Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

Discussion in 'Local Government and Groups' started by Reggie Gaskins, Apr 25, 2019.

  1. Bob Wells

    Bob Wells Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,860
    Likes Received:
    700
    Sad I agree, but when there are really no other viable options then this is what happens. I do think @Lake View Too comment is true.
     
  2. FloridaBeachBum

    FloridaBeachBum Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2017
    Messages:
    413
    Likes Received:
    86
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    Here's what you got wrong; not right. Walton Commissioners filed as Plaintiffs, litigation against 4,600+ Defendant private beachfront owners and have the burden of proof; not Defendent beachfront owners. It was Walton Commissioners choice; not private property owners choice. There are NO beachfront owner CU countersuits. Can you support this statement of fact? If not your credibility suffers. I was not aware Walton Commissioner's litigated against all 4,600+ beachfront owners because of "Bad Beach Behavior". Can you quote from the Walton Commissioner's and Theriaque complaint that fact? If not your hypothesis Bad Behavior is why Walton claims CU on private property is not credible. It is about Constitutional property rights all American property owners have.
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2019
  3. FloridaBeachBum

    FloridaBeachBum Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2017
    Messages:
    413
    Likes Received:
    86
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    Easy when it's not your personal money and easy when you have no real-property skin in the game. If the 650+ beachfront owners prevail; tell Walton tax payers you thought it was worth it. Would you be willing to kick in $20,000 to reimburse tax payers if BFO prevail? I'm guessing you are not willing to put you own money at risk; just tax payer's millions.
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2019
  4. Poppaj

    Poppaj Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    3,200
    Likes Received:
    450
    Sounds like the BFO’s are the ones afraid of the courts.
     
  5. Poppaj

    Poppaj Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2015
    Messages:
    3,200
    Likes Received:
    450
    I simply view the situation like a sidewalk being a public right of way. BFO’s sound like they want the public to walk in the street when in front of their homes. It doesn’t matter to me who has title as long as the public has use of a moderate amount of dry sand.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Creative Creative x 1
    • List
  6. Lake View Too

    Lake View Too SoWal Insider

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,852
    Likes Received:
    1,716
    Location:
    Eastern Lake
    The BFO's are willing to spend their money on trying to assert a property right that they have known they never had from the first time they set eyes on this beach. Customary use existed from before they were born. They started their campaign for privatization over a decade ago. It's that simple. The county is doing what is right and just for the constituents of this county, for the economic strength of this county, and for the broader beach community in general. It's that simple.
     
  7. BlueMtnBeachVagrant

    BlueMtnBeachVagrant Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,222
    Likes Received:
    148
    So @Bob Wells, are you saying we (BFOs) can’t or shouldn’t allow the public to “walk the beach (traverse), swim, fish, surface, collect shells, take pictures, etc ” because HB631? Has ANYBODY here on SoWal objected to those activities IN THE PAST? On the other hand, BFOs want to retain full control of their private sand in case these tourists are unruly or they decide to compete for prime beach location against owners and paying guests of said private property.

    Not sure what “surface” means, so that might have to be excluded. :)

    The days of “looking the other way” (30A Legacy) are regretfully gone because of overcrowding, FBFA and CU proponents’ self-entitlement attitudes and now that that the county deciding to file suit to confiscate private property without compensation.

    Yes you have said that on SEVERAL occasions....about as many times as I’ve brought up Daniel Uhlfelder’s Nazi card. Nobody can legitimately argue either point.

    So didn’t Mike Huckabee present one? And wasn’t it dismissed in its entirety by Mr. and Mrs. NO COMPROMISE?
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2019
  8. Lake View Too

    Lake View Too SoWal Insider

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,852
    Likes Received:
    1,716
    Location:
    Eastern Lake
    Please refresh my memory of Mike (I'm not directly involved) Huckabee's compromise. Didn't it involve money?
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2019
  9. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    35
    Location:
    SRB
    If forced occupation of private property against the will of the owner is removed from the ordnance (removing part about chairs & umbrellas on deeded private property) then option 1 is fully compliant with HB631 and no law suit required.

    If not, then this entire lawsuit is ONLY about forced occupation of private property against the will of the owner and everything else is thrown around just to cause confusion. Of course everyone wants the right to walk the entire beach, fish, surf, and build sandcastles. Who wouldn't? We already have that.

    It has been ancient custom to have permission to use private property and if a person used it without permission, and was asked to move, they moved. If a person was not asked to move, they stayed. If they knew an area that they were "not welcomed", then they did not go there. It was that way when Mr. Allen and a few others owned most of that beach area and stayed that way after the parcels were split and sold to new owners who built homes. It was an honored privilege to sit on somebody's property and was respected. It was also only a few people with minimal equipment. It is different when 100's of people "demand" that same "privilege" at the same time and at no costs. It is only very recent that the "public" has felt entitled to day camp or park anywhere and ignored requests to move, even when the request to move is made by the Sheriff. I don't think anyone has an issue finding a peaceful place to sit (unless they are purposely trying to cause a disruption) except between Memorial Day and Labor Day. During those times the DTC even pays the park fee so people can go the state park as a courtesy of the county. Of course what happens when we get 6 million visitors a year? What about 8 million visitors a year? What is the limit before destroy our unique ecosystem?

