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.
mp, what a futile attempt at twisting words. Alex was merely pointing out your obvious strawman fallacy of what's causing the division.
If the county government wants to confiscate private property without compensation. it obviously belongs in the courts. The BCC also claims this lawsuit is “without dispute”. Do you think it is without dispute? You seem willing to spend $50,000,000 to see if the courts think this is "without dispute" as the County claims. And sued for what? Merely for owning private property, some of which has been in their family for generations. You can't blame property owners if that leaves a bad taste in their mouth.
Nobody, and I mean nobody, likes being sued, and you should know that.
Nice try, though.
If the county government wants to confiscate private property without compensation. it obviously belongs in the courts. The BCC also claims this lawsuit is “without dispute”. Do you think it is without dispute? You seem willing to spend $50,000,000 to see if the courts think this is "without dispute" as the County claims. And sued for what? Merely for owning private property, some of which has been in their family for generations. You can't blame property owners if that leaves a bad taste in their mouth.
Nobody, and I mean nobody, likes being sued, and you should know that.
Nice try, though.
Last edited:
Wait, I’m confused. When is it socialism and when is it something else that’s socialism but if you use it or support it you’re not a socialist? Are the farmers with no market for their products taking bail out money socialists? Maybe temporary socialists, yea that’s it.
Ah, Florida Beach Bum thanks so much for placing links to the many reasoned responses I have posted regarding this issue. Here's one that really says it all. An oldie but a goodie.
"OK, Fact Or Fiction appreciate your point it is density driven and the concern is that there’s too many people and too many variances given. That’s why I worked very hard for three years with amazing people I am now lifelong friends with and are on both sides of the aisle and even this issue. And I spent nearly $40,000 of my own money to rally support to incorporate South Walton but those worried about taxes going up crushed that opportunity to have local representation. And some others who don’t want any control over development had a considerable influence as well.
The thing that bothers me is that those who are here and have theirs are trying to say I’ve got mine and we don’t want anybody else. Well, that’s not the way it works. Special places attract people and the people who invariably come require infrastructure and accommodations where they want to recreate. I’ve said it 1 million times “these are the good old days for the people just now moving here.”. Like in any city rules are created and enforcement is essential. If people don’t follow the rules and they are not enforced then there is anarchy. No one wants that so yes, we have to hold a representative officials accountable. However, changing the rules so drastically that it eliminates large swaths of the very reason why people come here is not acceptable under any conditions. I was the first person to step up and offer solutions that actually were adopted. I engaged with beachfront owners to try to solve the problem but the die was cast and they wanted the whole apple and they currently have it. I truly believe that it’s temporary though.
I’m willing to sit down and work on solutions and I appreciate the fact that you addressed to me civilly without attacking me. By nature I’m an out-of-the-box thinker and a problem solver but this recent legislation in my book was yes, criminal and drastic and way out of line. So, how do we walk that back and restore our beaches to some semblance of shareable order? I’m wide-open to suggestions that don’t include excluding the public from using the sandy parts of the beaches as long as they follow the rules.
One thing we seem to agree on is that the vending of Beach Chairs in the current incarnation has greatly exacerbated the problem and no vending should be allowed on any county public beaches the way it is currently set up. If someone wants to go to a county public beach and call up a phone number and have someone deliver some chairs and an umbrella in no specified zone that should be allowed, but only that. The rest of the county public beaches should be wide open for anyone to set up anywhere they wish; First come first served.
As I’ve said before I acknowledge private property but as long as people behave correctly on beach private property and follow whatever rules the county adopts then this truly could be solved.
So again, To speak to your point those 4 million visitors can easily be educated; The TDC has plenty of money to educate people about the rules.
Do we really want Walton county to be the county in America that set the precedent that privatized beaches across the Nation? Or, do we want to be the beach community that figured it out and worked out a fair solution? The only thing I’ve been uncompromising about is the ability of beachfront owners to exclude people from the sandy parts of the beach. There’s plenty of compromise when it comes to setting up rules on those sandy parts.
