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

FloridaBeachBum

Beach Fanatic
Feb 9, 2017
463
112
Santa Rosa Beach
CU believers perceive facts that point out false CU beliefs (lack credibility) as attacks on CU believers personally. Like a belly-button everyone can have an opinion. But not all opinions are credible. I guess if CU believers have no alternative facts to dispute the facts; they have to resort to claims of being “attacked” ... by the facts. Which shows the lack of CU believer’s credibility.

mputnal believes the sand and beach are not “normal land”. Heard recently from other BPOs that local REALTORS believe the same thing. Guess REALTORS are CU believers too.
#2033 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
“The sandy beach is unlike normal land in that sand is formed in the ocean and deposited along the coastline.”

Science has shown the facts are “this [FL panhandle] sand came from a process [of water erosion] involving the Appalachian Mountains and the Apalachicola River 20,000 years ago.” History of our Sand
New Judge for Florida-Georgia Water War - Southeast AgNET
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/af/e5/0f/afe50fc6cab66ca37bd0a415472768de.jpg

#1985 “Again, please understand that the State of Florida owns the sandy beach and we all share it.”
#1994 6. “... The sand is owned by the State of Florida. ...”
Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
#1996 “In other words the [BPO’s] deeds are inaccurate or incomplete at best.”

With this non-linear thinking can you concluded that people from Atlanta can own the Walton dry white quartz sand (land) washed down from the Appalachian Mountains and the Apalachicola River?

Just not credible CU beliefs or opinions no matter how many times CU believers say them.

DanaMarie thank you for your insight and two-cents as a Walton (American) property owner.
By the way the Walton Sheriff has used the term “hooligans” in his CU FB video before. Testing the sand for Customary Use
 

EZ4144

Beach Lover
Aug 6, 2005
194
107
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.
You should get permission before posting someone else material.
 

EZ4144

Beach Lover
Aug 6, 2005
194
107
Think that was about the time that all the beachfront owners were scrambling to shore up the "cliffs" in front of their property and we had a commissioner with a seawall side business that was more than happy to push "permits" through without going through the state like they were supposed to.
Ro Cuchens - remember a pic on here somewhere of him beside a mountain of illegal brown sand on the beach.
 

SUP View

Beach Comber
Jul 22, 2019
48
43
Above Water
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?

Agree 100% DanaMarie. It has NEVER been about the elite, wealthy or powerful BFO's. Although those words could describe some CU supporters who will benefit from a large increase in tourists / visitors / developers should they be able to promote that private property is now open to all comers.

The perception of a cooperative endeavor agreement between the major CU backers and the WCC has never been stronger. Although I do agree with the opinion of many that the WCC are realizing that the tax money they are using to fight this battle are coming into question from many sides. Particularly when the BFO's legal challenge is stronger than they expected.

Thank you for the facts noted DanaMarie, hopefully they will not be "overlooked" by the CU supporters.
 

BlueMtnBeachVagrant

Beach Fanatic
Jun 20, 2005
1,289
375
You should get permission before posting someone else material.
Just call it “Pre-discovery” since Dave (FBFA) is suing me and 1100+ other private property parcels (and associated owners) for having title to and defending private property.


Added: Some people think I have a personal issue with David Rauschkolb. Well DUH! He’s suing me!

Some people may need reminding...It’s not just he county who is trying to take away our private property rights, it’s also Dave Rauschkolb directly being the chairman of Florida Beaches For All who is now a co-plaintiff.

I do know all the lies, mistruths and emotional pleas that Dave Rauschkolb exudes on all forms of social media obviously won’t make one iota of a difference in court. We all know that.

Dave’s purpose, in my educated opinion, is only to rally his following in order for them to demand that their commissioners not give up this customary lawsuit lunacy.

So the way I see it, the more truth that is exposed to those with a truly open mind, maybe this will get back to the commissioners that they may be going down the wrong path. And hopefully they will rethink their strategy to “fix” the results of a hyper-successful TDC marketing campaign....too many tourist, not enough public facilities.
 
Last edited:

EZ4144

Beach Lover
Aug 6, 2005
194
107
Just call it “Pre-discovery” since Dave (FBFA) is suing me and 1100+ other private property parcels (and associated owners) for having title to and defending private property.


Added: Some people think I have a personal issue with David Rauschkolb. Well DUH! He’s suing me!

