I think 30a is too narrow - please consider broadening your interest to protect our way of life to all of South Walton .
Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
- Thread starter Reggie Gaskins
- Start date
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
"We are all falling for a real estate developers head fake. The commercial interests along 30-A are dividing 30-A lovers as they get the Walton BCC to do their bidding. The county continues to pursue additional north-south connectors form 98 to CR30-A in the state forest so more tourists can clog our already overloaded infrastructure. More tourist $$$ for the commercial interests. Customary Use is necessary for the new 170,000 single family dwelling St. Joe development, Latitude Margaritaville Watersound, on the north side of West Bay is to be a financial success. Their marketing materials emphasize the proximity to amenities along 30-A. They seem to have little respect or concern for the impact on their earlier beach front communities and inland locals alike. Surprise.
Keep 30-A funky. There is a BCC meeting on August 21 on this subject. Let's all unite and go to the meeting and help stop the abuse of and the profiteering from our precious and declining natural resources."
This is as good a description as any that have been provided in the past. I know in all my direct talks with WCC members and the county attorney, there was not ONE instance where they wanted to discuss a compromise. NOT ONE - and I tried to have a discussion that would provide a basis for MORE discussion. Sadly, that was not going to happen. It is still puzzling that many CU supporters are accepting of the county spending millions of "OUR" tax money on a case that has little if any chance of success. The fact that the WCC won't even discuss a compromise solution is more proof that they are in step with the big developers to broaden their tax stream.
Keep 30-A funky. There is a BCC meeting on August 21 on this subject. Let's all unite and go to the meeting and help stop the abuse of and the profiteering from our precious and declining natural resources."
This is as good a description as any that have been provided in the past. I know in all my direct talks with WCC members and the county attorney, there was not ONE instance where they wanted to discuss a compromise. NOT ONE - and I tried to have a discussion that would provide a basis for MORE discussion. Sadly, that was not going to happen. It is still puzzling that many CU supporters are accepting of the county spending millions of "OUR" tax money on a case that has little if any chance of success. The fact that the WCC won't even discuss a compromise solution is more proof that they are in step with the big developers to broaden their tax stream.
Keep South Walton funky.
Reggie, I understand why you are trying so hard to label me and put me into a group that you can attack but I only follow my instincts. I am sometimes a progressive type person. I am sometimes a conservative type person. I am a registered Republican but I do not follow either party "exclusively". I do not believe in exclusion on the beach yet I understand why you do. I have no agenda. No platform. No real power at all. I do not hide behind a computer. I simply like to interact with people either personally or on social media like this forum. I don't believe that occupy Wall Street was anything more than a group of young people who are asking good questions. Please tell us what you think of the financial crisis and who is to blame? The very nature of a young person is idealism and I do not discredit or devalue them even though their organizational skills need improving. I have already explained to you that yes I fantasize about an idealistic society where there are personal economic failures that is supposed to make us stronger not weaker. However The People should not lose hope because the system allows wealth to fail without the same consequences as the rest of us. My instincts are that you seek power. If my opinion is wrong then explain what other powers do you believe in besides property rights and how it relates to community. You have already answered my question about economic inequality and unfairness and we both agreed that it exists but somehow you desire to justify it. You say that you understand how laws work but you seem confused on how life works. I explained to you that I or my children would never go on your property without permission because I respect your right of exclusion. Then you proceeded to explain how I should punish my child if they neglected to see your exclusive beach sign. Apparently you do not even understand what abuse of power is. Yet somehow I am preaching and you are well...the authority!
I have no idea which questions you are referring to that I have not answered. I think you just don't like my answers. Please ask then again. I am not hiding anything. Between the two of us one of uses a real name and one of us use a fictional name. I do not understand why you keep making the point that you have the facts but then use fiction when it comes to your name. You said that you do this because of fear. I don't buy it. I can't figure that one out. The People are not as ignorant as you think we are. Maybe you fear that society will become unified and request (not demand) a more equitable distribution of resources but you certainly do not have any reason to fear your community. I do not demand anything of you except for you to have respect for your community. I do not desire anything you have including the beach behind your exclusive building on top of the sand dune. You desire exclusive use of the beach yet you keep saying that The People are all desire and no substance. All I am asking you is to share the beach with respectful people. Give something back to the same society that helped you be successful. Why is that so hard really? So, all that stuff you listed above is fiction and meant to frighten property owners. I am very sorry that I busted your "boom" but you could not be more wrong about why I care about any of this. Smile when you see others enjoying the beach because life is short! It is good for us all to be happy and have hope. Take the hope away from society and it is the fall of Rome over and over again. Happy people are hopeful and content. Be smart and don't rock the boat just because you can...
