Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

Discussion in 'Local Government and Groups' started by Reggie Gaskins, Apr 25, 2019.

  1. Reggie Gaskins

    Reggie Gaskins Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2018
    Messages:
    153
    Likes Received:
    94
    Location:
    Blue Mountain Beach
    Too Late, It’s official,
    Our 30A Legacy Has Been Destroyed

    Our slice of heaven has been prostituted to personal agendas, hollow local fame, big fish in a really small pond, and manipulation of a community so utterly divided by class warfare, they just forever ruined the very prize they coveted so dearly.

    There’s no turning back. Lines in the sand are permanent. Your local heroes have forced a finite definition of property lines, and an aggressive defense of same, with a deliberately misleading public campaign of emotional garbage. Welcome to checkerboard beach, folks, forever divided.

    I’m embarrassed for the people of Walton County. Think about it. Your global brand is no longer our pristine beach of heaven’s sugar and dreamy waters.

    Walton County Brand is now a middle school level, far left political icon, with a national following of radical Huckabee haters who never heard of Customary Use. This is engineered by a singular assault on the intelligence of fair and level minded people, to the dismay of those of us just wanting to all get along peacefully.

    The war is here, and now endless. I cry for our paradise lost. I’m ashamed at the success of those who leveraged the greed of those unknowing, who coveted their neighbor’s property. For they had it all along, but never again. Too late.
    The court case will go on, and be dismissed by something short of SCOTUS.

    This latest volley of public vitriol has disgusted the rational minded peeps right over the edge of reason. You wanted this fight, God only knows why. Could it really be a wasteland of our legacy - traded for small town personal publicity & political ambitions?
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
    • List
  2. Dawn

    Dawn Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Messages:
    872
    Likes Received:
    238
    Yeah OK. I think we'll be alright. As long as we can enjoy our beaches that is.
     
  3. FloridaBeachBum

    FloridaBeachBum Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2017
    Messages:
    463
    Likes Received:
    101
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    Unlike previous BPO censored SoWal posts, since Dave Rauschkolb’s two WaltonWatchDog Tweets were allowed by SoWal, any WaltonWatchDog Tweet is now permitted or will Dave Rauschkolb’s belief’s be deleted too?
    Now if Admin would please fix my account to not be slowed to a snail's pace to use and function like CU believer accounts.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  4. Dave Rauschkolb

    Dave Rauschkolb Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,006
    Likes Received:
    673
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    “Oh the humanity!“ I’ll say it again, that we would have the audacity to challenge those who would throw up no trespassing signs and exclude the public from beaches they have tread upon and played upon and joyfully used with their children and grandchildren as long as anyone can remember. Yes we will challenge this travesty. And the only thing we seek to (re)gain is the use of our beaches as we have always used them.

    And without a doubt, private beaches will(has) destroy(ed) our 30a legacy.
     
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2019
    • Dislike Dislike x 2
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
    • List
  5. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    88
    Location:
    SRB
    There is not a person alive today when all the property above the MHWL was all Public Property. It has always been Private Property and Private Property is the 30A legacy from the beginning. People have always been able to use the private property if it was not against the will of the property owner. Sometime you had to rent the property to use it and sometimes not and sometimes the answer was no. Has been that way in Florida since time immemorial. There has NEVER been force occupation of unlimited people with unlimited beach equipment on private property AGAINST the will of the property owner (includes both beach front and non-beach front).

    We have MORE public access (State Parks and Public Beach) today than we did in 1990 due to purchases by the State of Florida (Topsail) and Walton County purchases converted into Public Beach.

    The difference is we had 10% of the tourists in 1990 than we do today. This has NEVER been about access to beach by residents of Walton County, this is ALL ABOUT in increase of tourists (4 million this year and growing). A rate of tourist increase far greater than the infrastructure permits.

    What is the number of tourists that we can handle today for the current infrastructure? Some argue we have already far exceeded what we can handle without significant damage to our unique and sensitive ecosystem. How many tourists do we want to accommodate and what plans are being made to build that infrastructure (purchasing property, building parking, restrooms, road ways, etc).

    The BCC can purchase property but they cannot steal it (taking use away from the owner without compensation AKA stealing).

    Even if they buy more property we still have very serious issues about how many tourists can be accommodated, even with additional purchases by the State and County.
     
  6. James Bentwood

    James Bentwood Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2005
    Messages:
    1,214
    Likes Received:
    226
    :nuts:

    If you have a problem report it.

    :violin::banned::hammock:
     
  7. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,369
    Likes Received:
    201
    Fbb, believe it or not we have something in common :) The functionality of my forum membership account has been quite slow for years ever since I defended the Confederate monuments! However the difference is I am not complaining so much...

    Rg, be careful what you wish for "the war is here and is endless". I tried to tell you early on that winning the issue of private exclusive beach enjoyment for your class was like winning a battle and losing a war. Maybe it is what you wanted all along because "peace" was/is available. All you have to do is share the beach sand and nothing else. Why is your principle of exclusive beach enjoyment so important? What do you really fear? The Liberals are coming? I am as conservative as anyone but I do not think in terms of there is only one way or the highway. I understand emotions are high in this country and everyone feels like they must fight and defend something but what in the world is wrong with having exclusive views and sharing the beach sand??? Do you really believe Scotus is in your favor because of the Trump appointees? I think you will force the States to protect the entire shoreline. Most wars can be avoided. Just think it through...
     
  8. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    88
    Location:
    SRB
    The State already does protect the entire shoreline and a person can walk the entire beach front, swim, build sandcastles, or fish (with the exception of the Federal lands owned by the Military).

