Led away in Handcuffs

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Smiling Joe:

You just stated "Until these no trespassing signs were erected and people arrested, there has not been question to the public's right to freely sit on the sandy beaches in SoWal."

How can you be so absolutely sure of this?


Also you state that it's illegal to park on Blue Mountain Road. Are there any "No Parking" signs?

 

[sunshine]

Our posts passed each other.

I agree whole heartedly with what you are saying about the drive vs. the walk. The problem obviously boils down to the county deeding public beach access without the public beach part. This is not a matter of personal opinion, it's the way it is at the moment.

Please allow me to rephrase my question (since yippie is our local grammar nazi) in order to address the issue:

IF you still owned your rental property, and IF the beach was private on each side of the "nearby" public access WOULD your renters have been prevented from getting to the beach in an area that is know to be public?

I have no idea. I sold the home over three years ago before the no trespassing signs were installed at a different beach. I remain familiar with the area and have not seen any evidence of enforcement of private beaches there.

 

[1st in 59]

So therefore I see the Florida Real Estate industry funding the law suits to attempt to convert private beach property to public property on a "case by case basis" as they possibly have a lot to lose here.

If only it were that easy. The very same developers/agents have no problem turning right around and pitching the opposite story to potential beachfront owners. "And, you own the beach all the way up to the mean high water line. Imagine... your own private beach!" They have their hands in everybody's pocket!

 

[Smiling JOe]

Smiling Joe:

You just stated "Until these no trespassing signs were erected and people arrested, there has not been question to the public's right to freely sit on the sandy beaches in SoWal."

How can you be so absolutely sure of this?


Also you state that it's illegal to park on Blue Mountain Road. Are there any "No Parking" signs?

I don't recall seeing any signs posted on your street, noting that murder is illegal, but again, I don't think that signs are required to be posted to state all of the laws.

I'm not absolutely sure, but I cannot prove a negative.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

I have no idea. I sold the home over three years ago before the no trespassing signs were installed at a different beach. I remain familiar with the area and have not seen any evidence of enforcement of private beaches there.

No problem but I think you missed the last part of my question...

IF you still owned your rental property, and IF the beach was private on each side of the "nearby" public access WOULD your renters have been prevented from getting to the beach in an area that is known to be public?

Honestly, this was more of a rhetorical question as the point I was trying to make before my post was dissected every which way, is that nobody is "prevented" from getting to a public beach. SJ brings up a valid issue with parking during peak times.

 

[Smiling JOe]

If only it were that easy. The very same developers/agents have no problem turning right around and pitching the opposite story to potential beachfront owners. "And, you own the beach all the way up to the mean high water line. Imagine... your own private beach!" They have their hands in everybody's pocket!

and if a kid fell in a hole on the private beach, breaking his leg and hitting his head on a beach chair, the first person crying, "it's not my property. The public has been using it for many years," would be the property owner.

So what is your point?

 

[Smiling JOe]

BMBV, you are adding to some important discussion, giving opposing views, and I appreciate that. I know you have not placed no trespassing signs on the beach in front of your privately deeded beach property, and I've not seen you chasing anyone off of the beach in front of your house. Would you share with us your reasons why you have not protested the public's use?

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

BMBV, you are adding to some important discussion, giving opposing views, and I appreciate that. I know you have not placed no trespassing signs on the beach in front of your privately deeded beach property, and I've not seen you chasing anyone off of the beach in front of your house. Would you share with us your reasons why you have not protested the public's use?

I'm just one person in our association so I can't speak for the entire association. It would be validly assumed that the board members of an association must exercise prudent fiduciary responsibilty to not "knowingly" jeopardize the private property rights of the owners of our condos REGARDLESS of "opinion".

Could you now please answer my question about the parking signs on Blue Mountain Road?

 

[1st in 59]

The problem didn't start with the owners of private beach areas. It started with real estate agents and developers - people like Bobby J & Smiling Joe. When they're selling property down here, one of the perks they love to trumpet is access to the beach. Some developers advertise it before they even have beach access. Examples of that practice are legion on this site.

I doubt even a handful of realtors in the interest of full disclosure are honest enough to tell potential purchasers what "access" really, legally means. Wouldn't that kill a deal instantly if they said, "Yes, you have access, but I need to explain to you that the beach on either side of the access is privately owned and you might not be able to use it?" Ever done that Bobby J or Smiling Joe? I bet not. The profits are better when the buyers have this idylic vision of "their" beach.

