Back to All About SoWal

Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

Reggie Gaskins avatar
Beach Lover
526,496 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
Beach Lover
#2277
Can someone answer the following:
​
If I were to purchase a beach front property (not planning to as I already own a non beach from home and am quite happy there), and a title company issued me a title policy insuring the plot of land that extends to the HWML on the beach, is that not my private property?​
​

Charles, as of today, yes that would be your private property and as such you would have the full rights established by the State of Florida, which is also listed on the Walton County Web Site:

Florida Property Owner Bill of Rights
1. The right to acquire, possess, and protect your property.
2. The right to use and enjoy your property.
3. The right to exclude others from your property.
4. The right to dispose of your property.
5. The right to due process.
6. The right to just compensation for property taken for a public purpose.
7. The right to relief, or payment of compensation, when a new law, rule, regulation, or ordinance of the state or a political entity unfairly affects your property.

There is a lawsuit filed by the BCC to try and remove Private Property Rights guaranteed by the State of Florida, in particular #3 - the right to exclude others from your property. The BCC was the full and exclusive power to determine who, how many, and how much beach equipment can be on your private property against the will of the property owner. As of today there is currently no Private Property in the State of Florida has ever been subject to FORCED occupation of unlimited people and unlimited equipment AGAINST the will of the property owner. Never ever.

Not saying that it can not happen in the future, but as of today that would be 100% your private property and you would have Private Property Rights from the STATE OF FLORIDA. In addition, if you property was taken then you would also be entitled to compensation (see #6).

Many Private Property owners are defendants in the lawsuit, including St Joe, Watercolor, and Watersound, so they can retain exclusive rights to determine who and how many can be on their beach as they have had since Florida became a State. That does not mean ANYONE is getting kicked off, it does mean however that a person cannot be on Private Property AGAINST the will of the property owner, just like it has been for the last 100 years.
Beach Lover
#2278
Asking for a friend. How many Beach front owners are full-time residents in SoWal?

And the relevance of that is.......?
bob bob avatar
Beach Fanatic
#2279
Watersound Beach may be accessed and used by the public from the public access just east of Watersound Beach near the community where your non-beachfront home is and also at the Deer Lake State Park. Saint Joe/Watersound doesn’t step down to the level of placing private property signs/No trespassing sigs on their beaches. And I doubt very seriously we will ever see those unwelcoming and offensive signs there, nor will anyone ever likely be kicked off the beach on any Saint Joe Beach properties.
Apparently some folks have a problem learnin'.
Dave Rauschkolb avatar
Beach Fanatic
#22801
Oh Jim, aka/waltonwatchdog! So glad to be back on your radar. Thank you so much for retweeting my very informative and appreciated article in the name of keeping our beaches open to the public.

Yes I do live in Watersound Beach! Like any private beachfront home or any community development that has private access, private access is private access; private access is not in dispute but the USE of our beaches is (#CU/SeeYouInCourt).

Watersound Beach may be accessed and used by the public from the public access just east of Watersound Beach near the community where your non-beachfront home is and also at the Deer Lake State Park. Saint Joe/Watersound doesn’t step down to the level of placing private property signs/No trespassing sigs on their beaches. And I doubt very seriously we will ever see those unwelcoming and offensive signs there, nor will anyone ever likely be kicked off the beach on any Saint Joe Beach properties.

Merry Christmas to you and yours and thank you for your service to our country Sir. And should I ever see you on our beaches again I’ll certainly shake your hand again. After all, we are all neighbors with different viewpoints but I have respect for all beach front owners just like I have respect for you.



View attachment 80852


Oh dear the original tweet referenced in my last post has now been altered (below) to remove my article...boo hoo. I was so enjoying my early Christmas Present. Oh well, I still meant what I said and it's always good to see my messaging getting out there even on those platforms that oppose my views on public beaches.

