Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

[mputnal]

Alex Miles I have been around a block or two with you power brokers. You are not asking questions for civil discussion, community feedback or anything positive. You have one point. One principle. One purpose here on this forum. This is about whether or not the beaches should be shared enjoyment or private enjoyment. Or as you put it exclusivity. All the other stuff is bravo sierra. I have offered more than a few times to sponsor a community gathering like a redneck fish fry and class it up with Reggie/Regina's favorite and vastly superior drink so those questions could be asked and answered by real people. Those questions coming from you and the other power brokers are nothing but a trap. You do not care about an answer for those questions. You hide your name. You post nothing but shame. It is your game. It is really lame. If you really want answers to those questions why not show up in person. I wonder if you would have the spinal fortitude to ask anyone if they are a two faced jerk or a predatory perv to their face. I wonder. Just something to think about at Thanksgiving

Kathryn, I am not sure what you mean. I have no judgement about you or anyone else. I might disagree with you. I might not understand you. But I do not judge you. I am a small business person and have been around the economic block or two. I understand how our economic system works and it is not working fairly or equally. Reggie/Regina even admits this. Elite wealth does not pay the same fraction of their income as you and I. Many have off shore bank accounts or take advantage of loop holes that are not available for you and I. I do not protest their wealth and I do not admire their wealth. I am too old. Too tired to care that much anymore. As long as they leave me alone I am good with their success. But now they are wanting private enjoyment of a unique and limited resource that has been shared since the beginning. They shame the people and type bold statements meant to drown out the little ant voices. Stand up for yourself...

 

[kayti elliott]

Yep, I was right about one thing. You had the last word. Happy Thanksgiving. You too, Surfer Dude!

 

[DanaMarie]

A little background: I joined this forum 3-4 years ago when I was looking to purchase a house down here, which I did in 2016. So, while this is my first post, I did not join the forum specifically to post on this thread. While I’ve never posted before, I do read posts fairly often, and have been following this thread for a while. I’ve vacationed down here for 30+ years, sometimes for months at a time, so I’m very familiar with the area and how it has changed over the years.

I hesitated to post on this thread because posting about Customary Use seems like walking into a lion’s den. But I’ve been following this thread and am shocked at how much disinformation is being disseminated. I’m surprised how many posts say the beaches were always public or that the public always had use of the beaches until HB 631. That simply isn’t true. The Walton County Ordinance attempted to give the public use of private property, but without due process to the private property owners. HB 631 repealed the Ordinance and provided for due process. I’m surprised by the number of people that focus on the quieting of title, when the truth of the matter is that quieting title was simply clearing up clouds on title or transferring title from one private owner to another. Rarely, if ever, did it convey publicly owned beachfront to private property owners. I’m surprised at the number of posts saying the sand that is part of the private property owner’s deed is not taxed or is basically worthless because it can’t be built on. Taxes are based on value. Just compare the cost or value of a beachfront property to that of a property a tier or two back and you know the argument is false. The misinformation, negativity, and often-times name calling prompted me to post on this thread.

I wish I agreed with customary use, but I don’t. I don’t own beachfront property and would like nothing more than to be able to use the private property of beach front owners, but I don’t think I have the right to do so. What I wouldn’t give to have all of the tourists that are crowded onto the public beach areas spread out onto private property so there’s more room on the public beaches for me. But it is neither the private property owners’ fault that our beaches are so crowded nor is it their responsibility to share their backyard with those tourists, or with me for that matter. But just because I wish customary use was appropriate doesn’t make it so.

Many of the posts in this thread stereotype owners of beachfront property as greedy and selfish. Maybe some are, but I don’t think it has anything to do with customary use any more than some customary use supporters wanting something that doesn’t belong to them or some customary use supporters who want more area for tourists so that customary use supporters’ businesses can prosper. The economy was doing fine down here long before it became so crowded that you can’t find a place to park or get into a restaurant during high season. There was plenty of room to go to the beach with a cup of coffee in the morning, a chair and a book in the afternoon, or a glass of wine at sunset before the vendors took over.

Property rights in the U.S. are constitutionally protected. If we go down the path of confiscation, where does it end? Some will argue customary use doesn’t take the property away from the private property owners so it’s not confiscation. But it is if they don’t have the right to use their property to the exclusion of others. If Walton County wanted to grant a right of use to the public of private property, then an easement or use agreement should have been in place when the property was originally sold. If a use agreement or easement were in place, I bet the cost/value of those beachfront homes would have been much less and property taxes reduced significantly. Without a use agreement or easement, private beachfront owners have every right to rely on the deed to their property and to enforce their property rights. If Walton County wants eminent domain, an easement, or a use agreement, they should have to pay private property owners for it. I don’t like saying that at all, because if that is what happens, you know mine and everybody else’s taxes will pay for it. But we’re already paying for the lawsuit. And we all know that beachfront owners carry a much larger property tax burden than non-beachfront owners.

Just my two cents from a non-beachfront owner who does not support customer use.

I’ve tried very hard to be respectful, not to call anybody names or sling mud. Please be respectful in return.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

@DanaMarie , your first post reads like a symphony, not a misplayed note anywhere. It was like a breath of fresh crisp spring air. Thank you.

 

[mputnal]

DanaMarie, I commend you for posting your opinion. It is important for everyone to have a voice. Yes we should be able to be respectful even though we may disagree. Life is too short for all the shaming going on here for differing opinions. I look at this from the perspective of what happens next if the beaches are used for private enjoyment. I look at it from the perspective of future generations who may not have access to the beach if people with elite wealth and power entitle themselves to more and more beach front real estate. I know people who have more history here than I do and I trust their accounting of the way the beaches were shared in the past. I do not trust elite wealth and power to have my best interest in mind. The sandy beach is unlike normal land in that sand is formed in the ocean and deposited along the coastline. It is constantly shifting seaward then landward and up and down the beach. I also believe in property rights and of course the Constitution and so do other public recreational beach use supporters. But this is not about that. This is about individual power being used to exclude all people from the beach. We can disagree and that is okay but we should all have a voice. Repetitive posting is obnoxious and I realize I fit that description but I do not judge anyone or call people sick names. The only thing in dispute here is whether or not the beach is for private enjoyment or shared enjoyment. I use to think it could be both but once I started reading how elite wealth and power have given themselves a mandate for exclusive beach use, for greatness and for superior opinions I had to stand up and say enough is enough. I don't want the last word. I don't want something for nothing. I don't care about who has more money than someone else. I just believe that the beach is for shared enjoyment and that everyone should have a voice. If the Supreme Courts says I am wrong then I will abide by that decision. Until then we debate, we argue, we agree, we disagree but by all means we should be respectful...

 

[DanaMarie]

DanaMarie, I commend you for posting your opinion. It is important for everyone to have a voice. Yes we should be able to be respectful even though we may disagree. Life is too short for all the shaming going on here for differing opinions. I look at this from the perspective of what happens next if the beaches are used for private enjoyment. I look at it from the perspective of future generations who may not have access to the beach if people with elite wealth and power entitle themselves to more and more beach front real estate. I know people who have more history here than I do and I trust their accounting of the way the beaches were shared in the past. I do not trust elite wealth and power to have my best interest in mind. The sandy beach is unlike normal land in that sand is formed in the ocean and deposited along the coastline. It is constantly shifting seaward then landward and up and down the beach. I also believe in property rights and of course the Constitution and so do other public recreational beach use supporters. But this is not about that. This is about individual power being used to exclude all people from the beach. We can disagree and that is okay but we should all have a voice. Repetitive posting is obnoxious and I realize I fit that description but I do not judge anyone or call people sick names. The only thing in dispute here is whether or not the beach is for private enjoyment or shared enjoyment. I use to think it could be both but once I started reading how elite wealth and power have given themselves a mandate for exclusive beach use, for greatness and for superior opinions I had to stand up and say enough is enough. I don't want the last word. I don't want something for nothing. I don't care about who has more money than someone else. I just believe that the beach is for shared enjoyment and that everyone should have a voice. If the Supreme Courts says I am wrong then I will abide by that decision. Until then we debate, we argue, we agree, we disagree but by all means we should be respectful...

I don’t believe it’s about elite wealth or power. Many beachfront owners saved the majority of their lifetimes to be able to afford beachfront, and others handed down property from generation to generation. Sure, there are the mega-mansions owned by the wealthy, but that isn’t the point. This is about property rights plain and simple. If you can take their land, what prevents me from thinking I have the right to take over your business? Who decides that the beach/sand doesn’t count as true/real property because it’s created by mother nature, but pine straw from trees in forests that have been around forever is different?