So I feel like I’ve given you a reasonable and respectful answer that offer solutions. And again, I appreciate the tenor of your response to my comments.
Very best regards,
Dave Rauschkolb"
"OK, Fact Or Fiction appreciate your point it is density driven and the concern is that there’s too many people and too many variances given. That’s why I worked very hard for three years with amazing people I am now lifelong friends with and are on both sides of the aisle and even this issue. And I spent nearly $40,000 of my own money to rally support to incorporate South Walton but those worried about taxes going up crushed that opportunity to have local representation. And some others who don’t want any control over development had a considerable influence as well.
The thing that bothers me is that those who are here and have theirs are trying to say I’ve got mine and we don’t want anybody else. Well, that’s not the way it works. Special places attract people and the people who invariably come require infrastructure and accommodations where they want to recreate. I’ve said it 1 million times “these are the good old days for the people just now moving here.”. Like in any city rules are created and enforcement is essential. If people don’t follow the rules and they are not enforced then there is anarchy. No one wants that so yes, we have to hold a representative officials accountable. However, changing the rules so drastically that it eliminates large swaths of the very reason why people come here is not acceptable under any conditions. I was the first person to step up and offer solutions that actually were adopted. I engaged with beachfront owners to try to solve the problem but the die was cast and they wanted the whole apple and they currently have it. I truly believe that it’s temporary though.
I’m willing to sit down and work on solutions and I appreciate the fact that you addressed to me civilly without attacking me. By nature I’m an out-of-the-box thinker and a problem solver but this recent legislation in my book was yes, criminal and drastic and way out of line. So, how do we walk that back and restore our beaches to some semblance of shareable order? I’m wide-open to suggestions that don’t include excluding the public from using the sandy parts of the beaches as long as they follow the rules.
One thing we seem to agree on is that the vending of Beach Chairs in the current incarnation has greatly exacerbated the problem and no vending should be allowed on any county public beaches the way it is currently set up. If someone wants to go to a county public beach and call up a phone number and have someone deliver some chairs and an umbrella in no specified zone that should be allowed, but only that. The rest of the county public beaches should be wide open for anyone to set up anywhere they wish; First come first served.
As I’ve said before I acknowledge private property but as long as people behave correctly on beach private property and follow whatever rules the county adopts then this truly could be solved.
So again, To speak to your point those 4 million visitors can easily be educated; The TDC has plenty of money to educate people about the rules.
Do we really want Walton county to be the county in America that set the precedent that privatized beaches across the Nation? Or, do we want to be the beach community that figured it out and worked out a fair solution? The only thing I’ve been uncompromising about is the ability of beachfront owners to exclude people from the sandy parts of the beach. There’s plenty of compromise when it comes to setting up rules on those sandy parts.
So I feel like I’ve given you a reasonable and respectful answer that offer solutions. And again, I appreciate the tenor of your response to my comments.
Very best regards,
Dave Rauschkolb"
Last edited:
DanaMarie, I understand your point but let me just try to explain if you don't mind. Who is trying to divide who? When I first started reading the thread I was on the same page as you. It seemed like a legit conversation about the causes of the beaches being overcrowded. Please go back and find my original posts and you will see why I began to see through the carefully crafted purpose of this thread. Listen you are going to believe or know what you know and I will not change that but it all comes down to math. Elite wealth obviously has power and privilege that most of us do not have. I would give you the definition of elite but you can look it up. Power and privilege is an issue that is also legit conversation for this thread because you and I do not have the kind of power that it takes to get a bill passed. Income inequality has now reached epic proportions. Politics has split us about 50/50. Politics need lots of money. Think about this. Who has the majority of the influence on politicians? Is it you and me or is it elite wealth? Just look at how fast that bill got passed in the Florida Legislature. Okay back to the math. Elite wealth represents about 1 percent. That leaves 99 percent of the rest of us. That 1 percent owns over 50 percent of our resources. Is that not disproportionate enough to at least be concerned? Well, I am concerned even more after reading these posts from people who represent elite wealth and power and privilege and entitlement and even a superior belief at having some mandate to use their power in an abusive manner. They will NEVER have anyone's best interest in mind but their own but an abuse of power is not a crime. So, I am not saying that they are creating a crime but they keep saying that we are "stealing" from them. I am merely pointing out the math but they are trying to criminalize anyone who does not believe in private exclusive beach enjoyment. Which is more divisive? If you take some time and go back and read their post I hope you will understand why I believe the way I do but if you don't I respect your difference of opinion.
