Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

Reggie Gaskins crossed a line in a post and broke a forum rule. The post was deleted and he was given a temporary ban. A few people who have been banned have been allowed to reurn since the forum started in 2003. Sometimes things get heated and people act like jerks and then later cool off and show humility. He emailed sort of an apology, but also making accusations and giving instruction. [Let's just say he sucks at apologies. ]

Our rules are simple. If you can't follow them you will be asked nicely to leave, or you may be banned. It rarely happens. From an admin perspective, In the context of fair play and open mindedness, I am not concerned which side of an issue you are on. I am only concerned that you follow rules and treat people here with respect. We are proud of what our community has built here and worked hard to nourish it. Mostly the forum is self-moderated by the members. Don't hesitate to call someone out in a respectful way if they cross a line, and/or do it by direct message (conversation feature / private message).
SoWal forum rules & general info

Having said that, a bit if extra leeway is usually given to heated topics. Most members understand this. Please stick to attacking the topic and not the people. If a thread gets off course it may be locked, or moved to the lounge where heated controversy and griping/venting belong.

Thank you!

1. What specific rule did Reggie break?

2. Was Reggie given any warning or asked first nicely to edit his post?

3. Was Lake View Too's name calling and repetitive postings of our nation's president standing over a POW's grave respectful and kind? Why is he not banned?

4. Were you Kurt being kind and respectful by saying Reggie sucks at apologies?

1. What specific rule did Reggie break?

2. Was Reggie given any warning or e postings of our nation's president standing over a POW's grave respectful and kind? Why is he not banned?

4. Were you Kurt being kind and respectful by saying Reggie sucks at apologies?

Are you Reggie's momma? Sounds like he broke a rule and not your concern. If you don't like the way things go here, find another forum is the message I got. Lighten up Francis is the other message I have for you.

1. What specific rule did Reggie break?

2. Was Reggie given any warning or asked first nicely to edit his post?

3. Was Lake View Too's name calling and repetitive postings of our nation's president standing over a POW's grave respectful and kind? Why is he not banned?

4. Were you Kurt being kind and respectful by saying Reggie sucks at apologies?

One of the rules is not to give moderators a hard time... sounds like you should be on facebook brah.

Are you Reggie's momma? Sounds like he broke a rule and not your concern. If you don't like the way things go here, find another forum is the message I got. Lighten up Francis is the other message I have for you.

Double standards should be everyone's concern who wishes to participate in an open forum in an honest, engaging, and informative manner.

Board of County Commissioners on 2019-03-26 9:00 AM - Regular Meeting - Mar 26th, 2019 << Must see TV. Video time 1:08:39 Walton TDC Beach Director Brian Kellenberger. Click and press video play.

Very enlightening. Danny Glidewell seems to get the issue of the beach vendor chairs on public accesses. Gotta love Alan Osborne.

Also did not realize there are “leased” sections of beach by the county as well as public accesses that exist only by easement.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Double standards should be everyone's concern who wishes to participate in an open forum in an honest, engaging, and informative manner.

Show me a double standard. You could always start your own website to spread your propaganda if this one isn't to your liking...

Show me a double standard. You could always start your own website to spread your propaganda if this one isn't to your liking...

The very nature of your post is a double standard. You call BFO posts propaganda and suggest starting another website. Why not suggest the same thing to the CU people who knowingly peddle a myriad of mistruths even when confronted with the facts?

Sheesh, the pot calling the kettle black.

Very enlightening. Danny Glidewell seems to get the issue of the beach vendor chairs on public accesses. Gotta love Alan Osborne.

Also did not realize there are “leased” sections of beach by the county as well as public accesses that exist only by easement.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Much of Grayton Beach beach is State land leased to the County.

From GRAYTON BEACH NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN (Adopted February 10, 2015) There may be more up to date plans but this had a good explanation.