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Time to slice and dice a post from Dave Raushkolb posted Nov 13, 2019 on Facebook:

House Bill 631 was written by some of the very attorneys and law firms representing beach front owners. It was meant to be cumbersome for any county in Florida to go to the trouble of ensuring their beaches stayed open to the public as they always have been. Still in complete denial that the county cannot take private property without due process and that's what HB631 simply reiterated. And if the part "...open to the public as they always have been" was true, this thread and the law suit would not exist. But it does make a great rally cry!

Having said that this notice issue has plagued the county from the beginning. But, regardless of whatever hoops they and we have to jump through, regardless of the amount of time it takes and regardless of whatever financial cost is incurred it’s going to be worth it in the end to ensure our beaches remain our beaches, a shared resource. Does Dave know something we don't? Almost sounds like the front-line may be wavering a bit. Oh yeah, Judge Green issued an order on Nov 14 denying county's motion for rehearing regarding the notification screw-ups. The county hasn't even started down the real legal road and yet they can't get their act together regarding notifications. Cliff Notes: beach front owners that were properly notified but DID NOT file a motion to intervene are off the hook from the customary lawsuit for now because they did not acknowledge (via a motion to intervene) that the county did not properly notify all beach front owners - pretty bad after all this time.

The use of the beaches of all of Florida for all of Florida's citizens and visitors is priceless. It’s an endless gift that is shared with every resident and every visitor going back hundreds and thousands of years to this very day. Excluding the public and our visitors from any beach is ludicrous. Not too ludicrous - over 2000 beachfront owners (over half the beach front parcels) officially disagree with Dave. And I'm guessing the county is having second thoughts.

So over 600 parcels have filed motion to intervene. The rest of the parcels are apparently are not part of the lawsuit if they didn't file a motion to intervene. Go figure.

The loudest voices that are driving this private beach train are beachfront homes closest to Public Beach Accesses. I have been a proponent of tightening the rules near Public Beach Accesses to address the complaints from Beach front owners. But it appears that “behavior“ is just a false flag when really it’s always been about excluding the public and declaring beaches behind their homes private all the long. They see and realize the value of exclusion and exclusivity for their own financial gain all the while homes that are across the street and in nearby neighborhoods of some of these beach accesses will see property values decline and rental incomes decline as well. What they have done is not fair to every person who has ever invested here and visited here.
Property values have absolutely NOTHING to do with customary use - again not one of the 4 cornerstones of customary use. And Dave made a comment on Facebook, when challenged, that he's not a hypocrite regarding his gated Watersound subdivision. In the end, their gate and fence accomplishes the same exclusivity, without a doubt. It's the lipstick on a pig thing someone mentioned.

The only path to fairness is to restore our beaches from the dune line to the water line for all. They hope to silence our voices and they have a fantasy that we may get used to not having the full use of our beaches but it is just that, a fantasy. Dave's concept of fairness is, indeed, a made-up fantasy which has no place in the bundle of private property rights.

This issue crosses the cultural and political divide that plagues our country. Conservatives and liberals predominately support open public beaches and not private exclusive beaches. Every politician in Florida knows this and the day will come when they will have to right this wrong because it’s not about left and right or conservative or liberal it truly is about right and wrong and it is wrong to exclude people from any beach in Florida. Has overtones of @mputnal righteousness.

Why do people come to Florida? To spend money and get sunburned. It’s the beaches. Why do people invest in Florida? To own private property along with the right to exclude, hopefully get a return for their investment, fish, drink mai-tais and swim all at the same time. It’s the Beaches. Why do people move here and raise their children? To teach them how to be surfer dudes and dudettes. It’s the Beaches. The beach is Florida’s heartbeat. So is a Chevrolet. A continuous ribbon of life from the Gulf of Mexico to the Atlantic. Our common shared border. It’s the beaches and they are all of ours. Florida’s beaches, Americas beaches. Sorry, none of the above are listed in the 4 cornerstones of customary use even though that last description did bring tears to my eyes.

 

[mputnal]

I don’t believe it’s about elite wealth or power. Many beachfront owners saved the majority of their lifetimes to be able to afford beachfront, and others handed down property from generation to generation. Sure, there are the mega-mansions owned by the wealthy, but that isn’t the point. This is about property rights plain and simple. If you can take their land, what prevents me from thinking I have the right to take over your business? Who decides that the beach/sand doesn’t count as true/real property because it’s created by mother nature, but pine straw from trees in forests that have been around forever is different?