I have no idea which questions you are referring to that I have not answered. I think you just don't like my answers. Please ask then again. I am not hiding anything. Between the two of us one of uses a real name and one of us use a fictional name. I do not understand why you keep making the point that you have the facts but then use fiction when it comes to your name. You said that you do this because of fear. I don't buy it. I can't figure that one out. The People are not as ignorant as you think we are. Maybe you fear that society will become unified and request (not demand) a more equitable distribution of resources but you certainly do not have any reason to fear your community. I do not demand anything of you except for you to have respect for your community. I do not desire anything you have including the beach behind your exclusive building on top of the sand dune. You desire exclusive use of the beach yet you keep saying that The People are all desire and no substance. All I am asking you is to share the beach with respectful people. Give something back to the same society that helped you be successful. Why is that so hard really? So, all that stuff you listed above is fiction and meant to frighten property owners. I am very sorry that I busted your "boom" but you could not be more wrong about why I care about any of this. Smile when you see others enjoying the beach because life is short! It is good for us all to be happy and have hope. Take the hope away from society and it is the fall of Rome over and over again. Happy people are hopeful and content. Be smart and don't rock the boat just because you can...
Don't be distracted by the term "big developers". Developers of all sizes want open beaches, as do citizens, small and large businesses, and visitors. The only ones who don't want open beaches are beach front owners who want no one on the beach or those who have been scared into action by the unsavory and the lawyers looking to profit.
Beachmax, we both agree on the declining natural resource. Do you happen to own land that once use to be a sand dune? If so, do you also own a building on that sand dune? I am not implying anything about who is right and who is wrong but don't you feel like it might be a stretch to blame the problem entirely on the commissioners for allowing over development when we all are responsible for this declining resource. Once we develop our desirable property is it fair to say to others that they are not allowed to develop as well? I agree that we need to show up and be heard at these community functions and start finding ways to limit development and improve existing infrastructure but this blame game is getting old. We should elect good leaders to represent us but if we don't whose fault is that? If we elect people that cater to big developers whose fault is that? Why not find better leaders? Maybe we just disagree about who is at fault but we should agree that the beach is a beautiful place that makes people happy! Excluding people from the beach because you can is just power. I suggest that power in the hands of a few will make people very unhappy. I see no reason why it is a good idea to make a lot of people unhappy...just because you can!
MP, You make waaaay too many assumptions about me. You are dead wrong in every one. My life’s work is all about people and community. Read the initial post again. I believe we all get along on our beaches just fine without an abusive lawsuit or loud public campaign against private owners.
You seem to think sand is different than dirt, a riverbank, an island, a mountaintop. In this case, where deeded property was sold to private individuals, it’s the same. If your property deed boundary is the Mean High Tide Line on the beach, then you own everything landward until the next boundary, like every other property in America.
The property is sold at market value. Market value is determined by supply and demand. There are few private islands for sale, scarcity drives up their price. There are few mountaintops available, supply and demand increases that price. Riverbanks are more rare than farmland, hence a supply and demand price increase. Property on the bay is 4 times as expensive as exact same property one mile inland. There is limited amount of private beach available, short supply, high demand, up goes the price.
Your world view is appropriate if the property were not private. Unfortunately for your argument, In Walton County, about 50% of the dry sand beach was sold as private property. It’s not about power you see, it’s about the president of private property rights, bought at free market, high prices. Along with the deed and rights that go along with it. No conspiracy, no movement, no power, no shadows in the night. Just folks paying higher prices for a scarce resource on the free market.
