South Walton's Community Website
Beach Like A Local!
Create Account
New posts

FloridaBeachBum

Beach Fanatic
Feb 9, 2017
463
112
Santa Rosa Beach
Interesting Dave Rauschkolb, attorney Daniel Uhlfelder or anyone have not disputed my information of the Vizcaya private beachfront and two pedestrian easements. Anyone call Brian Kellenberger?
Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy Vizcaya private property Plat
I’m not an attorney but I take the time to study the law and the facts...maybe I’m wrong and I'll learn something along the way. Facts not unsupported opinions please.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

jodiFL

Beach Fanatic
Jul 28, 2007
2,479
709
SOWAL,FL
@FloridaBeachBum ..can you explain to me why anyone would need to sue for quiet title in the first place if your deed clearly shows what you own? Is the title not clear to start with? Did the title company not do their job? I was required to get title insurance etc. when I bought my property. Are there any kind of liens on the property they are trying not to pay? There are alot of reasons to sue for quiet title...and they all come down to people trying to get something without due process.. (i.e. not paying liens, possible other owners, others with interest in said property).
 

FloridaBeachBum

Beach Fanatic
Feb 9, 2017
463
112
Santa Rosa Beach
@FloridaBeachBum ..can you explain to me why anyone would need to sue for quiet title in the first place if your deed clearly shows what you own? Is the title not clear to start with? Did the title company not do their job? I was required to get title insurance etc. when I bought my property. Are there any kind of liens on the property they are trying not to pay? There are alot of reasons to sue for quiet title...and they all come down to people trying to get something without due process.. (i.e. not paying liens, possible other owners, others with interest in said property).
JodiFL, your question implies you have not read or understand the plat or legal documents I pointed out. That is the point of quiet title litigation! The title/deed is NOT clear. The judge quiets and clears the title to the private property owner by the preponderance of the EVIDENCE. Quiet title litigation (not a $400 form you pay for) has been between the two private property owners. BMB developer and the parcel owners. NOT the Walton BCC or public and the private property owner. Usually because an old plat was unclear. Not sure what a lien has to do with the title. The litigation IS the DUE PROCESS and a JUDGE decides. Do you still want to guess who the celebrity BMB Subdivision No. 1 quiet title judge was?

A title search from the US land patent to the plat could show the public has an interest in private property. But don’t you think if there were Walton BCC or somebody would have done that by now? Why risk MILLIONS of Walton tax payer money on an lengthy litigation based on an ancient English common law doctrine of custom? Educate yourself on the old English doctrine of custom. Educate yourself on Tona Rama. Don't take my or Dave Rauschkolb's or Daniel Uhlfelder's word for it. I'd debate Uhlfelder online any day on the doctrine of customary use.

What do you want to believe? Legal real-property documents or a FBFA baseless made up PowerPoint slide? Please at least answer this question.
Do you blindly believe Dave Rauschkolb or do you do your own research of the law and facts?

I don’t expect you to change your belief based on what anyone says here. Do your own homework. It's hard work and takes time. It’s easy to want what you want without educating ones self when you have no real-property skin in the game and you’re not spending your own money to defend your property rights against a Walton BCC with unlimited tax payer money. Beachfront owners do not have that luxury and we are tired of the lies and misinformation repeated over and over again as if they are fact. There are over 4,500 beachfront owners out there that are not as familiar with the facts and only hear the intentional misinformation from the press, Florida Beaches for All and CU leaders like Dave Rauschkolb. CUnCourt. Florida Coastal Property Rights
 
Last edited by a moderator:

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
2,166
559
This thread is representative of the effects of a two party political system doused with human greed and disrespect. Both sides are valid. Both sides are destroying a civil society over principle. Both sides are destroying the 30A brand. It is both sad and predictable. When we humans lose our will to compromise this is what happens and the consequences will divide people and hurt people. It is obvious that one side uses shame and disrespect along with Ancient English Law as a tactic and the other side uses power and influence to continue an unjust privilege. I really don't like using the word privilege because it has become a slogan of civil rights and even though it is true I believe it to me taken out of context almost as much as it is used appropriately.

I do believe in property rights and I know that these property owners are tired of being shamed and disrespected for wanting control of the land that they bought and paid for. I understand the problems with all that but aren't you missing the bigger picture? You have to admit that it is easy to justify our good fortune but hard to justify how our economic system is rigged in your favor. Go ahead and stick with the principle and others will resent. I wish sharing and generosity was a driving human will but apparently you feel justified to defend your property rights. I do understand but feel very sad for you because you are missing something.

I do believe in Customary Use and I understand the benefits to a just society but do you have to shame and disrespect everyone that disagrees with you? I understand the resentment and it is justified but we need to do be more civil. The tactics that you are using hurt people and it is just plain wrong. There is no reason for it because I want to believe that there was a civil solution to the problems. Now you have forced property owners to defend their property ownership. Many of you hide behind false names and throw out insults at a level that is damaging to society. I think you are also missing the bigger picture.

