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

FactorFiction

Beach Fanatic
Feb 18, 2016
494
409
You still don't get it. It's about entire neighborhoods and new developments claiming these private properties as their property to use paying zero taxes on. It's a strategy by the TDC to support more development, a lot more development to North of 30A.

What do you mean "It's about entire neighborhoods and new developments claiming these private properties as their property to use paying zero taxes on." Do you mean they are claiming deeded property as theirs meaning the public is claiming it? Don't mean to be dense, but I don't quite understand what/where you are referring to.
 

FactorFiction

Beach Fanatic
Feb 18, 2016
494
409
What do you mean "It's about entire neighborhoods and new developments claiming these private properties as their property to use paying zero taxes on." Do you mean they are claiming deeded property as theirs meaning the public is claiming it? Don't mean to be dense, but I don't quite understand what/where you are referring to.

Nevermind, I think I see now. Key words being "to use". They aren't claiming they own it, but claim it is theirs to use without paying the beachfront taxes. Very true.
 

formosa64

Beach Lover
Apr 18, 2017
62
88
Seacrest Beach

Attachments

  • 9e8ba884-8710-4903-81ce-0ea803832750.c10.jpg
    9e8ba884-8710-4903-81ce-0ea803832750.c10.jpg
    123.4 KB · Views: 198
  • 41822998001_5625002299001_5624981469001-vs.jpg
    41822998001_5625002299001_5624981469001-vs.jpg
    24.1 KB · Views: 194
  • 636445416775088141-Florida---Walton-County-Beaches-22.jpg
    636445416775088141-Florida---Walton-County-Beaches-22.jpg
    189.9 KB · Views: 193
  • Access-Sign-Miramar-Beach.jpg
    Access-Sign-Miramar-Beach.jpg
    220.7 KB · Views: 198
  • FantasySign.jpg
    FantasySign.jpg
    566.1 KB · Views: 186
  • private_beach_document1.JPG
    private_beach_document1.JPG
    18.4 KB · Views: 187
  • private_beach_document2.JPG
    private_beach_document2.JPG
    41 KB · Views: 173

FactorFiction

Beach Fanatic
Feb 18, 2016
494
409
Document from 1977
Not 30 years old photos. Not sure what would prove if they were a hundred years old. Making a beach private is the ultimate in human greed.

It is unfortunate that Walton County allowed deeds to include the beach, but persecuting beachfront owners because they are trying to protect rights that they believe they had when they bought the property (and paid dearly for it) is misplaced IMO. It is interesting in this County that decisions are made that affect people, sometimes dramatically, without any real regard for those impacts. It happens with development all the time. We are a country of laws (supposedly). If the privately deeded beaches meet the criteria for customary use, why is everyone so afraid of due process that would support that? Unless you don't like your property rights, I hope you don't have any property that the public wants or you, too, may have some of your rights to that property unilaterally stripped from you.
 

formosa64

Beach Lover
Apr 18, 2017
62
88
Seacrest Beach
Not 30 years old photos. Not sure what would prove if they were a hundred years old. Making a beach private is the ultimate in human greed.

Some of them are - 30 years ago is 1988. I have 40 year old photos... just don't have them scanned ...

And they don't NEED to be 30 years old or 100 year old to disprove uninterrupted use. Anything prior to 2016. What about the legal documents - do you dispute those as well?

Are you suggesting there is no beach that you have access to in Walton county?

What about buying an island? How about a mountain top? Or a property on a river bank? What about a forest? Where do YOU live? Maybe I would enjoy that particular piece of property and think it's greedy for you to hog it all to yourself. I really like your car - can I use whenever I want?

"Ultimate greed" --- this kind of statement is one of a zealot or a hypocrite.

Let me ask you - do you agree that if the county by decree mandates the public can use what was once a private piece of property - then the property owner should not have to pay taxes on that land? Or is that okay with you as long as you get your way? You want the property owner to pay for it, and pay annual taxes on it - and let you use it for free - if they don't like it then they are just being "greedy"?

What are your thoughts on a state park charging admission? If you have no problem with that - then why can't private beach front property owners charge for the public to use their property?
 
Last edited:

formosa64

Beach Lover
Apr 18, 2017
62
88
Seacrest Beach
It is unfortunate that Walton County allowed deeds to include the beach, but persecuting beachfront owners because they are trying to protect rights that they believe they had when they bought the property (and paid dearly for it) is misplaced IMO. It is interesting in this County that decisions are made that affect people, sometimes dramatically, without any real regard for those impacts. It happens with development all the time. We are a country of laws (supposedly). If the privately deeded beaches meet the criteria for customary use, why is everyone so afraid of due process that would support that? Unless you don't like your property rights, I hope you don't have any property that the public wants or you, too, may have some of your rights to that property unilaterally stripped from you.

"Unfortunate" applies an emotion to property ownership which is legal or illegal - that's all. There was no "act" to turn this private property to be owned by the county. So unless a portion of the parcel was dedicated to the public (and many of them did - see Sand Cliffs plat for an example), or the county purchased it, or it was donated, there is nothing to change the deed boundaries. When an owner puts it up for sale, that's the time for all these zealots or the county to buy it and change the deed to dedicate the beach to the county.

The rallying cry that it's "greedy" for someone to own the beach - yet there ALWAYS is an owner of the beach.

After all this is not "public property with no owner" - what is called a public beach IS owned by someone --- it all belongs to "the county". So much for the "my sand and your sand" phony claim. You notice the county won't really get into the discussion that *they* own the beach and therefore they can close down the beach. It's an amazing illusion.

BTW - what's going to stand everyone on their head is when the county at some point in time, decides to charge for beach use, or takes alcohol off the beach.
 
Last edited:
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter