BMBVagrant:
The real issue here are the facts as you've stated and that the county has really, really, really, screwed up historically. Why do you think all that money was spent on mail outs to beach front owners PUSHING the re-nourishment? They couldn't even get peoples addresses correct...Thanks Property Appraiser. Is wasn't to Protect those owners from storms, it was to get, to take the beaches from them. How? Because re-nourishment is funded by tax dollars. That makes those beaches "public" by the use of taxes to pay for the sand.
This is consistent along Scenic Gulf, it was re-nourished, and its sure not private (with very few exceptions). I've yet to hear anyone argue that point. What is private are all those deeded beach access / walk overs that many of the properties along Scenic Gulf OWN. Its not as easy to get on to those beaches along Scenic Gulf, as it is along 30a. Thus, the problems we have along 30a is not the same as any on Scenic Gulf, yet its the same county. Each has beach vendors.
When re-nourishment Failed (as I said it would), the customary use argument was created. This was / is Plan B for the county to try and save their butts from future embarrassment. I'm sure it was cooked up about the same time the mailings were going out to non-existent beach front owners at a significant cost to the county.
As for no one going after the large developments / resorts, I feel if anyone wants to cite customary use, you should at minimum be consistent and not give Seagrove, Watercolor, etc., a pass. All or nothing, I'd have a lot more respect for the argument at that point. But is sounds like Blue Mt, Blue Mt, Blue Mt, spoiled rich people, spoiled rich people, etc., ect.
Selective Enforcement is one of the main problems this county has. WCSO does it, Code Enforcement does it, judges do it, it goes on and on. We can't ever be consistent, because its not convenient.
As for Kurt's defense of them (resorts), just look at who runs the adds on his site... It's all hypocritical in its worst form. I'm quite frankly surprised he's allowed much of the posts to continue as in the past people (including me) would be banned. But look at the numbers of viewers and posters. It mean more eyes on advertisement and thus, mo $ mo $ mo $.
The TDC continues to spend money on advertising that is not necessary, unless you want to continue to flood the area with a lower class of vacation renter that spends less money, but creates more demand our local infrastructure and resources. It just won't work and I fear 30a is doomed to become PCB in less than five years. I hope I'm wrong, but just look around at the visitors that are here, they are NOT the same as 6 years ago. Those people saw the writing in the sand and have moved to other vacation destinations that are loving the fact they now get high end, high class tourist that follow rules and respect the property rights of others.
There is not going to be a simple answer here. The county will spend money, may win, may loose. It will be appealed, spend more money, etc., repeat. By the time anything is done, the aforementioned five years doomsday clock to PCB will have struck midnight.
Oh yea, my guess is that many who profess that the beach should be public from customary use probably don't go up against (protest, critique, boycott, etc.) these private developments because they either work there, have friends who work there, know people who own property there, derive business from, on and on.