Screen Shot 2019-12-19 at 9.55.13 PM.jpg
Reggie Gaskins avatar
Beach LoverAuthor
#2281
Too Late, It’s official,
Our 30A Legacy Has Been Destroyed

Our slice of heaven has been prostituted to personal agendas, hollow local fame, big fish in a really small pond, and manipulation of a community so utterly divided by class warfare, they just forever ruined the very prize they coveted so dearly.

There’s no turning back. Lines in the sand are permanent. Your local heroes have forced a finite definition of property lines, and an aggressive defense of same, with a deliberately misleading public campaign of emotional garbage. Welcome to checkerboard beach, folks, forever divided.

I’m embarrassed for the people of Walton County. Think about it. Your global brand is no longer our pristine beach of heaven’s sugar and dreamy waters.

Walton County Brand is now a middle school level, far left political icon, with a national following of radical Huckabee haters who never heard of Customary Use. This is engineered by a singular assault on the intelligence of fair and level minded people, to the dismay of those of us just wanting to all get along peacefully.

The war is here, and now endless. I cry for our paradise lost. I’m ashamed at the success of those who leveraged the greed of those unknowing, who coveted their neighbor’s property. For they had it all along, but never again. Too late.
The court case will go on, and be dismissed by something short of SCOTUS.

This latest volley of public vitriol has disgusted the rational minded peeps right over the edge of reason. You wanted this fight, God only knows why. Could it really be a wasteland of our legacy - traded for small town personal publicity & political ambitions?
Dawn avatar
Beach Fanatic
#2282
I’m embarrassed for the people of Walton County.
Yeah OK. I think we'll be alright. As long as we can enjoy our beaches that is.
FloridaBeachBum avatar
Beach Fanatic
#2283
Unlike previous BPO censored SoWal posts, since Dave Rauschkolb’s two WaltonWatchDog Tweets were allowed by SoWal, any WaltonWatchDog Tweet is now permitted or will Dave Rauschkolb’s belief’s be deleted too?
Now if Admin would please fix my account to not be slowed to a snail's pace to use and function like CU believer accounts.
Dave Rauschkolb avatar
Beach Fanatic
#2284
Too Late, It’s official,
Our 30A Legacy Has Been Destroyed

Our slice of heaven has been prostituted to personal agendas, hollow local fame, big fish in a really small pond, and manipulation of a community so utterly divided by class warfare, they just forever ruined the very prize they coveted so dearly.

There’s no turning back. Lines in the sand are permanent. Your local heroes have forced a finite definition of property lines, and an aggressive defense of same, with a deliberately misleading public campaign of emotional garbage. Welcome to checkerboard beach, folks, forever divided.

I’m embarrassed for the people of Walton County. Think about it. Your global brand is no longer our pristine beach of heaven’s sugar and dreamy waters.

Walton County Brand is now a middle school level, far left political icon, with a national following of radical Huckabee haters who never heard of Customary Use. This is engineered by a singular assault on the intelligence of fair and level minded people, to the dismay of those of us just wanting to all get along peacefully.

The war is here, and now endless. I cry for our paradise lost. I’m ashamed at the success of those who leveraged the greed of those unknowing, who coveted their neighbor’s property. For they had it all along, but never again. Too late.
The court case will go on, and be dismissed by something short of SCOTUS.

This latest volley of public vitriol has disgusted the rational minded peeps right over the edge of reason. You wanted this fight, God only knows why. Could it really be a wasteland of our legacy - traded for small town personal publicity & political ambitions?

“Oh the humanity!“ I’ll say it again, that we would have the audacity to challenge those who would throw up no trespassing signs and exclude the public from beaches they have tread upon and played upon and joyfully used with their children and grandchildren as long as anyone can remember. Yes we will challenge this travesty. And the only thing we seek to (re)gain is the use of our beaches as we have always used them.

And without a doubt, private beaches will(has) destroy(ed) our 30a legacy.

Edited

Beach Lover
#2285
Yeah OK. I think we'll be alright. As long as we can enjoy our beaches that is.
And without a doubt, private beaches will destroy our 30a legacy.

There is not a person alive today when all the property above the MHWL was all Public Property. It has always been Private Property and Private Property is the 30A legacy from the beginning. People have always been able to use the private property if it was not against the will of the property owner. Sometime you had to rent the property to use it and sometimes not and sometimes the answer was no. Has been that way in Florida since time immemorial. There has NEVER been force occupation of unlimited people with unlimited beach equipment on private property AGAINST the will of the property owner (includes both beach front and non-beach front).

We have MORE public access (State Parks and Public Beach) today than we did in 1990 due to purchases by the State of Florida (Topsail) and Walton County purchases converted into Public Beach.

The difference is we had 10% of the tourists in 1990 than we do today. This has NEVER been about access to beach by residents of Walton County, this is ALL ABOUT in increase of tourists (4 million this year and growing). A rate of tourist increase far greater than the infrastructure permits.

What is the number of tourists that we can handle today for the current infrastructure? Some argue we have already far exceeded what we can handle without significant damage to our unique and sensitive ecosystem. How many tourists do we want to accommodate and what plans are being made to build that infrastructure (purchasing property, building parking, restrooms, road ways, etc).

The BCC can purchase property but they cannot steal it (taking use away from the owner without compensation AKA stealing).

Even if they buy more property we still have very serious issues about how many tourists can be accommodated, even with additional purchases by the State and County.
Beach Fanatic
#2286
Unlike previous BPO censored SoWal posts, since Dave Rauschkolb’s two WaltonWatchDog Tweets were allowed by SoWal, any WaltonWatchDog Tweet is now permitted or will Dave Rauschkolb’s belief’s be deleted too?
Now if Admin would please fix my account to not be slowed to a snail's pace to use and function like CU believer accounts.
:nuts:

If you have a problem report it.

:violin::banned::hammock:
Beach Fanatic
#2287
Fbb, believe it or not we have something in common :) The functionality of my forum membership account has been quite slow for years ever since I defended the Confederate monuments! However the difference is I am not complaining so much...

Rg, be careful what you wish for "the war is here and is endless". I tried to tell you early on that winning the issue of private exclusive beach enjoyment for your class was like winning a battle and losing a war. Maybe it is what you wanted all along because "peace" was/is available. All you have to do is share the beach sand and nothing else. Why is your principle of exclusive beach enjoyment so important? What do you really fear? The Liberals are coming? I am as conservative as anyone but I do not think in terms of there is only one way or the highway. I understand emotions are high in this country and everyone feels like they must fight and defend something but what in the world is wrong with having exclusive views and sharing the beach sand??? Do you really believe Scotus is in your favor because of the Trump appointees? I think you will force the States to protect the entire shoreline. Most wars can be avoided. Just think it through...
Beach Lover
#2288
I think you will force the States to protect the entire shoreline.

The State already does protect the entire shoreline and a person can walk the entire beach front, swim, build sandcastles, or fish (with the exception of the Federal lands owned by the Military).

That is different than forced occupation of private property by unlimited people with unlimited equipment against the will of the property owner which has NEVER been permitted by the State of Florida.

If the BCC can make Billions of tourists tax dollars (see the minutes of the 2016 BCC special meeting) then why not just buy property and turn into Public Beach? Purchasing property by the BCC or the State of Florida is not only legal, but has been done since time immemorial to protect land for future generations. Purchasing property is legal. Stealing it is illegal (until Judge Green makes a judicial ruling that can stand up to the review of the US Supreme Court).
Dave Rauschkolb avatar
Beach Fanatic
#2289
The State already does protect the entire shoreline and a person can walk the entire beach front, swim, build sandcastles, or fish (with the exception of the Federal lands owned by the Military).

That is different than forced occupation of private property by unlimited people with unlimited equipment against the will of the property owner which has NEVER been permitted by the State of Florida.

If the BCC can make Billions of tourists tax dollars (see the minutes of the 2016 BCC special meeting) then why not just buy property and turn into Public Beach? Purchasing property by the BCC or the State of Florida is not only legal, but has been done since time immemorial to protect land for future generations. Purchasing property is legal. Stealing it is illegal (until Judge Green makes a judicial ruling that can stand up to the review of the US Supreme Court).

So that’s it. Do you wanna profit off of Sand you don’t even pay taxes on? The unbuildable sand has value for being close in proximity to the water and the view. Your home is worth more because of that but not because you pay taxes on that sand. Eminent domain valuations, should it ever happen, should be worth no more than $400 per parcel for what it cost to quiet title the sand.
Beach Lover
#2290
Eminent domain valuations, should it ever happen, should be worth no more than $400 per parcel for what it cost to quiet title the sand.

If the Beach Front Property is only "worth" $400, why did the BCC pay $7.2 MILLION Dollars for the private property across from Stinky's that they just opened as a Public Beach?

The "myth" that taxes are not paid on beach front property has also been proven wrong numerous times, along with the "myth" of public beach made private by quiet title or the "myth" that public beach became private property due to HB631
Alex Miles avatar
Beach Comber
#2291
How valuable is that dry sandy beach to a beach bar built in the dunes?
Beach Fanatic
#2292
How valuable is that dry sandy beach to a beach bar built in the dunes?
How dare you! There will be no dry sand soon.
-Greta Thunberg
:moon:



:beach:
FactorFiction avatar
Beach Fanatic
#2293
So that’s it. Do you wanna profit off of Sand you don’t even pay taxes on? The unbuildable sand has value for being close in proximity to the water and the view. Your home is worth more because of that but not because you pay taxes on that sand. Eminent domain valuations, should it ever happen, should be worth no more than $400 per parcel for what it cost to quiet title the sand.

With all due respect, the premise that a beach parcel has no more value than a filing fee is, to use your word, "ridiculous". There would be no fight if that were the case. The County would be snapping up beach for $400 a pop with eminent domain, don't you think? Also, given your premise, I would like to understand how you justify making a profit with the beach bar located on the dry sand. Aren't YOU profiting off sand you don't even pay taxes on under your argument? Hasn't that also been a major argument related to vending, even on public beaches? Basically vendors of any kind are making profit off of public beach with only a vendor license fee. How is that different on the beach where your bar sits?
Beach Fanatic
#2294
With all due respect, the premise that a beach parcel has no more value than a filing fee is, to use your word, "ridiculous". There would be no fight if that were the case. The County would be snapping up beach for $400 a pop with eminent domain, don't you think? Also, given your premise, I would like to understand how you justify making a profit with the beach bar located on the dry sand. Aren't YOU profiting off sand you don't even pay taxes on under your argument? Hasn't that also been a major argument related to vending, even on public beaches? Basically vendors of any kind are making profit off of public beach with only a vendor license fee. How is that different on the beach where your bar sits?
Again, the anger and personal vendettas come out. Dave attracts beachfront owners like moths to the flame.

What is your business sir? Fill us in so we can discuss.
FactorFiction avatar
Beach Fanatic
#2295
Again, the anger and personal vendettas come out. Dave attracts beachfront owners like moths to the flame.

What is your business sir? Fill us in so we can discuss.

You are making interesting assumptions. I am asking for clarification. Many statements have been made that don't make sense to me and don't seem to be consistent and/or supported by independent facts that I can find. If I could go buy a piece of beach for $400, I would do it and I suspect many more people would, too. I have no problem with vendors or Dave's beach bar except as they are profiting on supposedly public sand that they don't pay taxes on and he continually espouses that argument. I'm not angry at all and I have no personal vendetta against Dave. As a matter of fact, I am an inland owner, but it doesn't mean that I can't see both sides of an argument or empathize with members of both sides.
Beach Fanatic
#2296
You are making interesting assumptions. I am asking for clarification. Many statements have been made that don't make sense to me and don't seem to be consistent and/or supported by independent facts that I can find. If I could go buy a piece of beach for $400, I would do it and I suspect many more people would, too. I have no problem with vendors or Dave's beach bar except as they are profiting on supposedly public sand that they don't pay taxes on and he continually espouses that argument. I'm not angry at all and I have no personal vendetta against Dave. As a matter of fact, I am an inland owner, but it doesn't mean that I can't see both sides of an argument or empathize with members of both sides.
115 pages of axe grinding and you have no property? Then surely you are a lawyer. Or a liar. But I repeat myself.
Dave Rauschkolb avatar
Beach Fanatic
#2297
If the Beach Front Property is only "worth" $400, why did the BCC pay $7.2 MILLION Dollars for the private property across from Stinky's that they just opened as a Public Beach?

The "myth" that taxes are not paid on beach front property has also been proven wrong numerous times, along with the "myth" of public beach made private by quiet title or the "myth" that public beach became private property due to HB631

There you go again, twisting my words. Beachfront owners pay taxes on beach front property but not the sand behind their homes. The unbuildable portion behind the dune line to the waterline is not taxed.

Edited

Beach Lover
#2298
There you go again, twisting my words. Beachfront owners pay taxes on beach front property but not the sand behind their homes. The unbuildable portion behind the dune line to the waterline is not taxed.

Ah, there you go again with more "myths". Taxes are paid on the entire property. A property that has title boundaries to the MWHL will cost significantly more than the same size property a few miles inland and taxed accordingly. Therefore taxes are paid on the "unbuildable portion behind the dune line to the waterline" because those property boundaries make it more desirable and thus more valuable. The more value the higher the sale price, the higher the sale price the more taxes paid. Nice try Dave, any more "myths" for a raining day?
jodiFL avatar
Beach Fanatic
#2299
I am pretty sure that it is the "improvements" on that beach front property are what makes it more valuable. The little 30 year old block house on the 1/2acre beach front isnt going to be taxed near what the 4 story mega- house that sleeps 30 in that 20K sq.ft. on the same 1/2 acre lot will. Dont forget the pool that people that rent them have to have because there are "ewww... fish in the "ocean" will tack on some more taxes.
Beach Fanatic
#2300
Ah, there you go again with more "myths". Taxes are paid on the entire property. A property that has title boundaries to the MWHL will cost significantly more than the same size property a few miles inland and taxed accordingly. Therefore taxes are paid on the "unbuildable portion behind the dune line to the waterline" because those property boundaries make it more desirable and thus more valuable. The more value the higher the sale price, the higher the sale price the more taxes paid. Nice try Dave, any more "myths" for a raining day?
There is no difference in value between two properties, all things equal except one with deeded sand and one without.

As someone posted on here before the purpose of including sand in a deed was because some paranoid owner (or attorney probably) in the past wanted to ensure no one could build on the beach between them and the water. This illegal mistake was compounded time after time. Now it is time to correct the mistakes of the past and I am glad it will play our in a court and not the court of public opinion. You'd think people would be smart enough to shut up about the issue and let the court decide. This thread illustrates how the arrogance and vindictiveness wins out over common sense.

Private beaches are a mistake and a ludicrous idea which has since been seized upon by greedy, selfish, exclusionary beachfront owners who are on a power trip. @mputnal has made it plain a hundred times but the scum keeps rebutting.
FactorFiction avatar
Beach Fanatic
#2301
115 pages of axe grinding and you have no property? Then surely you are a lawyer. Or a liar. But I repeat myself.

I have contributed nowhere near 115 pages of comments or axe grinding. I specifically said that I have inland property. I am a full time resident. I am not a lawyer and I am definitely not a liar, but people like you will believe what you want anyway or you wouldn't make the kinds of accusations you are while having no evidence whatsoever. Interesting way to handle a discussion on your part.

Checking your forum account

Please wait while we verify your forum account.

New posts