Grayton Dunes State Recreation Area was acquired by the State of Florida through the Save Our Coast program administered by the Florida Department of Natural Resources (now Department of Environmental Protection - FDEP), Division of Parks and Recreation. In January 1985, the portion of the site fronting Grayton Beach was leased to the FDEP for 50 years. In October 1986, the site was sub-leased to Walton County for environmental protection and compatible public outdoor recreation by the State of Florida, Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund, Lease No. 3884. (See Figure 2. Grayton Dunes County Park). The lease specifically authorizes the launching of boats from this site.

16.1 Findings. The portion of Grayton Beach that permits vehicular access is leased to Walton County from the State of Florida. The stated purpose of the lease is for conservation and public recreation. It is important that Walton County is a good steward of this land and that it adheres to the requirements and purpose of the lease. As such, it is in the public’s interest that vending on public and private lands is addressed. Vending on the beaches of Walton County is controlled by Ordinance 2013-04. This plan incorporates Ordinance 2013-04 (January 2013) by reference and offers the following:

16.2 Vending on Public Land Owned by the State of Florida. Vending on State owned public breaches requires annual written authorization from the State of Florida and any private owner whose southern property line is contiguous to the proposed vending location.

16.3 Vending on Public Land Owned by Walton County. Vending on county owned public beaches in Grayton Beach requires annual written authorization from Walton County and any private owner whose southern property line is contiguous to the proposed vending location.

16.4 Vending on Private Property. Vending of private property requires annual written authorization from the property owner.

16.5 Launching of Boats. Authority to launch boats on Grayton Beach is provided in the sublease from the State of Florida to Walton County. Nothing in this plan alters this authorize use.

The very nature of your post is a double standard. You call BFO posts propaganda and suggest starting another website. Why not suggest the same thing to the CU people who knowingly peddle a myriad of mistruths even when confronted with the facts?

Sheesh, the pot calling the kettle black.

Why so defensive? I am calling out the Auburn fan's propaganda and aggressive postings, not all beachfront owners in general. Although I do see several new members on this thread who arrived en masse to attack and demean under the guise of facts and honesty. It is really obvious and gross. Not to mention singling out a couple of members of their opposition and bashing them. Axe grinding is not allowed on this site.

There is a single standard - treat others with respect. If you don't want honest, respectful conversation, go somewhere else or start your own website.

Why so defensive? I am calling out the Auburn fan's propaganda and aggressive postings, not all beachfront owners in general.

BS!
You’re calling all BFOs out. Can’t even be truthful about that.

There is a single standard - treat others with respect. If you don't want honest, respectful conversation, go somewhere else or start your own website.

More BS about “respect”. I guess you’ve forgotten about my reply to Dave R’s post about his call for respect long before yours...

Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy (Rauschkolb respect post/reply)

He still won’t acknowledge or deny the horrific anology made by Daniel Uhlfelder. Combine that with Uhlfelder’s repeated efforts along with his supporters to intentionally harass BFOs with his trespassing antics.

How about you? Care to step up to the plate? Start a little respectful dialogue and say something like Uhlfelder crossed the line literally (via provocative trespassing) and figuratively (hurtful analogy).

Remember, Teresa gave him a pass, saying “heartfelt” comment and all. I certainly won’t.

RESPECT. Hell even Aretha Franklin couldn’t get any. BFOs certainly ain’t gonna find any here on this forum.

Rename the thread “CU Will Make You A Whiner.”

One of the rules is not to give moderators a hard time... sounds like you should be on facebook brah.

"You don't make progress by standing on the sidelines, whimpering and complaining. You make progress by implementing ideas."
- Shirley Chisholm

MALARKEY!
If that’s your feeble attempt to silence private property rights advocates as in the info and facts we provide is “wrong”, you’d be wrong. If it’s your feeble attempt to persuade private property rights advocates to not attack your hypocrisy, total lack of respect for BFOs and perpetuation of known mistruths, you’d also be wrong.

GET OFF MY LAWN!!!

