New posts

miznotebook

Beach Fanatic
Jul 8, 2009
925
556
Stone's throw from Inlet Bch
Got some additional info. I had misunderstood about the captioning, they are planning to do some sort of captioning to help the hearing impaired participate, but apparently they do not plan to record or live stream the meeting. Speakers will be Carolynn Zonia, a candidate for Walton County District 5, and Phil Ehr, a candidate for Congress. Karen McGee of the Walton County Democratic Women's Club will moderate.
 

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
2,194
574
FBB lets say BFO's win the lawsuit because a Judge agrees with you regarding the facts. Then what? Are you going to chain off your property to the wet sand? Put up NO TRESPASSING or KEEP OUT signs? Maybe build walls out of concrete? What are you going to do when someone trespasses? You know people will keep coming and spreading out down the beach. Do you think that people will be orderly and stay out? Will you charge a fee and let people use your beach? If you are a realist then you know that human behavior will lead to people resenting BFO's who do not share their beaches. I'm just wondering if you have thought this through? All the facts in the world will not stop the reality of more and more people coming. Neither all the facts in the world nor all the money in the world will not stop hurricanes from coming. You need your community in my opinion to support you when conflicts and disasters come. Will it really give you that much satisfaction to be right? Will it really give you that much satisfaction to own your private beach? If so then there will be a cost and I don't think it will involve money.
 

Auburn Fan

Beach Lover
Oct 4, 2018
82
67
Auburn
FALSE narrative, cotton candy slogan:
"It's not about left and right, it's about right and wrong. It's wrong to exclude the public from any of America's beaches."
Today
on Twitter
on a Socialist account



Straight up TRUTH:
It's not about left and right, it's about right and wrong. It's wrong to exclude the rights of private property ownership (including the freedom to manage crowd density on ones' own property), from any citizen of the US public.
In fact. It's downright illegal.
In addition to being morally wrong.
Sept 25, 1789
on a document governing a republic nation
US Constitution, Amend. V, Sec. 5

Do you care about protecting your property rights?
Don't fall for this dangerously twisted propaganda, aimed at reversing our county's culture.
 

Dave Rauschkolb

Beach Fanatic
Jul 13, 2005
1,006
790
Santa Rosa Beach
FALSE narrative, cotton candy slogan:
"It's not about left and right, it's about right and wrong. It's wrong to exclude the public from any of America's beaches."
Today
on Twitter
on a Socialist account



Straight up TRUTH:
It's not about left and right, it's about right and wrong. It's wrong to exclude the rights of private property ownership (including the freedom to manage crowd density on ones' own property), from any citizen of the US public.
In fact. It's downright illegal.
In addition to being morally wrong.
Sept 25, 1789
on a document governing a republic nation
US Constitution, Amend. V, Sec. 5

Do you care about protecting your property rights?
Don't fall for this dangerously twisted propaganda, aimed at reversing our county's culture.


Oh, so glad to see you care, but you left out the rest of the tweet. Straight up truth.

66372245_475693319923105_983185840177938432_o.jpg
 
Last edited:

BlueMtnBeachVagrant

Beach Fanatic
Jun 20, 2005
1,289
375
mputnal,
I think you might be fretting a little too much about how BFOs will fare. I respect your tone but feel compelled to “slice and dice” your post, just a little.

FBB lets say BFO's win the lawsuit because a Judge agrees with you regarding the facts. Then what? Are you going to chain off your property to the wet sand?
I don’t think you’ll find any chains in our neck of the woods at Blue Mountain Beach Regional Access. There’s no reason for that to change if CU loses in court.

Put up NO TRESPASSING or KEEP OUT signs?
No Trespassing signs are obviously required to inform the public that parts of the beach are private property. Otherwise they assume it’s all public because most genuinely don’t know what’s public and what’s private.

Maybe build walls out of concrete?
No comment needed.

What are you going to do when someone trespasses? You know people will keep coming and spreading out down the beach.
If and when CU is defeated, the sheriff will have no choice but to press charges if filed, especially against people like Daniel Uhlfelder who intentionally trespass, ignoring the no trespassing signs.

Do you think that people will be orderly and stay out?
.
So far for us, the public has been pretty respectful regarding the signs and all.

Will you charge a fee and let people use your beach?
. Well now you’re digressing a bit into one of the previous topics regarding compromise (of course not one CU proponent made any significant comment (yay or nay and why). There’s no need to compromise if the court case ultimately goes against CU.

If you are a realist then you know that human behavior will lead to people resenting BFO's who do not share their beaches. I'm just wondering if you have thought this through? All the facts in the world will not stop the reality of more and more people coming.
Now I did get a good laugh from that one regarding BFOs being resented. Honestly, I think it’s way too late for that discussion.

Neither all the facts in the world nor all the money in the world will not stop hurricanes from coming.
Agreed (double negatives aside).

You need your community in my opinion to support you when conflicts and disasters come.
Funny how so many people think the BFOs were helped after Hurricanes Ivan and Dennis. Sand, sea walls, walkovers, balcony repairs, etc. were all paid OUT OF POCKET where most of the damage occurred. Didn’t receive any help with any of that. I know it’s a matter of time before we become the next Mexico Beach and that’s what insurance is for. Again, to expect any real “help” from the county is a bit naive. I just ask that they stay out of our way as much as possible during a recovery.

Will it really give you that much satisfaction to be right? Will it really give you that much satisfaction to own your private beach? If so then there will be a cost and I don't think it will involve money.
Just a grammatical correction - we already own the property.

Seems to me you could just as easily flip this question on CU proponents. Instead of CU satisfaction of taking private property without compensation, why not negotiate with the legal fees saved and an increased TDC tax to pay for beach parcels. Everybody wins.

My thinking is this won’t ever happen simply because CU people in charge of things (commissioners, county manager, county attorney, etc., won’t risk the negative light that will shine down on them if they were to back pedal a bit.
 

BlueMtnBeachVagrant

Beach Fanatic
Jun 20, 2005
1,289
375
Dave R,
You’ve already brought up that poll that means absolutely nothing on the legal and Constitutional stage. You hope that this idiotic poll will appeal to the emotions of your followers by helping them feel more noble than they deserve by following your antics. And somehow bringing it up again invalidates Auburn Fan’s post? Good grief!
 

FactorFiction

Beach Fanatic
Feb 18, 2016
494
409
Well, peeps, the BFOs that I know who were willing to share are not feeling too generous after the July 4th illegal fireworks displays all over private properties (and public, too). CU advocates need to do some serious work on encouraging respectful behavior from the public. While some of the bigger stuff was cleaned up, there were thousands of small pieces of plastic and cardboard to pick up. Inexcusable.
 

Stone Cold J

Beach Lover
Jun 6, 2019
150
171
SRB
but you left out the rest

I can see where people might be confused on the question itself.

For the Questions: Do you believe owners of Florida beachfront property should or should not have the authority to ban the public from using the dry sand area above the normal high tide line that adjoins their property?

I would answer "Should Not" the way the question is worded. Maybe the wording is why so many people answered the way they did. Constitutional property rights are only extended to property owners that have a legally deeded title to that property. In this case it looks like the question is asking about property "adjoining" or "next door" to the deeded property and not owned by the property owner. A beachfront property owner would not have the right to tell someone to leave a neighbor’s property (unless asked by the neighbor to convey that message), but a private property owner WOULD have the right to tell someone to leave his own property. That is independent of where the property is located. Similar to the lawsuit won by the Surfriders in California. The public has the right to surf, swim, sunbathe, build sandcastles, etc on Martin Beach, BUT they are NOT ALLOWED to day camp (beach equipment) on the private property adjoining Martin Beach. The public is only allowed to use the portion owned by the State of California. Private property rights are the same (right of exclusion) if the property is owned by the State, County, individual. or even the US Military. Trespassing on military property is not recommended, and the military owns a considerable amount of property in Florida. The (Surfriders) in the California lawsuit did however win the right to "unblock" access to Martin Beach (public beach) that was land blocked by Mr. Khosla. I wonder if Surfriders will mount a lawsuit to "unblock" access to public beach behind gated communities?


So here are a few questions. Can you provide honest and real answers with legal reasons and not sarcastic answers based solely on emotion or entitlement?

1. Do private property owners have the right to ask people to leave who trespass on their legally deeded private property?

2. Do Florida property owners have less constitutional property rights than other US citizens?

3. Does a property owner have fewer constitutional rights if their property is considered desirable by others?
 
Last edited:

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
2,194
574
FBB thank you for answering my questions. I understand now that you indeed will not compromise on your principles. IMHO I believe that you represent more of a libertarian ideal than a realistic one. I agree with so many things that you believe except those libertarian principles. You don't want or need the help of this community. I believe I understand why the commissioners had no other choice. If/when the court rules in your favor the CU (maybe they will change the name to something else) activist will double overnight. I agree with you that their tactics leave room for improvement but don't hold your breath on that one. Good luck to you!
 
New posts