• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
New posts

DanaMarie

Beach Comber
Jun 22, 2016
35
43
Point Washington
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?
 

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
2,289
1,796
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...
 

DanaMarie

Beach Comber
Jun 22, 2016
35
43
Point Washington
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...
 

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
2,289
1,796
Yes I think the BCC were listening to their constituents. The people who elected them. Force is not the right word though.
 

bob1

Beach Fanatic
Jun 26, 2010
530
523
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

SoWal Insider
Oct 9, 2015
8,149
19,906
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:
 

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
2,289
1,796
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

Beach Lover
Jan 10, 2018
59
35
69
niceville
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

SoWal Insider
Oct 9, 2015
8,149
19,906
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.
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter