best interests in mind above my own. And that is exactly why I don’t support customary use. I don’t own beachfront, but I believe in the beachfront owners’ right to private property.
stone packard avatar
Beach Lover
#2131
Fbb, I think it is more like you are trying to avoid the truth. I wonder why!

Try as you might to link me to socialism you will fail because I am linked to reality and awareness. Your efforts to use words like Marxist, Socialist and Communist only proves that you have lived your life with many many entitlements that you have NOT earned otherwise you would not fear the truth of what makes this Country strong. The Middle Class and the Working Class is the back bone of this Country and you are doing your best to break it by hoarding resources like the coastal sandy beach. It is quite revealing the way Elite Wealth and Power believe in their importance. Your every post solidifies my awareness.
Congratulations on setting yourself up as a moral compass!
Beach Lover
#2132
mp, what a futile attempt at twisting words. Alex was merely pointing out your obvious strawman fallacy of what's causing the division.

If the county government wants to confiscate private property without compensation. it obviously belongs in the courts. The BCC also claims this lawsuit is “without dispute”. Do you think it is without dispute? You seem willing to spend $50,000,000 to see if the courts think this is "without dispute" as the County claims. And sued for what? Merely for owning private property, some of which has been in their family for generations. You can't blame property owners if that leaves a bad taste in their mouth.

Nobody, and I mean nobody, likes being sued, and you should know that.

Nice try, though.

Edited

PoppaJ avatar
SoWal Insider
#2133
Yep, I'm in favor of those things too. I also supported the purchase of Camp Helen by the state. Capitalism doesn't mean privatizing everything. Funny that you mentioned the police though. Law enforcement seems to be a target of the socialists these days.
Wait, I’m confused. When is it socialism and when is it something else that’s socialism but if you use it or support it you’re not a socialist? Are the farmers with no market for their products taking bail out money socialists? Maybe temporary socialists, yea that’s it.
Dave Rauschkolb avatar
Beach Fanatic
#2134
Ah, Florida Beach Bum thanks so much for placing links to the many reasoned responses I have posted regarding this issue. Here's one that really says it all. An oldie but a goodie.

"OK, Fact Or Fiction appreciate your point it is density driven and the concern is that there’s too many people and too many variances given. That’s why I worked very hard for three years with amazing people I am now lifelong friends with and are on both sides of the aisle and even this issue. And I spent nearly $40,000 of my own money to rally support to incorporate South Walton but those worried about taxes going up crushed that opportunity to have local representation. And some others who don’t want any control over development had a considerable influence as well.
The thing that bothers me is that those who are here and have theirs are trying to say I’ve got mine and we don’t want anybody else. Well, that’s not the way it works. Special places attract people and the people who invariably come require infrastructure and accommodations where they want to recreate. I’ve said it 1 million times “these are the good old days for the people just now moving here.”. Like in any city rules are created and enforcement is essential. If people don’t follow the rules and they are not enforced then there is anarchy. No one wants that so yes, we have to hold a representative officials accountable. However, changing the rules so drastically that it eliminates large swaths of the very reason why people come here is not acceptable under any conditions. I was the first person to step up and offer solutions that actually were adopted. I engaged with beachfront owners to try to solve the problem but the die was cast and they wanted the whole apple and they currently have it. I truly believe that it’s temporary though.

I’m willing to sit down and work on solutions and I appreciate the fact that you addressed to me civilly without attacking me. By nature I’m an out-of-the-box thinker and a problem solver but this recent legislation in my book was yes, criminal and drastic and way out of line. So, how do we walk that back and restore our beaches to some semblance of shareable order? I’m wide-open to suggestions that don’t include excluding the public from using the sandy parts of the beaches as long as they follow the rules.

One thing we seem to agree on is that the vending of Beach Chairs in the current incarnation has greatly exacerbated the problem and no vending should be allowed on any county public beaches the way it is currently set up. If someone wants to go to a county public beach and call up a phone number and have someone deliver some chairs and an umbrella in no specified zone that should be allowed, but only that. The rest of the county public beaches should be wide open for anyone to set up anywhere they wish; First come first served.

As I’ve said before I acknowledge private property but as long as people behave correctly on beach private property and follow whatever rules the county adopts then this truly could be solved.

So again, To speak to your point those 4 million visitors can easily be educated; The TDC has plenty of money to educate people about the rules.

