Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

[Stone Cold J]

Property rights require due process.

mp, you state Property rights require due process. What does that mean? Does that mean all property purchased since Florida became a State requires due process or only BPO property? Is that the same for all BPO property in the State of Florida or only Walton County?

You also did not answer the question, do you think this issue is without dispute?

 

[DanaMarie]

Yes I think the BCC were listening to their constituents. The people who elected them. Force is not the right word though.

 

[DanaMarie]

mputnal, I asked “if The People had the power over the local politicians to force the BCC to pass the ordinance.” You said “Yes I think the BCC were listening to their constituents. The people who elected them. Force is not the right word though.” So, it was The People who wielded the power, and started the customary use issue. It was The People who convinced the BCC to enact an ordinance that attempted to take away private property rights without due process. Sounds like per your own reasoning you should be accusing The People of abuse of power, not your imaginary power brokers or those you say have elite wealth.

 

[mputnal]

DanaMarie, Your last post suggest that you have officially entered into the twilight zone where people have no shadows I tried to explain a different perspective on the issue but apparently you are indoctrinated by imaginary people. I am not surprised. People with no shadow are not interested in reality is all I can figure...

 

[mputnal]

Scj, what part of due process do you not understand? I will try to explain again. The County has the authority to declare public recreational use if that is what their constituents believe to be the reality of how the beaches have been used in the past which is the reality. Bpo's have the right to due process which allows them to dispute public recreational use and I assume must deny sharing the beaches by claiming they enjoyed exclusive private use in the past. Even your group admits they shared the beach in the past which confirms public recreational use so I admit it is all a little confusing. Of course they could have compromised and made some real progress toward a happy community but instead this is now a lawsuit where there will be winners and losers and a lot of unhappy people. The court will rule. The losers probably take it to a higher court. The community is torn apart. If elite power wins at least a few people will be happy at the expense of thousands. That should answer your question. I have found that if you read slower it helps to listen

 

[Stone Cold J]

The County has the authority to declare public recreational use if that is what their constituents believe to be the reality of how the beaches have been used in the past which is the reality.

I have found that if you read slower it helps to listen

According to the State of Florida, Walton County BCC DOES NOT have the authority to declare recreational customary use. It is a judicial process (and the BCC is not part of the judicial branch).

The BCC can request to the court (judicial branch) to determine recreational customary use IF the BCC can PROVE that recreational customary use (in particular the BCC request for unlimited access by unlimited tourists with unlimited beach equipment to occupy private property AGAINST the will of the property owner) is ANCIENT, REASONABLE, WITHOUT INTERUPTION, and WITHOUT DISPUTE.

mputnal, Do you think do you think this issue is without dispute as claimed in the BCC lawsuit?

 

[mputnal]

Scj, Asked and answered more than once. Also you are wrong about the BCC authority to declare public recreational use. The court will determine if that declaration was correct based on use. I believe it is. You believe it is not. Here we go around the mulberry bush...again...and again...

 

[Stone Cold J]

mputnal post #2143 "Also you are wrong about the BCC authority to declare public recreational use"

The State of Florida in Statute 163.035, specifically states that the judicial branch has the authority and that a governmental entity (AKA BCC) does NOT have the authority to declare public recreational use.

Can you please reference a State of Florida statute or other sources (other than personal opinion) which states the BCC does have this authority?

mputnal, Do you think do you think this issue is without dispute as claimed in the BCC lawsuit?

 

[FloridaBeachBum]

#2139 DanaMarie, remember CU many believers do not even believe the State of Florida legal coastal property boundary definitions
#1994 FS"177.28 Legal significance of the mean high-water line." Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

CU believers can not even list the ancient English common law custom criteria much less define the 4 to 7 or more legal criteria.
#471 "But wait!" David Theriaque September 2018 presentation cites English criteria Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

#285 Dave Theriaque's, Walton's lead $425/hr land use attorney, CU criteria list Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

#1202 "The repeated post is not true, unless there are alternative facts to the contrary." There have been none. Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

#2128 "There was no taking by the BCC IF these beaches have been "used" for public recreational use at all which they have." Which ancient English CU criteria defines public CU "use" of private property? The CU believer's defined criteria; if you can define more than one? Sir William Blackstone's 1700's COMMENTARIES ON THE LAWS OF ENGLAND common law multiple historical criteria?, Walton's $425/hr CU attorney Theriaque's 7 Oregon criteria, Tiffany Real Property law 7 CU criteria (taken from 1700's Blackstone's Commentaries)? FL court CU 4 criteria (truncated from Tiffany 7 criteria)? FS163.035 4 criteria? If CU believers can list any legal CU criteria, can you define the CU criteria? Is "ancient" since anyone alive today can remember? Since photographs were invented?

CU believers should read my posts (#2094) slower (as suggested by mputnal) to comprehend; I do not have to try to link CU believers to anything. I just post their words #2088 "... Equal Distribution of Resources is the hope and dreams of this great Country." I only list references from experts on "Equal Distribution of Resources" and the reader can draw their own conclusions. Egalitarianism and the "Envy Test" is the only reference I made to "Equal Distribution of Resources". Beside it's only math - right!? Your valuable deeded beach property you pay taxes on is mine and my property I have and pay taxes on is mine. 1+1=MINE for CU and not BPO's right to choose quiet uninterrupted enjoyment or not.

#10 Oldie but Goodie reminder. "Unfortunately, no customary use facts or rational reason to the contrary will persuade ..." Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy Other FoF Oldies Search Results | SoWal Forum - South Walton Florida
Everyone can have an opinion; but not everyone can have a credible opinion unless you have some facts or verifiable information.

Are the anonymous "imaginary people" referred to by some (and thier incredible-facts) Pappaj, bob1, leeboy, 30A Skunkape, EZ4144, jodiFL, James Bentwood? Or Jim Tucker, bob bob, Pam Hicks, Lake View Too, Dawn, MRBS, Duchess, Jenksy, L.C. Bane, buster, Leader of the Banned, Emerald Drifter, ShallowsNole too?

 

[mputnal]

Scj, Objection. question asks for an opinion. Opinions are like belly buttons. Everyone has one

I have read the statue. The government entity has authority to seek Judicial affirmation of Customary Use. Last I heard that is what the lawsuit is for.
My "opinion" is that the beaches have been "used" for public recreational use without dispute since the beginning. In addition I do believe the court will allow arguments regarding whether or not there can be private ownership of the coastal sandy shoreline which is constantly moving and does not stay in one place. There is a good chance that the court will decide that coastal sandy shoreline is owned by the State of Florida. If that is proven this Statue will not apply. There are many cards in the deck. Stay tuned...