    I can see where imminent domain might be used to force "access" to a public beach that has access blocked by private owner, like the California case where Vinod Khosla was sued to allow access, but the public was never allowed to day camp on his property and he was able to charge for parking and access. Access is very different than "day camping" against the will of the property owner. The property owner is the one that determines the rules to use the property. Doesn't matter if it is Florida that owns the property (state park has entry fees and maximum occupation limits depending on available resources and conditions, etc), or the County (county park / public beach has limited hours, parking limits, chair vendor rules, etc), or a private owner (use of property if permitted).

    We need to preserve our unique ecosystem. That is why (including many of the readers here) were so excited in 1992 when the community came together to make sure the 1,637 acres and 3-1/2 miles beach at Topsail were protected and not developed.

    It was never "customary" for forced occupation of private property in Walton County, nor is it reasonable to remove private property right from the owner, nor is this free from dispute if the county is spending millions of dollars on a lawsuit to try and take away these rights. This has nothing to do with sharing. This is about who has the right to determine who can use private property, the owner or the county.
    Let's spend millions preserve our unique ecosystem instead of on lawyers.
     
  10. Lake View Too

    Lake View Too SoWal Insider

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,852
    Likes Received:
    1,716
    Location:
    Eastern Lake
    From my understanding, H631 conflicted with our previously written customary use ordinance, so it was re-written to comply with 631, and was passed unanimously by the BCC, and was immediately challenged in court by several BFO's. The county was then forced to countersue those BFO's to get a judgement on this issue. I may not be quite sure of my terminology, but that is my general understanding. Whether the 5300 or 6100 BFO's are defendants of a lawsuit by the County, or are launching countersuits, or both, is still a little bit fuzzy to me. There are a bunch of "instigators and agitators" who launched this thread, and the amount of disinformation is mind-numbing.
     
  11. BlueMtnBeachVagrant

    BlueMtnBeachVagrant Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,222
    Likes Received:
    148
    @Bob Wells , over 3 years ago, I threw out what I thought was a very good compromise based on what I observed taking place at the Blue Mountain Beach access. Coincidentally, you sort of just shot it down saying it was an old topic under a new thread without any constructive input.

    Please take a look.....
    Eliminate Beach Vending from Blue Mountain Regional Beach Access (and possibly others)

    I genuinely believed everyone would benefit in that scenario - the essence of compromise:

    Eliminate ALL beach vending on public accesses, especially the crowded ones where the adjacent private property owners are agreeable to partner with beach vendors to allow to rent setups on their private property.
    and ALSO get to use private property.

    Locals and others on a limited budget could use the more open public beach without having to compete against paying customers on public beach and the BFO gets to control their property while receiving compensation (sorry @Lake View Too, that does mean money).

    It basically worked at Blue Mountain Beach except for the part where vendors are getting 50% of the public beach for their own profitable use and so the public part was (is) still very crowded. Could it work at other accesses? Not sure. But given a choice of constantly pushing back on public encroachment on private property vs. allowing the public access to private property for the price of a beach setup sounded like a pretty good compromise to me.

    But it’s too late now......you know, Mr. and Mrs. NO COMPROMISE.
     
  12. Reggie Gaskins

    Reggie Gaskins Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2018
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    66
    Location:
    Blue Mountain Beach
    Trying to catch up after 600 posts is definitely mind-numbing. I'm not as up to speed as you all. But trying to separate the facts on this one is becoming more clear to me. Can you help me Lake View Too?
    Which "disinformation" facts did these "instigators and agitators" put forth? Just give me the two biggest ones. I want to research them for myself. Thanks!
     
  13. L.C. Bane

    L.C. Bane Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2017
    Messages:
    410
    Likes Received:
    71
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    You sound very self aware. That's good.
     
  14. FloridaBeachBum

    FloridaBeachBum Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2017
    Messages:
    413
    Likes Received:
    86
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    Your understanding is wrong. "H631 conflicted with our previously written customary use ordinance [wrong], so it [Walton CU ordinance] was re-written to comply with 631 [did not happen or provide your evidence]" There was NO "countersuite" or provide a reference to the "countersuite" please. Only Walton's litigation pursuant to FS163.035 that defines the legal due process for any local government to seek a judicial determination that all the criteria of customary use apply to 26 miles of private beachfront property.
    You need to do your own homework and not listen to social media or your posts are not credible.
     
