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

Reggie Gaskins

Beach Lover
Oct 4, 2018
153
259
58
Blue Mountain Beach
PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT

Fully Understanding Shiner Bock at a cafe in Lamont, FL, is like fully comprehending;
Glacier migrating white quartz sand distribution
Sea turtle dune nesting behavior
Dune lake outfalls
Ghost crab habitat
Sea oats environment requirements
Human impact on dune growth
Sand dune regeneration dynamics
Human impact on beach habitats
All by visiting 30A for a vacation week.

You’ll ONLY understand Shiner Bock after years of attending “Come and Take It”, or buying a pair of Naconas in Lott, or “Tubing the Lupe”, or hunting in the “Muy Grande”, or putting an empty Lone Star Longneck in the hands of an upside down roadkill armadillo, or swimming in Balmorea, or touring the Spoetzl.

Metaphorically analogous?
 
Last edited:

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
1,938
477
Reggie/Regina, I think you are trying to tell my that you out class me or something of that nature. Well, at least I know now how important you must be to this universe :). If something ever brings you back down to planet earth let me know and I will cook us up some vittles and open a few buds...
 

Stone Cold J

Beach Lover
Jun 6, 2019
150
171
SRB
SCJ, The economics is not an issue relevant to the lawsuit.

Mputnal, the reason the lawsuit was filed was all about the money and not “access to the beach”. The BCC ordinance for 2013 and prior years CONFIRMS private property Rights. Those rights have been recognized and confirmed in court for decades. The smoking gun was found and exposed in the 2016 BCC special meeting minutes. This is solely about Power Brokers and the chase for billions of development dollars for developers and businessmen. Guess we found who was holding the pair of pocket 10’s.

And as BBBV pointed out, the economy is not one of the 4 cornerstones of customary use lawsuit, the BCC is suing BPO's on the STATEMENT that taking away private property rights (right of excision) is ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and without dispute. And so far not one of the Plaintiffs or any other person, including you, has provided any answers to those claims. Dave and Dan's deposition should be very interesting and provide a lot more information. I don't think any other depositions will be needed.
 

Dave Rauschkolb

Beach Fanatic
Jul 13, 2005
1,006
790
Santa Rosa Beach
Mputnal, the reason the lawsuit was filed was all about the money and not “access to the beach”. The BCC ordinance for 2013 and prior years CONFIRMS private property Rights. Those rights have been recognized and confirmed in court for decades. The smoking gun was found and exposed in the 2016 BCC special meeting minutes. This is solely about Power Brokers and the chase for billions of development dollars for developers and businessmen. Guess we found who was holding the pair of pocket 10’s.

And as BBBV pointed out, the economy is not one of the 4 cornerstones of customary use lawsuit, the BCC is suing BPO's on the STATEMENT that taking away private property rights (right of excision) is ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and without dispute. And so far not one of the Plaintiffs or any other person, including you, has provided any answers to those claims. Dave and Dan's deposition should be very interesting and provide a lot more information. I don't think any other depositions will be needed.

More never ending Bravo Sierra
 

Stone Cold J

Beach Lover
Jun 6, 2019
150
171
SRB
More never ending Bravo Sierra

Which part is Bravo Sierra?

1. The part of the 2013 and previous Walton County Beach Ordinances which proved the BCC recognized deeded private property rights?

2. The 2016 Special Minutes prepared by the BCC which documented the change of strategy to launch lawsuit for financial gain?

3. The inability of the Plaintiff to say WHY it is reasonable to remove property rights from legally deeded private property owners which have been CONFIRMED in COURT?

4. The inability of the Plaintiff to say WHAT evidence has shown going to every single parcel in the 26 mile stretch from the mean high tide line to the dunes has been used without interruption?

5. The inability of the Plaintiff to say WHEN this issue was WITHOUT DISPUTE as specified in the County Lawsuit?
 

Rachael Ashman McKee

Beach Lover
May 21, 2012
58
28
Seacrest
Mputnal. I FINALLY FOUND WHAT CHANGED IN 2016.

First, Fact or Fiction is totally correct. The 2013 Walton County Beach Ordinance Chapter 22 is as follows:

Sec. 22-52. - Customary use.

This chapter makes no finding of fact that the public either has or has not customarily used any particular piece of gulf front property beach.

(Ord. No. 2013-04, § 2, 1-22-13)

But something happened in 2016 for the BCC to change direction that they now claim that they (BCC) actually control Property Rights in Walton County (Right of Exclusion) instead of the Private Property Owners, whose rights had been recognized for GENERATIONS! The evidence is in the March 16, 2016 BCC Special Workshop. If you need a full copy, please ask Danny Glidewell.