Do we really want Walton county to be the county in America that set the precedent that privatized beaches across the Nation? Or, do we want to be the beach community that figured it out and worked out a fair solution? The only thing I’ve been uncompromising about is the ability of beachfront owners to exclude people from the sandy parts of the beach. There’s plenty of compromise when it comes to setting up rules on those sandy parts.

So I feel like I’ve given you a reasonable and respectful answer that offer solutions. And again, I appreciate the tenor of your response to my comments.


Very best regards,

Dave Rauschkolb"

Edited

Beach Fanatic
#2135
DanaMarie, I understand your point but let me just try to explain if you don't mind. Who is trying to divide who? When I first started reading the thread I was on the same page as you. It seemed like a legit conversation about the causes of the beaches being overcrowded. Please go back and find my original posts and you will see why I began to see through the carefully crafted purpose of this thread. Listen you are going to believe or know what you know and I will not change that but it all comes down to math. Elite wealth obviously has power and privilege that most of us do not have. I would give you the definition of elite but you can look it up. Power and privilege is an issue that is also legit conversation for this thread because you and I do not have the kind of power that it takes to get a bill passed. Income inequality has now reached epic proportions. Politics has split us about 50/50. Politics need lots of money. Think about this. Who has the majority of the influence on politicians? Is it you and me or is it elite wealth? Just look at how fast that bill got passed in the Florida Legislature. Okay back to the math. Elite wealth represents about 1 percent. That leaves 99 percent of the rest of us. That 1 percent owns over 50 percent of our resources. Is that not disproportionate enough to at least be concerned? Well, I am concerned even more after reading these posts from people who represent elite wealth and power and privilege and entitlement and even a superior belief at having some mandate to use their power in an abusive manner. They will NEVER have anyone's best interest in mind but their own but an abuse of power is not a crime. So, I am not saying that they are creating a crime but they keep saying that we are "stealing" from them. I am merely pointing out the math but they are trying to criminalize anyone who does not believe in private exclusive beach enjoyment. Which is more divisive? If you take some time and go back and read their post I hope you will understand why I believe the way I do but if you don't I respect your difference of opinion.
Beach Fanatic
#2136
Scj, why did it have to go to court? Because a very few wanted to test property law of who has the rights to enjoy the coastal sandy beach. AM even said the sand is not realestate and therefore can not be bought or sold or privately used. He did say that the solid ground underneath is private property. Do you see a problem with that? There would have been zero money spent if you and yours accepted public recreational use and negotiated density and vending but oh no that is not enough. You want private coastal sandy beach enjoyment. You are done with sharing the beach. The lawsuit is a deceptive way for you to blame the cost on The People. Problem is not all bfo's wanted to spend a bunch of money so you have to try and keep them in the lawsuit instead of negotiating density and vending. Your group of power brokers want control of the resource period. This is not about protecting my property rights or anyone's property rights. This is pure abuse of power, of privilege and of entitlement which is not a crime. Stealing is a crime. Who is doing the dividing?
Beach Fanatic
#2137
SP, I am definitely not the one who is judging character in this thread. In case you do not read my threads I am not accusing anyone of a crime. I am saying that we the people should not let political theater divide us. I am also saying that there is a disproportionate ratio of income, privilege, entitlement and power in society and that we better wake up America...
Beach Lover
#2138
Scj, why did it have to go to court?

Thank you for asking. This went to court because in 2016 the BCC, for the first time ever, tried to pass a beach ordinance illegally taking away private property rights that has been held since Florida awarded property deeds.

This illegal attempt by the BCC to "remove" State of Florida Property Rights was stopped by the State and the county must follow a judicial procedure and IF the BCC could PROVE that each individual parcel had recreational customary use that was ANCIENT, REASONABLE, WITHOUT INTERUPTION, and WITHOUT DISPUTE, then it could be established for recreational customary use. IF THEY COULD PROVE ALL 4 CRITERIA.

If Private Property rights have been in place since Florida became a State then Private Property rights are "from a time when the memory of man runs not to the contrary of it" (AKA ancient). The BCC MUST PROVE that private property rights (for only the BPO's) have not existed since Florida was a State.

The BCC MUST PROVE that it is reasonable to remove private property rights (only for the BPO's), which are used by owners to generate the income to pay their mortgages and taxes, and instead give those rights exclusively to the BCC to chase after billions of tourists dollars and remove that economic benefit which the BPO's have PAID FOR.

