Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

Beach Lover

Apr 25, '19 · 7:46 AM526,4982

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.

Replies

2,312

Beach Comber

Nov 29, '19 · 12:40 AM#2152

Yes I think the BCC were listening to their constituents. The people who elected them. Force is not the right word though.

Beach Comber

Nov 29, '19 · 12:40 AM#2153

mputnal, I asked “if The People had the power over the local politicians to force the BCC to pass the ordinance.” You said “Yes I think the BCC were listening to their constituents. The people who elected them. Force is not the right word though.” So, it was The People who wielded the power, and started the customary use issue. It was The People who convinced the BCC to enact an ordinance that attempted to take away private property rights without due process. Sounds like per your own reasoning you should be accusing The People of abuse of power, not your imaginary power brokers or those you say have elite wealth.

Beach Fanatic

Nov 29, '19 · 6:13 AM#2154

DanaMarie, Your last post suggest that you have officially entered into the twilight zone where people have no shadows

I tried to explain a different perspective on the issue but apparently you are indoctrinated by imaginary people. I am not surprised. People with no shadow are not interested in reality is all I can figure...

Beach Fanatic

Nov 29, '19 · 6:33 AM#2155

Scj, what part of due process do you not understand? I will try to explain again. The County has the authority to declare public recreational use if that is what their constituents believe to be the reality of how the beaches have been used in the past which is the reality. Bpo's have the right to due process which allows them to dispute public recreational use and I assume must deny sharing the beaches by claiming they enjoyed exclusive private use in the past. Even your group admits they shared the beach in the past which confirms public recreational use so I admit it is all a little confusing. Of course they could have compromised and made some real progress toward a happy community but instead this is now a lawsuit where there will be winners and losers and a lot of unhappy people. The court will rule. The losers probably take it to a higher court. The community is torn apart. If elite power wins at least a few people will be happy at the expense of thousands. That should answer your question. I have found that if you read slower it helps to listen

Beach Lover

Nov 29, '19 · 7:45 AM#2156

The County has the authority to declare public recreational use if that is what their constituents believe to be the reality of how the beaches have been used in the past which is the reality.

I have found that if you read slower it helps to listen

According to the State of Florida, Walton County BCC DOES NOT have the authority to declare recreational customary use. It is a judicial process (and the BCC is not part of the judicial branch).

The BCC can request to the court (judicial branch) to determine recreational customary use IF the BCC can PROVE that recreational customary use (in particular the BCC request for unlimited access by unlimited tourists with unlimited beach equipment to occupy private property AGAINST the will of the property owner) is ANCIENT, REASONABLE, WITHOUT INTERUPTION, and WITHOUT DISPUTE.

mputnal, Do you think do you think this issue is without dispute as claimed in the BCC lawsuit?

Edited Nov 29, '19 · 8:37 AM

Beach Fanatic

Nov 29, '19 · 9:01 AM#2157

Scj, Asked and answered more than once. Also you are wrong about the BCC authority to declare public recreational use. The court will determine if that declaration was correct based on use. I believe it is. You believe it is not. Here we go around the mulberry bush...again...and again...

Beach Lover

Nov 29, '19 · 10:43 AM#2158

mputnal post #2143 "Also you are wrong about the BCC authority to declare public recreational use"

The State of Florida in Statute 163.035, specifically states that the judicial branch has the authority and that a governmental entity (AKA BCC) does NOT have the authority to declare public recreational use.

Can you please reference a State of Florida statute or other sources (other than personal opinion) which states the BCC does have this authority?

mputnal, Do you think do you think this issue is without dispute as claimed in the BCC lawsuit?

Beach Fanatic

Nov 29, '19 · 11:27 AM#2159

#2139 DanaMarie, remember CU many believers do not even believe the State of Florida legal coastal property boundary definitions
#1994 FS"177.28 Legal significance of the mean high-water line." Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

CU believers can not even list the ancient English common law custom criteria much less define the 4 to 7 or more legal criteria.
#471 "But wait!" David Theriaque September 2018 presentation cites English criteria Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

#285 Dave Theriaque's, Walton's lead $425/hr land use attorney, CU criteria list Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

#1202 "The repeated post is not true, unless there are alternative facts to the contrary." There have been none. Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

#2128 "There was no taking by the BCC IF these beaches have been "used" for public recreational use at all which they have." Which ancient English CU criteria defines public CU "use" of private property? The CU believer's defined criteria; if you can define more than one? Sir William Blackstone's 1700's COMMENTARIES ON THE LAWS OF ENGLAND common law multiple historical criteria?, Walton's $425/hr CU attorney Theriaque's 7 Oregon criteria, Tiffany Real Property law 7 CU criteria (taken from 1700's Blackstone's Commentaries)? FL court CU 4 criteria (truncated from Tiffany 7 criteria)? FS163.035 4 criteria? If CU believers can list any legal CU criteria, can you define the CU criteria? Is "ancient" since anyone alive today can remember? Since photographs were invented?