“The following Board Members were present: Commissioner Sara Comander, Chairman; Commissioner Cecilia Jones, Vice-Chairman; Commissioner W. N. (Bill) Chapman; and Commissioner Cindy Meadows. Mr. Larry Jones, County Administrator, and Attorney Mark
Davis, County Attorney, and Attorney Sidney Noyes, Assistant County Attorney, were also present. Attorney David Theriaque was present on behalf of Walton County.”

“Attorney Theriaque presented the following information relating to the economic impacts of tourism: Tourism has a $2.9 billion direct economic impact annually to Walton County; 19,500 jobs are directly related to tourism; $202 million was spent on tourists' accommodations in June and July of 2015; south Walton County was the #1 Coastal Economy in Florida for tourism in June and July of2015; and 3.2 million tourists visit south Walton County every year. By not allowing the public/tourists on the beaches it would bring substantial economic harm to the county.

“Mr. David Ravschkolb spoke about the economic impacts which are self-evident”

“Mr. Jimmy Kuhn, a member of the Emerald Coast Chapter of The Surfrider Foundation … offered three suggestions: 1) he urged the county to enforce obstructions in the Beach Ordinance; 2) step in and intervene to protect the public beach access use when threatened by beach front
property owners; and 3) urge the county to pass a Customary Use Ordinance for all 26 miles of the beach from the base of the dunes to the Gulf of Mexico. He asked to keep the beaches public either by acquisition, legislation, enforcement, or even litigation.(looks like the BCC decided to start with litigation instead of acquisition, legislation, and enforcement).

“Mr. Bruce Anderson, Okaloosa County resident and local attorney, stated he has spent much time on the beaches. Mr. Anderson stated he has assisted homeowners and associations regarding this issue relating to the impacts on homeowners. He stated there is a failure of Sheriffs Office to enforce the trespass laws. He felt this Board is looking at taking property and overlooking the rights of landowners. His clients will pursue litigation.”

“Mr. Kent Safriet, Hopping Green & Sams, Tallahassee, stated he was present on behalf of multiple residents. Mr. Safriet felt Mr. Theriaque's information was presented as an advocate for the county and did not give both pros and cons to provide all of the necessary information. He
spoke regarding the magnitude of a lawsuit. Mr. Safriet recommended obtaining independent neutral advice in order to do the right thing for taxpayers.”


So looks what changed in 2016 is the BCC is chasing the development and $2.9 Billion impact of new tourists dollars and decided the easiest way was to try and take away property rights that have existed, and recognized by the BCC in previous ordinances, from the legally deeded property owner for exclusive use (right of exclusion) by the BCC. So this is not about allow locals access to the beach, but trying to make billions of new dollars for developers and businessmen. The power brokers are NOT the private property owners. The power brokers are the BCC (or those that might be paying the BCC) and developers and local businessmen out to make a quick buck at the exploitation and potential rapid demise of our unique and sensitive ecosystem. Dave said there would only a “few property owners” objecting to losing private property rights (right of exclusion) and recommended a lawsuit with “no compromise” and “no matter the cost”. If this happens, it won’t be long before beach bars, tattoo parlors, and t-shirt shops dominate 30A, because this is about exploitation and power brokers making money and not access to the beach or the deeded private property owners in Walton County.
Also remember the SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) for the beaches. One of the many requirements from the Sheriff’s department was to mark your private property.
 

mputnal

Beach Fanatic
Nov 10, 2009
1,938
477
Scj, I do not know where you are from but I do know that you have no clue about the people or the beaches in this community. Let’s just say that credible relevant information is not your thing. If it were you and yours would not keep hiding behind your computer and put a face to the accusations of real people and attacks on truth.
 

Rachael Ashman McKee

Beach Lover
May 21, 2012
58
28
Seacrest
...and also, my children asked me not to post while they have been working in Seaside, high school/ college breaks because of the obvious ram rod of one sidedness. So anyone all horny for the truth from a BFO who uses her real name, let’s go...and be sweet
 

BlueMtnBeachVagrant

Beach Fanatic
Jun 20, 2005
1,289
375
Dave [Rauschkolb] and Dan's [Uhlfelder’s] deposition should be very interesting and provide a lot more information. I don't think any other depositions will be needed.

More never ending Bravo Sierra

Which part is Bravo Sierra?

I think it’s self evident. Dave is referring to his highly anticipated testimony under oath. Do you think Dave and Dan are going to coach each other as to their testimony? Should be interesting if not entertaining. However, they have both spouted their EXPOSED LIES AND MISTRUTHS for so long that rehearsals aren’t necessary....OH WAIT! They’ll be under oath. Without lies, mistruths and the non-relevant economic argument, they’ve got nothing.

BTW, can opposing counsel be deposed when he is affiliated with (helped create and nurture) Florida Beaches for All and filed as co-plaintiff?

First we have Perry Mason, then Matlock and now the Dave & Dan Comedy Hour.
 
Last edited:
New posts