And the present dilemma is all about correcting the mistake of selling the sand in the first place. It was a monumental mistake. A lot of mistakes have been made here because civilization came late.
However I have no doubt that including sand in deeds was never meant to exclude the public from enjoying the beach. Interpreting your rights to exclude is perverted.
Interesting. Seriously. Legit discussion point here. Thousands upon thousands of legal transactions have been made under the law. How can that be considered a mistake? The concept, maybe. The transaction and resulting commerce and possession? No. Besides, You can’t correct a “mistake” by illegally “taking” someone’s property. You either buy it, or work out a mutually agreeable use agreement. Even eminent domain is a government option that hopefully never sees light here.
Why would a property deed with strict boundary lines not “mean” just that? Unless otherwise noted on the deed or platt or sale document or county/state/federal law, a property deed “means” private property and all of the rights that go along with it. That always includes the right of exclusion. No amount of public outcry or public demand can change that.
Any private deed, BY DEFINITION, s indeed legally “meant” to exclude the public from that property at the owners discretion. Nothing written anywhere in Walton Co contradicts that.
That’s why private owners are forced to defend themselves in this lawsuit. They aren’t attacking the public. Most of them don’t even mind public responsible use on beach. But to donate their property to the public is not what they paid for.
Last edited:
Reggie, I want to believe that your "life's work is people and the community" but my instinct is telling me that you are on a political mission. If that were true then why hide your name? You seem very confident that you are an authority. You have an opportunity here to prove me wrong but you will have to use a real name. I only trust what I can verify.
Yes sand is made from a natural resource and people are inspired by it. Of course it is different because it is connected to the resource where life began. It is a limited resource which you helped to limit by buying and building on a sand dune. As you say, "it is your right" to purchase part of the resource and then exclude it from The People. Without knowing who you are I do not trust you to have the power to exclude people from the sandy beaches and then campaign to limit future development. Maybe laws work that way but life does not.
If you have been reading my post I think you would know that I am familiar with supply and demand economics. You would know that I believe that supply and demand are affected by a monopolization of resources in a very negative way. The very definition of wealth is an accumulation of resources. Wealth accumulates resources and then limits or in this case "excludes" access to those resources. Sound familiar?
Wealth accumulates resources and then limits or excludes the resource. Does that sound like a free market? I believe the biggest mistake by the county was to give wealth a ticket to a desirable resource. Maybe they trusted you to share the resource and that is where I put some blame on the county. Trusting wealth with the community was apparently a bad idea. You have proven this over and over with your desire to refuse compromise on the right to exclude. Listen, I want you to prove me wrong but you have a hard time even using the word "share" so I am not holding my breath!
Yes, you are part of a movement that uses power and fear to control others. It's not evil but you don't really care about The People. It's just apathy and we all suffer from it at times. My only message is that The People need to have hope and we will not find it in your message!
Yes sand is made from a natural resource and people are inspired by it. Of course it is different because it is connected to the resource where life began. It is a limited resource which you helped to limit by buying and building on a sand dune. As you say, "it is your right" to purchase part of the resource and then exclude it from The People. Without knowing who you are I do not trust you to have the power to exclude people from the sandy beaches and then campaign to limit future development. Maybe laws work that way but life does not.
If you have been reading my post I think you would know that I am familiar with supply and demand economics. You would know that I believe that supply and demand are affected by a monopolization of resources in a very negative way. The very definition of wealth is an accumulation of resources. Wealth accumulates resources and then limits or in this case "excludes" access to those resources. Sound familiar?
Wealth accumulates resources and then limits or excludes the resource. Does that sound like a free market? I believe the biggest mistake by the county was to give wealth a ticket to a desirable resource. Maybe they trusted you to share the resource and that is where I put some blame on the county. Trusting wealth with the community was apparently a bad idea. You have proven this over and over with your desire to refuse compromise on the right to exclude. Listen, I want you to prove me wrong but you have a hard time even using the word "share" so I am not holding my breath!
Yes, you are part of a movement that uses power and fear to control others. It's not evil but you don't really care about The People. It's just apathy and we all suffer from it at times. My only message is that The People need to have hope and we will not find it in your message!