I feel like property owners will not attack me personally for my beliefs but Customary Use supporters will ridicule, diminish and shame for having any opinion different than theirs. I consider myself a progressive but why do you think people like me will support conservative values? Until the liberal side understands this they will keep losing...
 

jodiFL

Beach Fanatic
Jul 28, 2007
2,479
709
SOWAL,FL
So you are admitting that there is a clouded title? Why would anyone buy something (property,car or whatever) that doesnt have a clear insurable title to it? Not sure what a lien has to do with it? If a property has any kind of lien on it (tax,construction,mortgage) it is a "clouded title". As for the "preponderance of the EVIDENCE'...what about the others that havent been properly notified about the "judgement" and havent had a chance to respond? (BFOs know all about that little issue). Do you think that posting something in The Defuniak Herald is going to a proper way to notify any people that may have interest in property their grandparents left them 50 years ago that live in LA,Bham,etc? What about a mortgage company in Louisiana that didnt get paid in the foreclosure fiasco several years ago?
 

Dave Rauschkolb

Beach Fanatic
Jul 13, 2005
1,006
790
Santa Rosa Beach
5 County Commissioners in Walton County voted 5 to zero to affirm Customary Use as an ordinance. 5 County Commissioners voted 5 to zero to proceed with the process set forth in HB 631. 14,000 people signed affidavits affirming they have customarily used our beaches dispite claims private beachfront owners dispute that use. It's in the courts and we will see the outcome. I am confident those who have used the beaches as they always have will have their customary use affirmed regardless of private ownership. It's pretty simple. We will tell anyone willing to listen what we believe. We all have a right to continue using our beaches as we always have. The opposing view disagrees. They say the beaches have always been private. It's a matter of opinion. Sorry if you folks feel overwhelmed with sentiment towards customary use; more people just believe what we believe; that will always be the case. I'm sorry you feel outnumbered on this subject; the truth is you will always be outnumbered; just wait until this issue enters the national dialog. We are standing up for our beliefs and you, yours.

There will always be bad actors, out of control with personal attacks. We don't condone that, nor can we control that as people say and do things on impulse without thinking; plenty of examples of Private Beachfront owners treating beachgoers with disrespect. We, Florida Beaches For All, do not personally attack people and have treated those with private property on the beaches with respect. We will defend ourselves when attacked though. I am sure those folks at Florida Coastal Property Rights don't condone bad actors on the other side either.

You have all heard me on the record many times in the public realm in many BCC/County meetings vocalize that we should treat each other with respect. When we participated in the Stand your Sand events I asked participants to conduct themselves with respect and they did with no incidents. I have been called all sorts of names and lists of Customary use advocates have been published as though they are criminals on the Watchdog Blog (recently removed). Attempts to intimidate any and all Customary Use advocates that number in the tens of thousands have and will fail. Attempts to silence hard working Realtors on their opinions supporting Customary Use have and will fail. Attempts to call us all liars who just need to accept private beaches will fail. It's pretty clear we are all in this for the long run. I have had, for years civil discussions with opposing opinions; many of whom are my friends. We just disagree with you Reggie Gaskins or whoever you are with your fake name and all you others who don't stand out of the shadows as yourselves.

This utterly silly attempt at trying to paint CU supporters as ruining the legacy of 30A is truly ridiculous and yet another desperate tactic to silence the voices of ordinary beachgoers who have used the beaches for generations. The actions of a handful of private beachfront owners, political operatives, politicians and past politicians and lawyers going all the way back to the stop beach nourishment movement are responsible for any legacy damage that has and may occur. Our beaches have and aways have defined our 30A legacy and the actions of the few have damaged that legacy. It's about OUR beaches and we are going to work on many tracks regardless of intimidation, shaming or whatever may come to affirm our rights to continue using our beaches. A Judge in Walton County will decide, then many others will decide in other courts. Or, perhaps the people of Florida will decide. One way or the other this goes far beyond any of us. We hope to restore our Walton County beaches to their natural balance; shared, Customary Use. That's our aim and it's our opinion, that we have always had a right to those beaches and nothing and no one is going to stop us from using whatever legal means to that end.
 
Last edited:

FloridaBeachBum

Beach Fanatic
Feb 9, 2017
463
112
Santa Rosa Beach
This thread is representative of the effects of a two party political system doused with human greed and disrespect. Both sides are valid. Both sides are destroying a civil society over principle. Both sides are destroying the 30A brand. It is both sad and predictable. When we humans lose our will to compromise this is what happens and the consequences will divide people and hurt people. It is obvious that one side uses shame and disrespect along with Ancient English Law as a tactic and the other side uses power and influence to continue an unjust privilege. I really don't like using the word privilege because it has become a slogan of civil rights and even though it is true I believe it to me taken out of context almost as much as it is used appropriately.

I do believe in property rights and I know that these property owners are tired of being shamed and disrespected for wanting control of the land that they bought and paid for. I understand the problems with all that but aren't you missing the bigger picture? You have to admit that it is easy to justify our good fortune but hard to justify how our economic system is rigged in your favor. Go ahead and stick with the principle and others will resent. I wish sharing and generosity was a driving human will but apparently you feel justified to defend your property rights. I do understand but feel very sad for you because you are missing something.

I do believe in Customary Use and I understand the benefits to a just society but do you have to shame and disrespect everyone that disagrees with you? I understand the resentment and it is justified but we need to do be more civil. The tactics that you are using hurt people and it is just plain wrong. There is no reason for it because I want to believe that there was a civil solution to the problems. Now you have forced property owners to defend their property ownership. Many of you hide behind false names and throw out insults at a level that is damaging to society. I think you are also missing the bigger picture.

I feel like property owners will not attack me personally for my beliefs but Customary Use supporters will ridicule, diminish and shame for having any opinion different than theirs. I consider myself a progressive but why do you think people like me will support conservative values? Until the liberal side understands this they will keep losing...
Thanks for your prospective. Your premise seems to be beachfront property owners are rich selfish and undeserving of their labor or success with power and influence to contradict the law. I do not mind sharing our beachfront but that is my choice; not the BCC or Dave Rauschkolb's "Your sand is my sand" silly ditty.
Our family bought beachfront here many decades ago for hundreds of thousands - not millions of dollars when 30A was an unknown paradise. I have a day job. Our family is not unique. We’ve paid much more in property taxes over the years than we paid for the property. Our good fortune is because we worked hard and were able to purchase beachfront at market value that we pay taxes on for that privilege. Nobody gave us anything and we shared our beach over the decades.
The Walton BCC is trying to take our Constitutional rights (Walton BCC have the burden of proof) and 650+ of the 1192 beachfront parcel owners have the will and privilege to able to defend our rights with our own hard earned money. That makes me and I’m guessing many of the 4,500 other beachfront owners angry. This about life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness embodied in the Constitution that protects every individual private property owner. If you want to point fingers point at the inept Walton political leaders now and over the decades; not the beachfront owners.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

FloridaBeachBum

Beach Fanatic
Feb 9, 2017
463
112
Santa Rosa Beach
5 County Commissioners in Walton County voted 5 to zero to affirm Customary Use as an ordinance. 5 County Commissioners voted 5 to zero to proceed with the process set forth in HB 631. 14,000 people signed affidavits affirming they have customarily used our beaches dispite claims private beachfront owners dispute that use. It's in the courts and we will see the outcome.
Dave, more rhetoric? "silence the voices of ordinary beachgoers"? We want you to tell us on what basis do you support customary use of private property? So far it's been because customary use of private property just has been. Ancient is only one of many criteria of custom that the preponderance of evidence has to prove. You inform and repeat your rhetoric and polls and we'll present property rights with the verifiable facts.

Politicians can not declare/affirm customary use of private property. That's why Florida Statue 163.035 was passed. I'll see your 5 Walton Commissioners and raise with a 2018 state legislature super majority including local FL Rep Brad Drake invalidating any county's customary use ordinance (that had not been to court FIRST). Polls have no legal meaning; unless you are a politician. A million affidavits will not mean anything unless the judge finds that any of them comply with the rules of evidence. Attorney Daniel Ulhfelder should be able to tell you that. There is NO right to use private property owners have had since 1776 and today without consent. Even BCC declared customary-use uses is very limited. Nine (I think) activities that shall be at least ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and free from dispute. Ancient English common law custom has more than four criteria. Can you or Daniel Ulhfelder explain these criteria for us please? CUnCourt.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

kayti elliott

Beach Lover
Feb 19, 2014
151
87
31
Freeport
I'm not a beachfront owner or someone who really has a dog in the hunt, but I'm ready for this matter to be settled by the courts. After reading most of the arguments from both sides, it seems to be a question of whether English common law trumps established laws. I kind of thought the Revolutionary War did away with the ancient laws of England.
 

FloridaBeachBum

Beach Fanatic
Feb 9, 2017
463
112
Santa Rosa Beach
So you are admitting that there is a clouded title? Why would anyone buy something (property,car or whatever) that doesnt have a clear insurable title to it? Not sure what a lien has to do with it? If a property has any kind of lien on it (tax,construction,mortgage) it is a "clouded title". As for the "preponderance of the EVIDENCE'...what about the others that havent been properly notified about the "judgement" and havent had a chance to respond? (BFOs know all about that little issue). Do you think that posting something in The Defuniak Herald is going to a proper way to notify any people that may have interest in property their grandparents left them 50 years ago that live in LA,Bham,etc? What about a mortgage company in Louisiana that didnt get paid in the foreclosure fiasco several years ago?
No. Admitting nothing. You are confusing clear title with a clouded title IMO. In the Walton quiet title litigation between private property owners there was NO encumbrance that might invalidate or impair or cloud the parcel owner's title.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
New posts