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

jodiFL

Beach Fanatic
Jul 28, 2007
2,476
733
SOWAL,FL
How sure are you, Jodi?

Here are the facts:

Actually 4,671 tax-paying citizens have been sued by Walton County and Dave Rauschkolb's FBFA, to rob them of their rights of ownership of
1,194 distinct privately owned deeded parcels.

Millions of dollars have already been spent on legal defense expenses.
And from the FLCPR notification...."FlaCPR today announced the owners of 570 beachfront parcels of the 1,194 parcels sued by the county, which includes individuals, associations and condominiums, have now challenged the Walton County customary use lawsuit. Interventions increased by more than 200 interventions since February 18, 2019 and these interventions represent over 3,500 owners in individual, associations and condos combined,"
seems like someones number dont add up.... which one is it?
 

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
2,288
1,799
Rg, your questions are like the mirror (I will explain if you need me to) that I asked you about earlier so why not you answer this question: What parcels can lay claim to containing the dry sand on the beach for the purpose of exclusive use?

The law that created this mess is also creating a money pit because neither side will likely accept the lower court decision. Only people with money and power (and those that are mislead) would prefer this to compromising the principle of exclusive dry sandy beach use. Money and power believe they can bully the system, the people and our natural resources to conform to their principle of exclusion. What is interesting is that they have mislead themselves into believing in their self importance to the point of having some warped (rg's word) mandate of entitlement. In the big picture life is short and you can't take it with you. Happiness does not come from what you think you own but what you give back. We will all find this out eventually including myself...
 

Stone Cold J

Beach Lover
Jun 6, 2019
150
171
SRB
What parcels can lay claim to containing the dry sand on the beach for the purpose of exclusive use?

According to the State of Florida, ALL deeded properties that include boundaries that extend from the toe of the dune to the MWHL (if defined as such in their deed) are able to exclude people, just like it has been since Florida became a State.

Your turn, name ONE deeded property that was Public property that became Private Property as a result of HB 631.

A JUDCIAL action is required to remove property rights in the State of Florida (not the BCC changing their mind in 2016 to take it with no compromise, no matter what the cost). And the BCC must prove that it is ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and without dispute. The lawsuit is one year old, millions of dollars have been spent legal fees, and the county STILL has not provided sufficient notice (sufficient to Judge Green) to each property owner. With this progress, the estimate of the FBFA lawyer of 10 years and 50,000,000 dollars might be on the low side.
 

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
2,288
1,799
SCJ, thank you! You answered both questions! Your answer is that you believe ALL beach property with deeds that describe the boundaries to the mhwl is private and able to exclude people. Before HB 631 bfo's did not exclude people from the dry sandy beach. There is much evidence to support this and available for your review in the court documents submitted by the county. So those parcels that had boundary descriptions to the mhwl always had a public use. You power brokers wanted to change that use from public to private and used that power to pass HB 631. The evidence is in many of your post where you indicated that you will no longer be inclined to share the dry sandy beach as a result of HB 631. That one little word...USE. Public to Private. Shared to Exclusive. That is what you finally admit to. No reason to hide your purpose anymore. All these post to rile people up instead of admitting your purpose. Never was about 30A legacy or civility or community and definitely not about shared enjoyment of the dry sandy beach. It has always been about use...before Florida was a State...after Florida was a State...forever and ever amen...
 

Stone Cold J

Beach Lover
Jun 6, 2019
150
171
SRB
There is much evidence to support this and available for your review in the court documents submitted by the county.

I have looked at the evidence and the State of Florida believes deeded property has Private Property Rights. The State of Florida Property Rights are published on the Walton County Web Site and the right is exclude people is a Key Right. I believe it also, but most importantly the State of Florida believes it, and that is what makes it True.

Other Court Documents, such as the Edgewater lawsuit (2008) clearly show people absolutely were not permitted on Private Property AGAINST the will of the Property Owner. Other evidence, such as occurred in July 2002, when Mark Austin used a public access walkover to get to a stretch of Dune Allen beach and the property owner at the time, William Houser, objected to Austin's presence on "his" private property and called police, who gave Austin a summons for trespassing shows this is nothing new and not created by HB 631.

Also there are NO documents in Exhibit B provided by the county showing anyone was on Private Property with unlimited people and unlimited equipment AGAINST the will of the property owner.

Here is a typical Exhibit B by "Steve" that does not indicate any parcel id's (could be a Public Beach) and no indication of forced occupation against the will of the property owner. In addition the activity is "fishing, bathing, swimming", which is all permitted on the State owned coast and nothing to do with Private Property. If there are any that provide documentation of occupation against the will of the property owner will you please post a copy of it.


upload_2020-1-13_15-37-43.png

Questions answered and facts provided.

Can you provide ANY parcel numbers of ANY public property that became private property as a result of HB 635?
 

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
2,288
1,799
The boundaries on beaches are word descriptions not physical boundaries. Therefore parcel numbers have no meaning to a beach user. Let's say that you are a bfo and throw your frisbee and it eventually lands on the white sandy beach somewhere. There are no boundaries. The white sandy beach is the same everywhere. So you retrieve your frisbee no matter where it lands. It is the same with beach users. The beach is continuous. The sand is dynamic and flows seaward, landward and up and down the beach. The sand where your frisbee touches down might be behind another bfo's but Lets be honest, you would retrieve your frisbee without a moments thought about where it landed. You will never be able to prove ownership of dry sandy beach in our judicial system imo. The fact that you keep trying is a testament to why it was necessary for the county to make the declaration of public use.
 

Stone Cold J

Beach Lover
Jun 6, 2019
150
171
SRB
The boundaries on beaches are word descriptions not physical boundaries. Therefore parcel numbers have no meaning

The boundaries on beach properties are not just word descriptions but legally defined boundaries that are fixed each year, measurable, can be surveyed and marked. Therefore, parcel numbers do have legally meaning and are protected by the State of Florida.

Please see FLORIDA STATUTES CHAPTER 177, PART II COASTAL MAPPING ACT section 177.28 for more information.

There is no such thing as a “frisbee law” that permits unlimited people with unlimited frisbees to occupy private property against the will of the property owner. If you think one does exist, please reference the Florida Statutes...

Myth of Public Beach becoming Private Property due to HB 631 has been busted. The myth of Property Boundaries can not be determined has been busted. We are not a socialist country and the local county commissionaires cannot “take property rights” to allow unlimited people and equipment on private property against the will of the property owner to chase billions of tourist’s dollars without judicial approval.
 

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
2,288
1,799
Scj, you have two things two prove in a court of law. 1. Do you have full ownership of the dry sandy beach from the toe of the dunes to the mhwl. Ownership is the key word. Is ownership defined by a word description or a long history of use? Precedent will be a consideration. Political propaganda not so much. You believe the State of Florida will support the word description over use. I believe that use is the basis for property law. Eventually a higher court will decide. 2. Is it possible for a private party to claim any ownership of the dry sandy beach? Beach sand is almost fluid. It shifts constantly. It is not normal real estate as Alex Miles has stated. The sand behind your beach moves around from high surf and is completely relocated during a storm. It does not stay in place so who actually owns it? Imo the State of Florida likely owns the dry sandy beach. Your desire for private exclusive beach will eventually force the State of Florida to make a declaration of public use.

This will take a long time for any court to navigate. HB 631 was all politics. The power brokers thought it would be a slam dunk in controlling yet another natural resource. Your purpose is to exclude all people from the beach. Your group has left no doubt of your purpose. Now you have energized the citizens of the State of Florida which will energize citizens across this great country which was founded on democratic principles. This energy is just getting started because this resource is very important to the people. The people majority have power AND there is NO proof of mob behavior on this issue. When your group push this narrative it proves that you are all about political propaganda and nothing about civility and respect for the people. Both sides have made mistakes in communication because of emotion but there is not and will not be any mob behavior. Autocracy and the exclusion-ist beliefs that come from those with elite power and wealth has been exposed. Your posts are part of that exposure. If I were a bfo and I wanted more privacy on the beach I would have negotiated a settlement with the county. But, you and yours chose to push your agenda of complete exclusion. I am not the only one made aware of how elite wealth and power believes to superior to the people and superior to nature by your continuing posts of this superiority. It is all right here in this forum for all to see...
 

Stone Cold J

Beach Lover
Jun 6, 2019
150
171
SRB
Scj, you have two things two prove in a court of law.

Actually there is NOTHING that I have to prove in court, it is the BCC that MUST PROVE IN COURT that forced occupation of unlimited people with unlimited equipment against the will of the property owner in the State of Florida is ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and without dispute.
 

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
2,288
1,799
Scj, I like the idea of a "frisbee law" but the thought was that you would be honest in following through with an explanation of beach "use". I understand why you would deflect. I also understand why you use the word "socialist" when you become more desperate. It explains how connected you are to politics and disconnected from real people who share the beach. I realize that you have a job to do here and it is not to compromise, negotiate or listen to anyone. I have listened to your arguments and respect them but you and yours have exposed something much bigger than the desire to exclude people from the beach. That something is exactly why our founders formed a government that is based on checks and balances. That something is an abuse of power. In the past I have given people like you and yours a free pass because of my political beliefs. You have opened my eyes!
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter