Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

[Stone Cold J]

you indeed will not compromise on your principles

I think many property owners might be willing to return to Ancient Customary Use, defined as: the right to transverse the coastline, swim, fish, take family photos, on the entire 26 miles of 30A coastline and the right to use beach equipment on County Property (during approved hours) or State Property (with a permit) or Private Property (if no objection by the Private Property Owner).

I don't think many (if any) property owners (beach front or non beach front) would be willing to renounce their property rights (in particular the right of exclusion) and give those rights to the BCC. There may be a concern by some of the free for all and chaos that could occur under the exclusive BCC control of property rights. What about non-beach front private properties owners down the street from a restaurant? What if the BCC allowed people to park on their property at no cost (but the property owner would need to fix ruts and pick up trash), or even allow the restaurant to set up extra tables and chairs on their private property, because the restaurant was too crowded for the property they owned, and the county needs the "tourists money" and the restaurant owner wants to expand? Is the BCC allowed to TAKE property rights against the will of ANY property owner? What if the county just paved over that property owners front yard to make parking for the restaurant or a beach access? Would that "reasonable"? This is not the same as "Eminent Domain" but "Taking". The BCC has filed a lawsuit to "take property rights" from beach front property owners. If successful they will expand it to other property owners. Why would they stop? What about taking property to build a new ball park? Of course they would also need to take more property for parking and concession stands. It is for the good of the many and a poll shows most people want free land for a ball park.

If someone is not willing to renounce their private property rights and give them to the BCC for exclusive management, some of properties which have been in the family for generations, then that is a sign of "not willing to compromise on principles"?

I also think you are right that the "CU fight" (formally known as beach nourishment plan to remove property rights) will be reinvented as a constitutional push to remove property rights from a selected targeted population of owners (aka beach front property owners) or maybe as a push "Incorporate 30A" (so they can create new laws to take over beach front property)? Either way this looks like it is going to be long and expensive in terms of money, legacy, and potential further destruction of our sensitive ecosystem.

 

[FloridaBeachBum]

Survey

Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
I wonder what the poll results would be if the question was;
Do you believe owners of beachfront private property with legal title to the mean high water line have the Constitutional right all private property owners have to private enjoyment of their property?
or Do you think it is acceptable to for the public to occupy private beachfront property with legal title to the mean high water line if the property owner does not invite the public and want exclusive enjoyment of their property for themselves that they pay property taxes on?
Polls are for politicians. Not individual protected Constitutional rights. That's

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
I wonder what the poll results would be if the question was;
Do you believe owners of beachfront private property with legal title to the mean high water line have the Constitutional right all private property owners have to private enjoyment of their property?
or Do you think it is acceptable to for the public to occupy private beachfront property with legal title to the mean high water line if the property owner does not invite the public and want exclusive enjoyment of their property for themselves that they pay property taxes on?
Polls are for politicians. Not individual protected Constitutional rights. That's

Your post has been haunting me a bit. And that is one always sees surveys of all kinds as well as “over-analyzed” results of these surveys.

But now after seeing the Mason Dixon survey that Dave R keeps posting everywhere, it truly is an eye opening attempt to sway even more of the masses with a VERY MISLEADING question. And that’s the concern...that people who are experts in the science of polls know exactly how to phrase a question in order to influence the results they desire.

“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?”

Sounds like a simple question on the surface. As most of us know here in SoWal, one can own beachfront property and either own or not own the sandy part of the beach.

The above question is undoubtedly phrased in a way that implies the beachfront owner does not own the beach when the “dry sand area” “adjoins their property”.

For anyone to be throwing out this type of poll as having any real credence is being intellectually dishonest. And I’m being very kind right now, very kind.

 

[Poppaj]

Let’s abandon CU and go straight to a constitutionally mandated solution which is eminent domain.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Wow! Did you see the article just posted on the Walton County Wave? Check it out.

Do you mean the one where Suzanne Harris may be about to win yet another lawsuit against the county regarding CU and Edgewater Condominiums? Special executive BCC meeting taking place today regarding all of that, BTW.