  15. Dave Rauschkolb

    Dave Rauschkolb Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    924
    Likes Received:
    627
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    Now, something we finally agree on. There should be zero vending on county public beaches of Beach Chairs. Never should’ve happened and should stop as soon as the county comes to their senses. If they ever do. 100% there should be zero beach chair vending on County owned public beaches. If they absolutely cannot stop it then the only conditions that should be allowed would be if someone calls a company and the chairs are delivered where ever there is an open spot. No set ups until a call is made and the chairs are occupied.
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2019
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  16. Lake View Too

    Lake View Too SoWal Insider

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,852
    Likes Received:
    1,716
    Location:
    Eastern Lake
    I got my information from talking to the county attorney and from attending Brad Drake's explanation. I'm not saying it's 100% accurate but I didn't get it from anonymous posters on SoWal.
     
  17. FloridaBeachBum

    FloridaBeachBum Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2017
    Messages:
    413
    Likes Received:
    86
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    If there is any question about leading CU position on the "C" word and opinion of Mike Huckabee's "Beach Share"; intended as starting point for discussions, but rejected out of hand by leading Watersound CU resident and Walton Commissioners. Legally not "our" CU beaches regardless how many times you say it. Have 1,192 the private property deeds to prove it in court.

    Is There Another solution to the Customary Use Dispute?
    SoWal Posted by Dave Rauschkolb on Facebook Aug 25 2018
    Watch out for the "C" word coming to South Walton. This word first introduced by County Commission Candidate, Bill Fletcher. Seeking ways to "Compromise" regarding Customary Use of our Beaches.

    There will soon be a group or groups offering compromises couched in an narrative saying: "let's all come together and be good neighbors and work this out" Mmmm, a seemingly sounding, reasonable platform.

    We need to remember this. The beachfront owners and their lawyers determined, well executed plan is to take control of our beaches so they call the shots. Many or most obtained their beach through Quiet Title [proven false by the public records on this thread and other credible sites] in the very recent years like new resident, Mike Huckabee. When I met with former Arkansas Governor Huckabee last summer his "Beach Share" plan was predicated on the owners "giving permission" to beach goers using "their property" provided they behave correctly. This platform is fundementally flawed because the Beachfront owners are calling the shots on our beaches; our beaches we have used freely for centuries.

    Their end game is to Control, big C, the beaches and to monetize them. Make them private and up the price goes. Then, perhaps try to sell them back to he County through eminent domain or just have much more valuable property because it is private. [Nice hypothesis; no evidence, all opinion.]

    Yes, The "C" word will be creeping in and we need to be careful about creeping compromise.

    Read this "Good Neighbor" narrative coming from a new 501c3 website called "Preserving South Walton"... "We believe that Coastal property owners should be allowed to have full control of their private land, but realize that South Walton also needs recreational areas that the tourists and locals can enjoy." And further......"We look to secure and/or gain access to properties for public use that limits the liability of the landholder, while still permitting access to others who would use that property responsibly. In doing this, we firmly believe that we can find an acceptable compromise between the proponents of customary use, and those property owners who are concerned about allowing the public access to their property."

    Did you catch that? "allowing" public access.....to their [deeded private] property.

    This is eerily, exactly the Huckabee plan couched in a slick, new package. "It's ours. Behave and we might can work something out" Same playbook, different cover.

    So beware of Creeping Compromise because all it has ever been about is Control of our Beaches. I promise you. Any Compromise will Compromise our ancient, uninterrupted use of OUR treasured, shared beaches.

    Just remember everyone, the beach, it's ours, it's always been ours and anything less....is a Compromise. So let's be good neighbors and work together to reinstate Customary Use.

    I gotta hand it to our new Compromising good neighbors, Preserving South Walton...hey, nice logo!

    I just have to ask though, is the fence halfway down or halfway up?

    April 14, 2019 Jason Blakeney Executive editor of the Northwest Florida Daily News.
    JASON BLAKENEY: Compromise before it's too late in Walton County
     
    Last edited: Jun 6, 2019
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List
  18. FloridaBeachBum

    FloridaBeachBum Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2017
    Messages:
    413
    Likes Received:
    86
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    Then the county attorney is wrong or you did not understand her and Brad Drake voted for HB631. "but I didn't get it from anonymous posters on SoWal." You should because what is posted is credible and verified with facts. You may not like the facts, you may not accept the facts; then do your own homework and present alternative verifiable facts or your posts credibility suffers.
     
  19. Lake View Too

    Lake View Too SoWal Insider

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2008
    Messages:
    5,852
    Likes Received:
    1,716
    Location:
    Eastern Lake
    I’m sure your lawyer is giving you correct information, or maybe he’s just in it for the money and might take a dive in the end.
     
  20. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    35
    Location:
    SRB
    It is confusing so I went to the Clerk of Court records, did a case search on Year 2018, Course Type Circuit Civil (CA), and Sequence #547 and there are over 850 court documents. The county filed on Dec 11, 2018 against 1194 properties listed in Exhibit A, although the county is listed as owner of some of those parcels so not sure if they are also suing themselves? Anyway, the documents do confirm that the County is the one doing the suing (Plaintiff) and the property owners are the ones being sued (defendants). There are no countersuits mentioned in any of those documents. I did find Doc 784 asking the Judge to dismiss the lawsuit but I can not find anywhere that the Judge responded.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • List

Share This Page