CU believers should read my posts (#2094) slower (as suggested by mputnal) to comprehend; I do not have to try to link CU believers to anything. I just post their words #2088 "... Equal Distribution of Resources is the hope and dreams of this great Country." I only list references from experts on "Equal Distribution of Resources" and the reader can draw their own conclusions. Egalitarianism and the "Envy Test" is the only reference I made to "Equal Distribution of Resources". Beside it's only math - right!? Your valuable deeded beach property you pay taxes on is mine and my property I have and pay taxes on is mine. 1+1=MINE for CU and not BPO's right to choose quiet uninterrupted enjoyment or not.

#10 Oldie but Goodie reminder. "Unfortunately, no customary use facts or rational reason to the contrary will persuade ..." Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy Other FoF Oldies Search Results | SoWal Forum - South Walton Florida
Everyone can have an opinion; but not everyone can have a credible opinion unless you have some facts or verifiable information.

Are the anonymous "imaginary people" referred to by some (and thier incredible-facts) Pappaj, bob1, leeboy, 30A Skunkape, EZ4144, jodiFL, James Bentwood? Or Jim Tucker, bob bob, Pam Hicks, Lake View Too, Dawn, MRBS, Duchess, Jenksy, L.C. Bane, buster, Leader of the Banned, Emerald Drifter, ShallowsNole too?

Edited Nov 29, '19 · 11:38 AM

Beach Fanatic

Nov 29, '19 · 11:33 AM#2160

Scj, Objection. question asks for an opinion. Opinions are like belly buttons. Everyone has one

I have read the statue. The government entity has authority to seek Judicial affirmation of Customary Use. Last I heard that is what the lawsuit is for.
My "opinion" is that the beaches have been "used" for public recreational use without dispute since the beginning. In addition I do believe the court will allow arguments regarding whether or not there can be private ownership of the coastal sandy shoreline which is constantly moving and does not stay in one place. There is a good chance that the court will decide that coastal sandy shoreline is owned by the State of Florida. If that is proven this Statue will not apply. There are many cards in the deck. Stay tuned...

Beach LoverAuthor

Nov 29, '19 · 11:56 AM#2161

Discussing important community topics was the genesis of this thread. By design, Faulty positions and unsupportable claims would theoretically be easily dismissed and discarded, on both sides of CU.

Alternate opinions and voices would be unconditionally heard, and respected, with the assumption of rational reasoning and honest representation of facts.

The author didn’t foresee the derailing of legitimate reasoning and endless distraction by those not able to comprehend reality. Nor the same who refuse to respect or acknowledge current laws and culture. Not to mention the irrational frequent posting of some parallel fantasy universe that entitles the public to private assets gained from individual effort.

I apologize for all of the wasted posts that belong on a remedial political fiction thread.

Beach Fanatic

Nov 29, '19 · 12:01 PM#2162

Fbb, good work on the research! You have skills.

I tend to agree with you about anonymous posters using imaginary names posting divisive rhetoric but wait how do I know you are you

Beach Lover

Nov 29, '19 · 1:22 PM#2163

I have read the statue. The government entity has authority to seek Judicial affirmation of Customary Use

Thank you for confirming that the only “authority” Walton County BCC has is to request to the court (judicial branch) to determine recreational customary use IF the BCC can PROVE that recreational customary use (in particular the BCC request for unlimited access by unlimited tourists with unlimited beach equipment to occupy private property AGAINST the will of the property owner) is ANCIENT, REASONABLE, WITHOUT INTERUPTION, and WITHOUT DISPUTE.

You are correct, the BCC has the "authority to request" not the "authority to determine".

Also thank you also for providing your opinion that is issue is without dispute. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, even if you are the only one in Walton County that has that opinion.

Beach Fanatic

Nov 29, '19 · 1:49 PM#2164

Reggie, good job with keeping my name out of your post and speaking in generalities. I prefer to respect the Judicial system and let the court decide the facts. Btw double good job on the apology

. Maybe this will be my last post...

Beach Fanatic

Nov 29, '19 · 2:42 PM#2165

Scj, you are very welcome! I much appreciate respect and civility.

However you changed the words in the Statue which read "seek". In order to seek affirmation the government entity must "adopt a formal notice of intent to affirm customary use". Therefore the affirmation process will consider whether or not public recreational use occurred on the beach prior to the lawsuit. In other words a dispute caused by the affirmation process is moot. Both sides present evidence. One side wins. The other side appeals. It just seems silly that compromise is not the better path! These things happen when we lose our ability to be respectful and civil...

Beach Fanatic

Nov 30, '19 · 8:19 PM#2166

View attachment 80515

Beach Comber

Nov 30, '19 · 10:19 PM#2167

Walton County Ideas for Visioning and Quality of Life (closed Facebook group)
RULE #2: Content or screenshots of content may not be "reproduced or distributed outside of this group without express permission"

Do the rules apply to all members?
Hmmm...Did a couple of previous posts just get deleted from this forum thread? I wonder why.