Okay so I am going to ask you to please be respectful. You obviously know my business but I do not know yours which is okay as long as we are civil. BTW the organic life of a pine needle is very similar to the life of many agricultural products which are consumed. Both are consumed. One is consumed by humans and other organic life and the other is consumed by the elements that make up earth. Sand is different. It is not consumed. It has a shelf life of forever and it does not stay in any one place.

I really do not have a problem with those bfo's who saved their money to build on the beach or those that had the property handed down. We are talking modest and many are on pilings which I believe is less exclusive. Now imagine the beaches lined with visually exclusive mega-mansions as you say. Add to that the exclusive use of the beach behind the exclusive mega-mansions. This will happen in the near future because this is a valuable resource and guess who already owns over 50% of our available land resources? Okay so you say you are okay with that but I am not okay with that so do we keep arguing about who is right and who is wrong or just let the court figure it out? This is not a court room and we all have opinions! Your opinion is important. My opinion is important. Yes even these power brokers have an opinion and it is important. But the point is we are expressing opinions. When there are facts on both sides we as a community need to find compromises. If one side will not listen to the facts of the other side or attack those facts as being less than then we have a problem of civility and respect. We can argue all day and night and not solve anything that way and actually make things worse. That is what this thread intended. Create enough fear and anger that the government can take away your property rights and well isn't it obvious what the reaction will be?

My point here is that we just need to listen to each other and figure out a compromise. Apparently the County realized that something changed on our beaches regarding shared enjoyment and they had to do something about it. I am not letting the County off with being without fault here but what else could they do? The power brokers are adamant on exclusion. There are no other disputes regarding property rights but that power to exclude people from the beach. Those bfo's that you are referring to have always practiced shared enjoyment of the beach but something changed. Do you think it is possible that those with political influence believe that the Supreme Court will agree with exclusive private beach enjoyment? If you do I see a big risk in that it will be costly and not a slam dunk. We did take land from the native Americans and sent them packing. How do you get around that? Coastal boundaries are constantly changing because the forces of nature are greater than the forces of man. How do you get around that? Land use is a conservative application of property law and the public has no way of knowing where property lines are. How do you get around that? The Sandy beaches were formed in the sea and deposited on the coastline so who owns the sand. How do you get around that. When a public recreational beach uses the beach where are the boundaries? How do you get around that. Of course the power brokers have facts but there are many facts here that our Justice System will now have to figure out because the community was not able to compromise on exclusive private enjoyment or shared public enjoyment. It just seems like common sense should have led to a compromise but why do you think compromise was not an option? Because elite power does not compromise...

 

[mputnal]

Yep, that would be about right but I don't think it is the actual definition which is "gang like mentality". Sheesh could I run with that... Listen we should try and find our civility genes. What is wrong with being civil and respectful? What is wrong with disagreement if we do it with civility and respectful behavior. Truth has perspective. Honor has process. Our justice system is the appropriate place truth and honor. This forum is about community where people engage and interact with each other. We have to listen to both sides otherwise it will be chaos if one side believes they have the prime directive of all things. I will be the first to apologize if I hurt anyone with my words because that was not my intent. I believe it is time for all of us to move on and live and let live. Hard feelings are not worth being right or justified. Can we all agree that life is short and so we need to enjoy the time we have? If we could all just agree to be happy and joyous that life is good and people are good and the future is good...why is that so hard? The court will figure this thing out. Why not we all stop posting the same things over and over? I will try my very best to not post on this thread again...I know I said that before but this time I will try harder.

 

[Reggie Gaskins]

I really do hate to distract from the new, very intelligent, and salient voices in the room. But I must confess in their defense...I am the guilty party who typed the word...

Hooligan;

One who drums up emotional mob mentality in a community by broadcasting inflating and knowingly false info to public

One who Intentionally creates community division through staged video ambush events aimed at elevating discourse and community tension

One who avoids adult discussion on facts, and resorts to censoring all opposition voices and thoughts

One who discloses sensitive personal information on those in disagreement with his views, for the sole purpose of intimidation and silencing of any opposition

Hooligan, noun, indigenous to civic areas acutely susceptible to local bully tactics and dysfunctional authority