- Feb 18, 2016
Okay I think our lens have different coatings because I have already made the effort to do exactly that. Our perspective is different. Seems like there is no opportunity to compromise because The People will not accept the exclusion part of your belief or right in owning the resource (beach). Keep in mind we are talking about "beach" property NOT your yard. A yard is different than a beach. We are debating the issue of property rights versus human rights. Human rights demand fairness, equality and an even distribution of resources. I believe in Capitalism. I love my Country. Again and again I do not want something for nothing and I am not asking for that. I have "earned the right to enjoy the "beach" just as you. Yes just as you. Different lens or different coatings but we are different in perspective. FBB first made me aware of this difference. Before that I thought that we could see things from a common position of humanity. Humanity does not exist with your exclusive right to any part of the beach. I wish I were wrong but we will probably never see through the same lens. I will never have your existing and exclusive views of the water and magnificent colors of the sunset. NEVER. You can blame me for that but that does not solve your problem with public opinion. The bone I want is just to be able to walk up and down the beach without interruption and without signage telling me that I have not earned the "right" to do so. That is my perspective, my reality and my life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. In my opinion you are going to force the State to take your property. It did not have to be that way. Anyway, good luck to you and I am sorry to all the BPO's that are not part of exclusion.
I am baffled mputnal. With the exception of the signage, you can absolutely do what is in your quote above and the signage might very well go away with some changes. I don't know ANYONE who likes signs on the beach itself.
I find several things interesting about this whole mess:
1) Virtually EVERY heart warming, sentimental picture of CU shown by FBFA or old pictures of actual beach usage would never have created this firestorm in the first place. Look at the pictures closely sometime. Observe the density of people on the beach. Observe the uses on the beach. Observe the equipment on the beach.
2) Before this situation became so contentious. a beach share plan was proposed. Was it perfect? Was it a start? Was it worth trying before millions of dollars would be spent on lawsuits? Could it have been a test case or pilot program to at least TRY?
3) Even AFTER the County had effectively decided to have a CU ordinance, they convened a committee of people in favor of CU and property owners who were in favor of property rights, but willing to work together to see if some compromises would lead to peace on the beach. What happened? That committee found common ground and made a unanimous proposal to the BCC. Unfortunately, parts of that recommendation were either dismissed or diluted, but even so, the ordinance had some possibility of working UNTIL it was decided that enforcement would be complaint driven and there were insufficient code enforcement officers to handle the task, not to mention that they had little time to even completely understand what they were to enforce before the season began. To top that off, how much peace do you think it brought to the beach for BPOs to have to complain in order to get enforcement? Didn't work for all the reasons I've listed.
If there is ever to be a "compromise", some people have to adjust their attitudes and the ones that can truly make a difference (like the BCC for one) have to make some hard decisions. They need to address:
*Density of both people and equipment on the beach.
*Address "presets", that do nothing more than reserve an area of the beach. Why should any owner entity have to accept people who are not their guests "reserving" beach when the people aren't even there to enjoy the beach but their equipment is? The managed vendor program is addressing this issue for vendors, but not the general public.
* Behavior CAN be improved and needs to be. Can you control other people? No, BUT you can make it unappealing to continue bad behavior, including disrespect.
I've used this example before, but I'll use it again to make this point: I own a restaurant (beach parcel). I serve the public (tourists and non-BPOs). Without them, I don't have a successful business (tourism). However, I have control over how many people are in my restaurant at one time (density). I have the right to deny service to individuals or even groups (exclusion), which I rarely exercise, but I do have that right. If individuals or groups create a disturbance in my restaurant, I have the right to speak to them about the behavior creating that disturbance (behavior). It they don't change the behavior, I can ask them to leave (exclusion). If they refuse, I can get help from law enforcement (Code Enforcement/WCSO).
There's a lot of beach out there. If everyone would just look at all those wonderful pictures of "historical use" and reassess their need to have a reserved outdoor living space/camp setup at the beach, there might be hope again, but I'm not holding my breath. Way too much entitlement in this world today. Not just at the beach.