    That is different than forced occupation of private property by unlimited people with unlimited equipment against the will of the property owner which has NEVER been permitted by the State of Florida.

    If the BCC can make Billions of tourists tax dollars (see the minutes of the 2016 BCC special meeting) then why not just buy property and turn into Public Beach? Purchasing property by the BCC or the State of Florida is not only legal, but has been done since time immemorial to protect land for future generations. Purchasing property is legal. Stealing it is illegal (until Judge Green makes a judicial ruling that can stand up to the review of the US Supreme Court).
     
  9. Dave Rauschkolb

    Dave Rauschkolb Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,006
    Likes Received:
    673
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    So that’s it. Do you wanna profit off of Sand you don’t even pay taxes on? The unbuildable sand has value for being close in proximity to the water and the view. Your home is worth more because of that but not because you pay taxes on that sand. Eminent domain valuations, should it ever happen, should be worth no more than $400 per parcel for what it cost to quiet title the sand.
     
  10. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    88
    Location:
    SRB
    If the Beach Front Property is only "worth" $400, why did the BCC pay $7.2 MILLION Dollars for the private property across from Stinky's that they just opened as a Public Beach?

    The "myth" that taxes are not paid on beach front property has also been proven wrong numerous times, along with the "myth" of public beach made private by quiet title or the "myth" that public beach became private property due to HB631
     
  11. Alex Miles

    Alex Miles Beach Comber

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2019
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    Montgomery
    How valuable is that dry sandy beach to a beach bar built in the dunes?
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 1
    • List
  12. bob1

    bob1 Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    228
    Likes Received:
    58
    How dare you! There will be no dry sand soon.
    -Greta Thunberg
    :moon:



    :beach:
     
  13. FactorFiction

    FactorFiction Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2016
    Messages:
    494
    Likes Received:
    175
    With all due respect, the premise that a beach parcel has no more value than a filing fee is, to use your word, "ridiculous". There would be no fight if that were the case. The County would be snapping up beach for $400 a pop with eminent domain, don't you think? Also, given your premise, I would like to understand how you justify making a profit with the beach bar located on the dry sand. Aren't YOU profiting off sand you don't even pay taxes on under your argument? Hasn't that also been a major argument related to vending, even on public beaches? Basically vendors of any kind are making profit off of public beach with only a vendor license fee. How is that different on the beach where your bar sits?
     
  14. leeboy

    leeboy Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2015
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    22
    Again, the anger and personal vendettas come out. Dave attracts beachfront owners like moths to the flame.

    What is your business sir? Fill us in so we can discuss.
     
  15. FactorFiction

    FactorFiction Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2016
    Messages:
    494
    Likes Received:
    175
    You are making interesting assumptions. I am asking for clarification. Many statements have been made that don't make sense to me and don't seem to be consistent and/or supported by independent facts that I can find. If I could go buy a piece of beach for $400, I would do it and I suspect many more people would, too. I have no problem with vendors or Dave's beach bar except as they are profiting on supposedly public sand that they don't pay taxes on and he continually espouses that argument. I'm not angry at all and I have no personal vendetta against Dave. As a matter of fact, I am an inland owner, but it doesn't mean that I can't see both sides of an argument or empathize with members of both sides.
     
  16. leeboy

    leeboy Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2015
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    22
    115 pages of axe grinding and you have no property? Then surely you are a lawyer. Or a liar. But I repeat myself.
     
  17. Dave Rauschkolb

    Dave Rauschkolb Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,006
    Likes Received:
    673
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach

    There you go again, twisting my words. Beachfront owners pay taxes on beach front property but not the sand behind their homes. The unbuildable portion behind the dune line to the waterline is not taxed.
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2019
  18. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    88
    Location:
    SRB
    Ah, there you go again with more "myths". Taxes are paid on the entire property. A property that has title boundaries to the MWHL will cost significantly more than the same size property a few miles inland and taxed accordingly. Therefore taxes are paid on the "unbuildable portion behind the dune line to the waterline" because those property boundaries make it more desirable and thus more valuable. The more value the higher the sale price, the higher the sale price the more taxes paid. Nice try Dave, any more "myths" for a raining day?
     
  19. jodiFL

    jodiFL Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,471
    Likes Received:
    536
    Location:
    SOWAL,FL
    I am pretty sure that it is the "improvements" on that beach front property are what makes it more valuable. The little 30 year old block house on the 1/2acre beach front isnt going to be taxed near what the 4 story mega- house that sleeps 30 in that 20K sq.ft. on the same 1/2 acre lot will. Dont forget the pool that people that rent them have to have because there are "ewww... fish in the "ocean" will tack on some more taxes.
     
  20. leeboy

    leeboy Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2015
    Messages:
    84
    Likes Received:
    22
    There is no difference in value between two properties, all things equal except one with deeded sand and one without.

    As someone posted on here before the purpose of including sand in a deed was because some paranoid owner (or attorney probably) in the past wanted to ensure no one could build on the beach between them and the water. This illegal mistake was compounded time after time. Now it is time to correct the mistakes of the past and I am glad it will play our in a court and not the court of public opinion. You'd think people would be smart enough to shut up about the issue and let the court decide. This thread illustrates how the arrogance and vindictiveness wins out over common sense.

    Private beaches are a mistake and a ludicrous idea which has since been seized upon by greedy, selfish, exclusionary beachfront owners who are on a power trip. @mputnal has made it plain a hundred times but the scum keeps rebutting.
     

Share This Page