Private Property owners have the right to allow people on private property that are family, guests, or paying guests. If someone was on private property against the will of the property owner and asked to move, they moved, or the Sherriff was called and removed them (until 2016, but just because he is temporarily not enforcing trespassing right now does not mean Property Rights don't exist). The BCC MUST PROVE that unlimited people with unlimited beach equipment have been allowed on public property AGAINST the will of the property owner (lots of trespassing tickets and court cases prior to 2016 prove otherwise)

And finally, The BCC must PROVE this issue without DISPUTE! (even though they say it may cost $50,000,000 just to take it to court and don't know if they are even going to make it past Judge Green let alone the US Supreme Court).

So do you think the BCC can prove all four of those criteria, not just one, two, or three, but ALL FOUR.

All the other arguments, redistribution of wealth, "sharing", tourist economic tax gain, increased number of tourists for local business, beach density, beach behavior, chair vendors, etc have zero role in THIS court case. Save that for a different court case.
​

So what about it mp, do you think this issue is without dispute? ​

Edited

stone packard avatar
Beach Lover
#2139
Wait, I’m confused. When is it socialism and when is it something else that’s socialism but if you use it or support it you’re not a socialist? Are the farmers with no market for their products taking bail out money socialists? Maybe temporary socialists, yea that’s it.
We've always had a public sector that provided services such as law enforcement, defense and many other public services. You socialists want to expand public enterprise. When railroad travel became obsolete in the US, AmTrak was created and has been a complete failure. I support national parks and state parks as part of the public sector, but I'm not sure it worked when the Henderson Beach property was purchased by the state.
Beach Comber
#2140
DanaMarie, I understand your point but let me just try to explain if you don't mind. Who is trying to divide who? When I first started reading the thread I was on the same page as you. It seemed like a legit conversation about the causes of the beaches being overcrowded. Please go back and find my original posts and you will see why I began to see through the carefully crafted purpose of this thread. Listen you are going to believe or know what you know and I will not change that but it all comes down to math. Elite wealth obviously has power and privilege that most of us do not have. I would give you the definition of elite but you can look it up. Power and privilege is an issue that is also legit conversation for this thread because you and I do not have the kind of power that it takes to get a bill passed. Income inequality has now reached epic proportions. Politics has split us about 50/50. Politics need lots of money. Think about this. Who has the majority of the influence on politicians? Is it you and me or is it elite wealth? Just look at how fast that bill got passed in the Florida Legislature. Okay back to the math. Elite wealth represents about 1 percent. That leaves 99 percent of the rest of us. That 1 percent owns over 50 percent of our resources. Is that not disproportionate enough to at least be concerned? Well, I am concerned even more after reading these posts from people who represent elite wealth and power and privilege and entitlement and even a superior belief at having some mandate to use their power in an abusive manner. They will NEVER have anyone's best interest in mind but their own but an abuse of power is not a crime. So, I am not saying that they are creating a crime but they keep saying that we are "stealing" from them. I am merely pointing out the math but they are trying to criminalize anyone who does not believe in private exclusive beach enjoyment. Which is more divisive? If you take some time and go back and read their post I hope you will understand why I believe the way I do but if you don't I respect your difference of opinion.
Beach Comber
#2141
Mputnal, you asked me “who has the majority of influence on the politicians?” You followed with the example of how quickly the bill got passed in the Florida Legislature. I have a question for you: Who had the power over the local politicians (BCC) to convince them to pass the ordinance that attempted to remove private property rights, which started the customary issue dispute?
Beach Fanatic
#2142
DanaMarie, good question. The people who vote are supposed to have the power over the local politicians. Our voice is in the vote, attending local government meetings, communicating with our commissioners and listening to our neighbors. When we give up our voice to those who believe they know what is best for you and me well you an me loses our voice and democracy fails. Okay now I understand that we have beach overcrowding and yes I agree that they allowed too much development. Where we disagree is on whether the coastal sandy beach is for private exclusive use or public recreational use. Since we do not agree and there was no compromise the BCC had no choice but to declare public recreational use. So, now those with power pushed a bill through the legislature that required the lawsuit. I believe the lawsuit became necessary when bpo's changed their mind from sharing to excluding. I think we have a different perspective. You and I can vote but we do not have any power to control that legislative branch like those with elite power in passing that bill. There was no taking by the BCC IF these beaches have been "used" for public recreational use at all which they have. In addition the declaration of public recreational use does not restrict or remove the right for bfo's to enjoy the beach ONLY that they can not exclude others from enjoying the beach. I am not trying to convince you of anything other than we should keep communicating with respect and find solutions and compromises that work for our community instead of lawsuits but in this case the lawsuit is the only way to determine if public recreational use existed on the coastal sandy shoreline or if private exclusive enjoyment existed. Since bpo's no longer want to share the enjoyment of the beach this lawsuit had to happen. I think it is time to stop blaming each other and have confidence in our Justice System...
Beach Comber
#2143
DanaMarie, good question. The people who vote are supposed to have the power over the local politicians. Our voice is in the vote, attending local government meetings, communicating with our commissioners and listening to our neighbors. When we give up our voice to those who believe they know what is best for you and me well you an me loses our voice and democracy fails. Okay now I understand that we have beach overcrowding and yes I agree that they allowed too much development. Where we disagree is on whether the coastal sandy beach is for private exclusive use or public recreational use. Since we do not agree and there was no compromise the BCC had no choice but to declare public recreational use. So, now those with power pushed a bill through the legislature that required the lawsuit. I believe the lawsuit became necessary when bpo's changed their mind from sharing to excluding. I think we have a different perspective. You and I can vote but we do not have any power to control that legislative branch like those with elite power in passing that bill. There was no taking by the BCC IF these beaches have been "used" for public recreational use at all which they have. In addition the declaration of public recreational use does not restrict or remove the right for bfo's to enjoy the beach ONLY that they can not exclude others from enjoying the beach. I am not trying to convince you of anything other than we should keep communicating with respect and find solutions and compromises that work for our community instead of lawsuits but in this case the lawsuit is the only way to determine if public recreational use existed on the coastal sandy shoreline or if private exclusive enjoyment existed. Since bpo's no longer want to share the enjoyment of the beach this lawsuit had to happen. I think it is time to stop blaming each other and have confidence in our Justice System...
Beach Comber
#2144
mputnal, so you are saying The People had the power over the local politicians to force the BCC to pass the ordinance. Is that accurate?
Beach Fanatic
#2145
Yes I think the BCC were listening to their constituents. The people who elected them. Force is not the right word though.
Beach Fanatic
#2146
Just so you know, every time you call someone a socialist we all know you are a fox brainwash victim with no ability to think for yourself.