James Bentwood: you have been one of the most fair and even tempered poster on SoWal for many years. Please don’t get sucked into this swamp of vicious animosity. That is their purpose and strategy: to bring out the worst reflexes in normal honest people and use our quotes on other sites to further their propaganda.

James Bentwood: you have been one of the most fair and even tempered poster on SoWal for many years. Please don’t get sucked into this swamp of vicious animosity. That is their purpose and strategy: to bring out the worst reflexes in normal honest people and use our quotes on other sites to further their propaganda.

That is despicable and if tru this thread should be deleted and all of them banned. I wondered why we had all these new bfo dix on here all of a sudden. Thanks for the warning.

That is despicable and if tru this thread should be deleted and all of them banned. I wondered why we had all these new bfo dix on here all of a sudden. Thanks for the warning.

“How about you? Care to step up to the plate? Start a little respectful dialogue...”

Guess not.

Keep hearing rumblings about deleting this thread from you and others. I guess the truth just ain’t onvenient. And just the idea of you and others suggesting that this thread be deleted brings absolute credibility to the facts presented here by private property advocates.

Despicable me.

Admins have total control, it's their forum. If they want to ban Reggie, their game, their rules. But Reggie DID do something no one else has: He created a long standing public dialogue on CU with both sides able to opine. Let's don't waste it. It appears that Reggie might have been inspired by this post last year from SoWal Al, and expanded on it. The video displays clearly what will happen in court.
It appears that those here armed with facts aren't the ones who might be "wrong".
Hear from professionals why the CU battle will now last eight years

View attachment 77385

Dave Rauschkolb why do you believe you are right about CU and private property rights and everyone else is wrong? You nor any CU advocate have disputed any facts that dispute CU alternative "beliefs" on this thread. You have only called property law facts ridiculous and whined about pseudonyms, that many historic figures like Ben Franklin, Mark Twain, and many others, including the prolific in-credible CU contributors on this forum use.

Prove these posts from just this thread wrong. Goes to the CU credibility. Goes to if you only have little ditties, cute signs, internet slides from bizarre CU activist, go pound sand responses, or do you have credible facts or law or anything other than your unsubstantiated CU beliefs or opinions? Your are right about one thing - your points are circular, challenge to present any facts?-rhetoric-facts?-rhetoric-facts? ... just not credible rhetoric.

"Talking about credibility of facts. Here is a simple Yes or No question; is there any Seaside business/LLC, excluding the original property owner, Seaside Community Development Corporation and Seaside HOAs, that own private property in Seaside seaward from the beach top of the dunes, the dune walkovers, to the MHWL?
Is the Seaside Community Development Corporation intervening against Walton Commissioner’s litigation against 650+ other private beachfront owners to affirm public customary use of private property?"
Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

Right or Wrong? "BTW. NO Seaside 30A beach-side LLC business owns beachfront. The Seaside developer owns the dunes, constructed walkovers, and dry sand to the MHWL in Seaside. All fact in Walton Property Appraiser and Clerk of Court public records. The Seaside developer is 1 of the 650+ private property owners intervening against Walton’s public customary use of private property litigation too."
Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

If anyone makes a public statement like; “I personally am a beachfront owner in Seaside with my restaurant” and posts it in the public domain; is that a, right or wrong fact? There is a legal difference between beachfront and beach-side or beach-view and if one is a beachfront property owner entitled to intervene against (or for) Walton Commissioners' CU litigation. Goes to credibility of any other CU belief.
Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

Want to address the impending economic "Ghost Town"-doom facing Walton County since April 1, 2017 or July 1, 2018? or that tourist taxes are up 17.8%?
Do you dispute Walton Commissioners were considering customary use of private property as far back as 2007 or who is responsible for the ill will in South Walton?
Want to address Vizcaya private (public) property? I guess you think Walton TDC Beach Director is wrong about private beach access easements? How about Quiet Title in Blue Mountain beach? How about there are only a "handful" of evil sneaky BFOs orchestrating a Federal beach fortification plan and State of FL HB631 to keep you and the public off all private beachfront property? Of the 13 miles of private beaches how many BFO have enforced their private property rights? 10 miles? 5 miles? 1 mile? Or is FBFA making a mountain out of a mole hill and fear mongering to advance a CU agenda to incite the masses on antisocial media with intentional misinformation?