Edited Nov 30, '19 · 10:32 PM

Beach Fanatic

Nov 30, '19 · 10:31 PM#2168

Sometimes the truth is just plain inconvenient.

Beach Comber

Nov 30, '19 · 10:33 PM#2169

Sometimes the truth is just plain inconvenient.

So are depositions.

Beach Comber

Dec 1, '19 · 12:16 AM#2170

Mputnal,
There it is. The personal attack. I knew you’d resort to personal attack, because that's what you do when you have no facts to fall back on. I quoted two statements you made, took them to a logical conclusion, and instead of responding with a logical answer you attacked me. You may think I’m in the Twilight Zone, but just because you don’t understand the basic rules of logic doesn’t mean you should attack others. Your statements are delusional. You must have had too many psilocybin mushrooms in your Thanksgiving green bean casserole.

Sincerely, Rod Serling

Beach Comber

Dec 1, '19 · 1:00 AM#2171

View attachment 80515

Getting rid of the vendors, or at least the ghost chairs, would be a huge step in the right direction.

Beach Lover

Dec 1, '19 · 3:38 AM#2172

Walton County Ideas for Visioning and Quality of Life (closed Facebook group)
RULE #2: Content or screenshots of content may not be "reproduced or distributed outside of this group without express permission"

Do the rules apply to all members?
Hmmm...Did a couple of previous posts just get deleted from this forum thread? I wonder why.

There are "very special" people on this forum.

Beach Fanatic

Dec 1, '19 · 5:59 AM#2173

DanaMarie, my apologies to you. If I had said that your logic was flawed would that have been better? Of course not so I chose to use the power brokers own words who brought up the twilight zone type of reasoning because it is funny. I always try to lighten up the mood. My mistake and very sorry I hurt your feelings.

Why do you believe only in one narrow set of facts? Truth. Reality. Justice. Happiness. Purpose. Democracy. Are not these all part of reasoning? Are these not the elements of LLH that our founders applied to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? We have been beat over the head with one set of facts regarding exclusion in property rights but the property we are talking about has always been shared enjoyment IMO. Alex Miles even admits that it is not normal real estate. Reggie Gaskins even admits that the beach sand has always been shared. Who really owns shoreline sand that moves seaward then landward then up and down the beach? What about the people who have generations of history here that witnessed public recreational use up and down the beach? What about those facts? People with money and power have access to our political system that those in the working class and middle class do not have so why is that not a fact? Do you really not see the difference in an individual vote versus abuse of power? I understand the facts and principles of property law but it is not as cut and dry as you would like to believe. I will never understand why people like you and I have to resort to personal attacks. Yes you attacked me much worse. Own it.

Beach Fanatic

Dec 1, '19 · 6:33 AM#2174

DanaMarie, Logic is the "science" of the "principles" of "reasoning". Science is a formal demonstration of natural laws. Principles is plural meaning there are multiple facts from different perspectives. Reasoning is sense which includes history, intelligent thought, knowledge and an ability to listen and learn. Humans have emotion which conflicts with logic. Neither of us are perfect so I say we live and let live and just try to get along which is the opposite of exclusion. My sense tells me that is the better way toward peace and harmony...

Beach Fanatic

Dec 1, '19 · 6:41 AM#2175

AlexMiles, You do know that the poster can delete their own post right? Reggie may have decided to delete his post that pooh poohed compromise as an option for these issues. Surely you are not insinuating that the moderators have strict rules of engagement on this forum

Beach Fanatic

Dec 1, '19 · 7:03 AM#2176

DanaMarie, my apologies to you. If I had said that your logic was flawed would that have been better? Of course not so I chose to use the power brokers own words who brought up the twilight zone type of reasoning because it is funny. I always try to lighten up the mood. My mistake and very sorry I hurt your feelings.

Why do you believe only in one narrow set of facts? Truth. Reality. Justice. Happiness. Purpose. Democracy. Are not these all part of reasoning? Are these not the elements of LLH that our founders applied to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution? We have been beat over the head with one set of facts regarding exclusion in property rights but the property we are talking about has always been shared enjoyment IMO. Alex Miles even admits that it is not normal real estate. Reggie Gaskins even admits that the beach sand has always been shared. Who really owns shoreline sand that moves seaward then landward then up and down the beach? What about the people who have generations of history here that witnessed public recreational use up and down the beach? What about those facts? People with money and power have access to our political system that those in the working class and middle class do not have so why is that not a fact? Do you really not see the difference in an individual vote versus abuse of power? I understand the facts and principles of property law but it is not as cut and dry as you would like to believe. I will never understand why people like you and I have to resort to personal attacks. Yes you attacked me much worse. Own it.

A very researched, reasoned, relevant and important post.