Scj, why did it have to go to court? Because a very few wanted to test property law of who has the rights to enjoy the coastal sandy beach. AM even said the sand is not realestate and therefore can not be bought or sold or privately used. He did say that the solid ground underneath is private property. Do you see a problem with that? There would have been zero money spent if you and yours accepted public recreational use and negotiated density and vending but oh no that is not enough. You want private coastal sandy beach enjoyment. You are done with sharing the beach. The lawsuit is a deceptive way for you to blame the cost on The People. Problem is not all bfo's wanted to spend a bunch of money so you have to try and keep them in the lawsuit instead of negotiating density and vending. Your group of power brokers want control of the resource period. This is not about protecting my property rights or anyone's property rights. This is pure abuse of power, of privilege and of entitlement which is not a crime. Stealing is a crime. Who is doing the dividing?
SP, I am definitely not the one who is judging character in this thread. In case you do not read my threads I am not accusing anyone of a crime. I am saying that we the people should not let political theater divide us. I am also saying that there is a disproportionate ratio of income, privilege, entitlement and power in society and that we better wake up America...
Thank you for asking. This went to court because in 2016 the BCC, for the first time ever, tried to pass a beach ordinance illegally taking away private property rights that has been held since Florida awarded property deeds.
This illegal attempt by the BCC to "remove" State of Florida Property Rights was stopped by the State and the county must follow a judicial procedure and IF the BCC could PROVE that each individual parcel had recreational customary use that was ANCIENT, REASONABLE, WITHOUT INTERUPTION, and WITHOUT DISPUTE, then it could be established for recreational customary use. IF THEY COULD PROVE ALL 4 CRITERIA.
If Private Property rights have been in place since Florida became a State then Private Property rights are "from a time when the memory of man runs not to the contrary of it" (AKA ancient). The BCC MUST PROVE that private property rights (for only the BPO's) have not existed since Florida was a State.
The BCC MUST PROVE that it is reasonable to remove private property rights (only for the BPO's), which are used by owners to generate the income to pay their mortgages and taxes, and instead give those rights exclusively to the BCC to chase after billions of tourists dollars and remove that economic benefit which the BPO's have PAID FOR.
Private Property owners have the right to allow people on private property that are family, guests, or paying guests. If someone was on private property against the will of the property owner and asked to move, they moved, or the Sherriff was called and removed them (until 2016, but just because he is temporarily not enforcing trespassing right now does not mean Property Rights don't exist). The BCC MUST PROVE that unlimited people with unlimited beach equipment have been allowed on public property AGAINST the will of the property owner (lots of trespassing tickets and court cases prior to 2016 prove otherwise)
And finally, The BCC must PROVE this issue without DISPUTE! (even though they say it may cost $50,000,000 just to take it to court and don't know if they are even going to make it past Judge Green let alone the US Supreme Court).
So do you think the BCC can prove all four of those criteria, not just one, two, or three, but ALL FOUR.
All the other arguments, redistribution of wealth, "sharing", tourist economic tax gain, increased number of tourists for local business, beach density, beach behavior, chair vendors, etc have zero role in THIS court case. Save that for a different court case.
So what about it mp, do you think this issue is without dispute?
Last edited:
We've always had a public sector that provided services such as law enforcement, defense and many other public services. You socialists want to expand public enterprise. When railroad travel became obsolete in the US, AmTrak was created and has been a complete failure. I support national parks and state parks as part of the public sector, but I'm not sure it worked when the Henderson Beach property was purchased by the state.