If you can not or refuse to answer these simple questions I'd say BFOs are right (within the laws and American morality encompassed in those laws) and more credible with facts or prove BFOs property rights wrong with credible verifiable information. Not baseless rhetoric, cute signs, and shout downs that You're Wrong and despicable.

Admins have total control, it's their forum. ... Let's don't waste it.

Once on the internet, always on the internet. Even if deleted, Google and Bing have copied all the SoWal site, including the salient beliefs of CU advocates on this thread for posterity.
Fare warning; only each person can be responsible and accountable for their own "worst reflexes" - no one else. Same with blaming evil BFOs for past and present Commissioners' ineptness and this CU mess.

James Bentwood: you have been one of the most fair and even tempered poster on SoWal for many years.

That is despicable and if tru this thread should be deleted and all of them banned. I wondered why we had all these new bfo dix on here all of a sudden. Thanks for the warning.

Heck, that sounds “even tempered” to me.

Keep those names coming!

I call BS on being disrespectful no matter what side you are on. There is hypocrisy on both sides. CU wants to keep beaches open to the public yet are strongly opposed to a public pier. I see more disrespect, ridicule and shaming on the CU side. BFO's are opposed to government interfering with property rights yet the property rights they seek interfere with the common good. BFO's buildings already block our view of a beautiful natural resource and damage that resource by building on the sand dunes. Both sides are principled up the yin yang.

This thread regardless of intent has once again brought out the worst in all of us. If we don't figure out a way to compromise our principles then both sides will ruin the 30A legacy.

How can we turn the entire strip of 30A beaches into a State Park? Each Walton County resident could get a yearly pass included with their property taxes and the State would limit the number of beach visitors to the available resources (parking, bathrooms, etc) and that would protect our unique and sensitive ecosystem for our grandchildren.

Our TDC Web Site has the "Brand Promise" to "provide visitors with a relaxing escape: an upscale, yet casual, place to unwind and rejuvenate. Charm and scenic beauty define our stretch of Northwest Florida's Gulf Coast, and our white sand beaches and turquoise water offer a natural setting, where visitors feel comfortable. We deliver an unforgettable experience, filled with lasting memories".

From Danny Glidewell District 2 Website: Commitments: (#1) "return the emphasis of our marketing to high-end, family oriented tourism that brings in more income while increasing safety and enjoyment, both in our homes and on our roadways" (#6) "base our development codes and decisions on common sense and what is the best interest of all citizens by protecting the property rights of those already working and living here as well as those seeking to develop our area" and (#7) "expand preservation of our historical heritage and insure the protection of our beautiful natural resources".

We cannot accomplish the above and have 30A open with no density management and a free for all with no code enforcement, with tourists that feel entitled to park anywhere and end up destroying our fragile ecosystem. We already have huge infrastructure problems with 4 million tourists. What happens when we hit 6 million or 8 million?

Last week the Destin log reported "HIGH FECAL POLUTION" at Blue Mountain and Grayton Beaches. Guess we know where 4 million tourists are using the bathroom. Our coastal dune lakes are at the highest level of pollution in 20 years.

It doesn't matter if your are Pro CU or Pro Property Rights (as I have stated before, I am both Pro CU and Pro Property Rights and don't see that as a conflict). We must come together as a community to figure out a way to balance our unique and sensitive ecosystem compared to the desire of some to ruin it all chasing short term tourist dollars, mega rental houses, constant downgrading of our long term ecological protection plan to flip real estate for big profits, beach bars, and restaurant expansions.