People laugh at you.
PoppaJ avatar
SoWal Insider
#2147
We've always had a public sector that provided services such as law enforcement, defense and many other public services. You socialists want to expand public enterprise. When railroad travel became obsolete in the US, AmTrak was created and has been a complete failure. I support national parks and state parks as part of the public sector, but I'm not sure it worked when the Henderson Beach property was purchased by the state.
If a failure is what erodes your confidence I find it surprising you haven’t totally rejected capitalism.:lol:
Beach Fanatic
#2148
Scj, I think those with power created the issues that we now have. Too much development. Yes. Too many exclusive view blocking mansions on the beach. Yes. Public recreational Use is a fact. Property rights require due process. The lawsuit allows bpo's to dispute and the people to claim public recreational use. Who do you think are the winners in the end?
stone packard avatar
Beach Lover
#2149
Just so you know, every time you call someone a socialist we all know you are a fox brainwash victim with no ability to think for yourself.

People laugh at you.
I'm laughing at you. I'm now retired, but have always worked in the private sector as a business owner or partner. I'm happy to say my life has been satisfying. I call people socialissts who espouse socialist ideas. I'm a capitalist and I'm not ashamed of it..

And "PapaJ", why would I reject capitalism? Capitalism has been very good to me and my family. Your suggestion that capitalism is a failure is laughable. Has the wealthy restaurant owner who leads your movement prospered because of socialism? I don't think so. If you can sell screwdrivers and bloody marys at a huge profit, my hat is off to you.
PoppaJ avatar
SoWal Insider
#2150
I'm laughing at you. I'm now retired, but have always worked in the private sector as a business owner or partner. I'm happy to say my life has been satisfying. I call people socialissts who espouse socialist ideas. I'm a capitalist and I'm not ashamed of it..

And "PapaJ", why would I reject capitalism? Capitalism has been very good to me and my family. Your suggestion that capitalism is a failure is laughable. Has the wealthy restaurant owner who leads your movement prospered because of socialism? I don't think so. If you can sell screwdrivers and bloody marys at a huge profit, my hat is off to you.
I didn’t suggest capitalism is a failure.
Beach Lover
#2151
Property rights require due process.

mp, you state Property rights require due process. What does that mean? Does that mean all property purchased since Florida became a State requires due process or only BPO property? Is that the same for all BPO property in the State of Florida or only Walton County?

You also did not answer the question, do you think this issue is without dispute?

Checking your forum account

Please wait while we verify your forum account.

New posts