Some people may need reminding...It’s not just he county who is trying to take away our private property rights, it’s also Dave Rauschkolb directly being the chairman of Florida Beaches For All who is now a co-plaintiff.

I do know all the lies, mistruths and emotional pleas that Dave Rauschkolb exudes on all forms of social media obviously won’t make one iota of a difference in court. We all know that.

Dave’s purpose, in my educated opinion, is only to rally his following in order for them to demand that their commissioners not give up this customary lawsuit lunacy.

So the way I see it, the more truth that is exposed to those with a truly open mind, maybe this will get back to the commissioners that they may be going down the wrong path. And hopefully they will rethink their strategy to “fix” the results of a hyper-successful TDC marketing campaign....too many tourist, not enough public facilities.
Why so angry? Why make it personal?
 

FloridaBeachBum

Beach Fanatic
Feb 9, 2017
463
112
Santa Rosa Beach
I find it ironic that CU believer EZ4144, the master if the juvenile one-line BPO attacks and silly mojies, asks "Why so angry? Why make it personal? Cute.
Wonder why Dave Rauschkolb and mputnal never attack the majority CU believers with "anonymous" names?

#333 "greedy people."
#356 "always old rich people with nothing to do but spend their dyind days"
#437 "I for one look forward to you getting banned or slinking away soon as you cry and moan"
#789 "one lawyer/owner and a few sock puppets."
#934 : nuts :
#937 : trainwreck :: trainwreck :
#940 : trainwreck :: trainwreck :: trainwreck :: trainwreck :: trainwreck :
#1158 "Razor wire coming soon to a beach near you."
#1269 "Have you noticed that our world is ending soon because of runaway capitalism?"
#1272 "I'm just waiting on the revolution."
#1283 "OMG everybody! Retreat to our bama woods and load our guns!!!"
#1288 "The fact that beach front owners ... continue to spout propaganda is proof that either they know they are losing and venting frustration. Or ... va(i)nely can't keep their vindictive mouth shut."
#1309 "Expect the Supreme Court of the USA to rule that selling the beach was illegal. All the way back."
#1335 "Because those who call out the opposition by name while hiding are cowardly."
#1393 "Give me free beaches or give me death!"
#1396 "That's some class A bullshit spin right there my friends."
#1398 " don't need to keep repeating the BS over and over and over. Nothing better to do with your time? Doesn't your money need counting or something? I bet it's feeling neglected and lonely."
#1401 "Typical post from a victim troll. Do you even realize you remain trapped by the person who abused you as a child?"
#1426 "I don't want greedy people raping the beach. Or greedy people putting a chastity belt on it."
#1486 "you and your friends are soul crushers."
#1489 "Two typical elitist responses."
#1775 "Buzz Buzz"
#1778 "Buzz Buzz"
#1888 "Besides, even if you win you remain a greedy ahole to Beach lovers and neighbors. A million to one are odds not in your favor."

47 EZ4144 posts and not one fact; just juvenile whiny BPO attacks.

#914 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
"... if I came up to you and kicked you between the legs and then sued you; do you deny you would be angry at me? Or would you “abandon the ability to see a win-win?" why I kicked you between the legs?"

EZ4144, or any CU believer, how much of your personal money have you spent on this Walton Commissioner's CU litigation? A year later, well over a $1,000,000 in taxpayers legal fees on the Walton Commissioner’s side and Walton attorneys can not even get the basic FS163.035 BPO legal notices correct.

If you believe so strongly in CU would you be willing to place $15,000 of your own money in escrow and if BPOs prevail your money would go to reimburse BPOs legal fees? If CU prevails you get your money back. That’s skin in the game - not childish BPO name calling. If not, why not? Lets see how personal and angry you get when political police POWER attacks your private property rights by declaration that costs you many tens of thousands of dollars. CUnCourt.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Reggie Gaskins

Beach Lover
Oct 4, 2018
153
259
58
Blue Mountain Beach
I yield to the leadership and tenacity, professional research and communication, desire to find the truth and commitment to honesty, found in the many citizen contributors here, both the staples, and the impressive newcomers alike.

In recognition of their hard work and honest contributions, along with the very few CU supporters who have offered adult discourse, I applaud you all.

Alex’s post the other day reminded me a lot of how we got here. Since we’ve travelled nearly 7 months together on this thread, with 100+ pages of 2,000+ posts from 100,000+ views, I submit the following post to remind us of how this started, and how nothing has changed. Cheers!
 
Last edited:
New posts