I think there's been a lot of incomplete disclosure going on down here for years by knowing real estate agents and developers. They're the ones that have created the problem by over-developoing and over-selling areas that are already congested. And then they want to smugly turn around and blame the Commissioners as the problem for not stopping them. When the tourists come and rent these properties and are crawling over each other on the beaches and spilling over onto private beach property, Bobby J and Smiling Joe stick their chests out as defenders of the very problem they helped create. Please!

Perhaps a stall or even decline in growth is a good thing for the community and the health of the beaches? The only downside I can see is that it gives realtors like Bobby J and Smiling Joe too much time to genreate endless self-righteous, self-serving posts. Maybe a class action suit brought by all the cheated buyers against some of these unscrupulous realtors/developers would do more good than a silly 60's style sit in.

And how about addressing this, Smiling Joe. you're surprisingly quiet.

 

[Bobby J]

And how about addressing this, Smiling Joe. you're surprisingly quiet.

I think you have no clue what you are talking about... I have never sold a beach as private nor would I ever. The beaches are public. The reason SJ is quiet is why would he address the post. It is personal and does not pertain to the 18 pages this thread has covered. We are all trying to learn what the facts are... Welcome. Do you have any facts other then Real Estate agents caused all this? I thought it was George Bush that caused it.

I was sent this today:

In response to Walton County?s TDC ?public vs private beaches?
http://story.waltonsun.com/article.display.db.php?a=1734

Walton County?s TDC stated:
?Many of the county?s beaches are private due to the way some of the area?s properties were originally deeded?.?

My opinion: There are no ?PRIVATE BEACHES? in Florida:

Beaches consists of 2 elements: (1) A dry sand area and (2) A wet sand area

The dry sand area can be either privately of publicly owned, while the wet area has proprietary (ownership) authority and held in trust for the public:

?All tidally influenced waters to the mean high water line and navigable fresh waterbodies to the ordinary high water line in existence when Florida became a state in 1845 are considered sovereign. In accordance with the Constitution of the State of Florida, these lands are held in trust by the state for all the people. As the Trustees, the Governor and Cabinet have proprietary (ownership) authority over sovereign submerged lands and their uses and are responsible for insuring that these lands and the associated aquatic resources remain healthy and in abundance for present and future generations.?

Reference: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/WATER/wetlands/erp/propvreg.htm

Hence, to say a beach in Florida is a ?PRIVATE BEACH? should be considered both false and misleading.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Walton County?s TDC stated:
??beachgoers who set up tents and chairs in these areas may be asked to move?

My opinion: Private sand owners, those who own dry sand on public beaches, may file complaints with local law enforcement, but cannot use local law enforcement as their private agents, to enforce speculated trespassing violations.

From AGO 2002-38 ~ "Thus, it is my opinion that private property owners who hold title to dry sand areas of the beach falling within the jurisdictional limits of the City of Destin may utilize local law enforcement for purposes of reporting incidents of trespass upon their property on a case-by-case basis. However, local law enforcement officers may not be pre-authorized to act as agents of private landowners for the purpose of communicating orders to their property on a case-by-case basis. However, local law enforcement officers may not be pre-authorized to act as agents of private landowners for the purpose of communicating orders to leave private property to alleged trespassers pursuant to section 810.09(2)(b), Florida Statutes.."


From AGO 2002-38 ~ "The general public may continue to use the dry sand area for their usual recreational activities, not because the public has any interest in the land itself, but because of a right gained through custom to use this particular area of the beach as they have without dispute and without interruption for many years."

My opinion: The general public should be allowed to continue to use the dry sand area for their usual recreational activities until the private sand owner, those who own dry sand on public beaches, prove that no "customary right of use" by the public exists.

It?s up to the courts to decide if "customary right of use" of the dry sand on a particular beach exists and not the dry sand owner, not the local police and not the TDC.

From AGO 2002-38 ~ "However, portions of this property are subject to private ownership and until a court establishes a "customary right of use" by the public in such real property, the fee owners thereof may make complaints of trespass to local law enforcement officers as they occur."



Graham Ginsberg

www.publicshore.com