Article

 

[mputnal]

Poppaj if CU loses in court wouldn't the State then have no choice but to protect the economics of tourism by turning to eminent domain for beach property? If the State allows BFO's to manage the beach front then the beach eventually becomes private. How would that work for tourism? Of course BFO's could then individually fight for compensation. After my exchange with FBB and others I believe that BFO's are interested in two things: Privatizing the beach or compensation for loss of privatizing the beach. They are definitely not much interested in community per their own statements. I believe that will likely be what happens if CU loses. Hmm what is the "best use" of beach front property? Chair rentals? Sunbathing?

 

[Kurt]

Threads merged. Please keep it respectful and on topic.

 

[Reggie Gaskins]

So, I’m back from hunting wild boar in the Outback. I see that my original post title has been changed. Didn’t know that happened in an honest environment? Hmmmmm... The intent of that very descriptive title was to to drive discussion and raise an eyebrow. To make y’all think outside the normal banter.

“Customary Use will Destroy Our 30A Legacy”
The initial post described in detail that thought line.
It generated record views and replies. Now admins merged my two posts.

Why do these tracks generate such noise?
Because regardless of who wins, the fight itself, the very aggressive CU political campaign, and now the defense of property rights from ambush videos and misinformation, is tearing our wonderful community apart. Long time friends, club members, church members, neighbors, are judging each other by one yardstick; Your Stand on CU. A pathetic result of over zealous political ambitions. SERIOUSLY? Aren’t we better than that?

CU is NOT a thing. It’s NOT worth destroying our way of life here. It is definitely NOT a solution that will work in SoWal for all reasons you’ve read here.
People, rise up above the gutter There are 3 problems:

- Bad and inept leadership at county level
- Too many tourists for current public beach network
- Beach chair vendor problem of blocking beach

There are many feasible solutions that make sense.
Let’s address common sense solutions and fiscally responsible options. CU is waaaaaaay down the list on possible fixes. Why destroy our community on a Hail Mary socialist taking of private property, causing permanent harm to our community, when adults could step in in solve for X?

Somehow, the worst possible solution, this pipe dream of CU, got traction in social media in an echo chamber of censored propaganda. And yes admins, that description is quite accurate based on definitions of those words! Why are we focused on a political pipe dream that can’t win, even if it wins, get it? And if you read the tea leaves, the CU thing is unraveling at many levels.

See You on the beach. Hopefully without having to guess on which side of this charade you stand. Maybe we can get back to talking about number of turtle nests, or headliners for next Songwriter Festival, maybe even which bridge will be out this winter. But for God’s Sake, give this dying CU side show a rest....

 

[FloridaBeachBum]

mputnal, BMBV had a good reply to the dramatic conclusions to #1002 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
"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 percentage of the 1,193 BFOs parcels in the past decades and since 2016 have posted signs (as is their Constitutional First Amendment right to do), chained off property (which is regulated except where a court has permitted), or enforced their right to private enjoyment?
FactorFiction has made the point multiple times and asked the questions on many occasions with no credible CU response.
Customary Use of SoWal Beaches: Contact Governor Scott
Federal Lawsuit Could Bar Public from Beaches and Recreation Areas
Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

"Neither all the facts in the world nor all the money in the world will not stop hurricanes from coming."
How many hurricanes have there been in Walton since 1941? Walton beaches recover after time and are not much different today. That's the risk BFOs take, pay insurance for, and 30A BFOs will pay for recovery just like past decades.

"human behavior will lead to people resenting BFO's who do not share their beaches." If respect for property rights replaced resentment; most of us will all get along like before 2016.
Education of property rights and appropriate behavior with prompt consistent law enforcement will change "human behavior".
Why have you not asked; Will it really give Commissioners and CU believers satisfaction to be right?

 

[Kurt]

This is a passionate discussion and we need to keep it respectful without personal attacks. If you don't understand the difference between jabs and attacks then you will not enjoy our forum.

Thread titles are sometimes edited when they are all caps, confusing, too long, etc. They aren't intentionally edited to skew one way or the other. I changed the title to make it more inviting for to all to participate. I'm not even sure what a 30A Legacy is, or means, and may change it again to an even simpler "Customary Use Discussion".