Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

Thanks for the information. I checked your description, and you are right. Under circuit civil ca #547 the county is suing alot of people. I would be responding too. What is up with all that? The county using taxpayer money to sue taxpayers? There is something wrong with that picture. That money could be used by the county to do so many more things for the community like creating more public beach accesses to accommodate all of the tourists that help support our businesses.

 

I stand corrected. I do remember several lawsuits filed against the county earlier by BFO’s pertaining to the earlier customary use ordinance. But I’m sure I’m going get an assful of slings and arrows for not having my legalese in order.

 

This illustrates the intractable nature of the property owners. I understand that you feel backed into a corner. The other side wants to enjoy the beach. Not YOUR beach. THE BEACH. They don't see any property lines. Never have. Never will. So both sides are far apart. Neither will compromise.

Thing is, living with neighbors is about nothing other than compromise. It is what being a community is all about. SoWal WAS a community before we had luxury and branding.

 

What role, if any, do you think past and present Walton Commissioners and TDC is responsible with the premise of this thread and ill will?
What percentage of the 13 miles of intractable owner private beaches do you think the public can not access?
Is the about 13 miles of government public beaches not enough or not convenient for you?

There are some principles worth protecting. American founders fought a Revolutionary war to free themselves from English tyranny. Property rights and due process being key Constitutional principles embodied in the 5th and 14th Amendments.

 

Well.....
That’s exactly how the hunters felt who used other people’s land for hunting for a long period of time. In case you haven’t heard or just refuse to acknowledge it, Theriaque, the current Walton County CU attorney, won the case AGAINST the hunters in their attempt for CU on the lands they’ve hunted for a long time.

Drawing a parallel from your post:
Hunters said Not Your land, THE LAND. They don’t see property lines. Never have............
Never will. That last part will definitely land them in jail today.

 

I just looked up the Hunter Case that Theriaque was the Plaintiff attorney protecting private property rights, Case 2014 CA 2951 and found the quote from Judge Gievers at a hearing on Oct 31, 2017 "This is private property, and there's no right that the hunters have to be on the plaintiff's property"

In this case Mr Theriaque represented the private property owner and argued that the public cannot use private property if the private property owner did not give permission... and won.

 

I hope that a judge understands the difference between carrying guns onto a property with intent of killing and taking animals... and catching rays and riding waves.

Stupid example.

 

bob bob you have to understand the legal criteria ancient English common-law doctrine of public customary use of private property to understand the difference. Both hunting and catching rays on private property is the common denominator. Not the activity. The ancient English doctrine of custom is not specific of the activity or if the property is highly desirable beachfront private property or private hunting property. Just that the custom criteria, that has been posted previously, is met. The private property owner’s attorneys will make sure judge will understand the differences.

 

Thanks for owning that. That is the problem, this cycle of jumping on and accepting erroneous beliefs at face value, because it fits an agenda, regardless if it is factual or based on the law or not; that incites others with the same agenda to perpetuate the erroneous beliefs as fact but is an illusion of fact, and the next thing you know lies about local celebrities stole public beach for $400 with quiet title judgments [quiet title has been between two private property owners, never public property, and a judge quieted the title based on the facts/evidence] or single handedly got a FL bill passed, or Walton beaches were all public use until HB631 “privatized” all of “our public” privately owned beaches, and the internet slide from a known “bizarre” CU activist proved the belief. Then the anti-social media jumps on the band wagon, partisan polls show might makes right, and “progressive” news channels echo the erroneous belief that fit the agenda and increases hits, which continues the vicious cycle of repeating over and over again an erroneous belief, that regardless if the belief is lawful or not, tax payers end up spending millions of dollars to litigate the belief, may get nothing in return except the Defendants legal fees, and a whole lot of finger pointing, anger, and ill will that may damage SoWal community for a long time. The premise of this thread.

Regardless of who prevails in court the public demand to enjoy a beach grows but the Walton beach supply governments and private citizens own is fixed. No one will take care of the real property beaches better than an private property owner with an economic interest in the property. Not the public and not the government and you can not ignore property owner’s Constitutional property rights because you don’t like that fact.

Supply and demand (and lack of enforcement) is a major cause of bad public beach behavior. Without managing the demand for beaches, because the supply is fixed, with education of acceptable behavior and respect for private property rights; demanding beachfront owners “compromise” by Commissioners not litigating against 4,600+ owners if they will trade their Constitutionally protected property rights for enforcing bad beach behavior, that is the responsibility of the Commissioners regardless of who owns or has rights to use private beaches, is misguided by a belief American property laws don’t matter polls do, and disingenuous at best.

Sad thing is many owners are willing to share, but not if you force them by litigation (and cost them money to protect their property rights) or social media shaming. That just make us BFOs mad and not want to share any more. Is the CU agenda making a mountain out of mole hill out of a belief in principle regardless of American law? What if BFOs property rights prevail in court? (1) Public education and (2) respect of property rights can change the current course of actions but not if you want to litigate in court and shame on social media. The elected Commissioners made the political decision to litigate instead of finding a political solution to the beach supply & demand problem and self proclaimed leadership of the CU agenda can change civil discourse and social media shaming if they try. It will take time and effort on the leadership’s part. We didn’t get to this point of community ill will overnight. Otherwise what’s for BFOs to compromise? BFOs are the Defendant with private property right they have had since 1776 and have today and have nothing to prove or compromise if they so choose.

 

Ok, I get there is disagreement about “owning” and “using” the beach. And I do get that we won’t solve that here, but I re read Reggie’s original post that drew me to this thread (and btw, where is he? Is he banned? Never got an answer to that.) So imho it seems the County leadership is really at the bottom of all this since they haven’t been strategic in planning for all of the growth in our beach communities and the huge increase in tourists. I don’t know about you, but “the word is out” that Florida panhandle beaches are THE place to visit, bring the family, and enjoy an amazing beauty that we get to enjoy everyday. How can I find the county strategic plan? How can we get the county leadership to be better planners? Would pro CU folks accept more planned public accesses or are they really just wanting to fight with bfos?

 

Again, the fifth amendment to the Constitution says private property can be taken for public use if there is just compensation.

 

I wonder if the ratings for the erroneous posts will be revised? Or is just belief in the posts regardless if erroneous or not sufficient to Like the information?
590 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

606 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

 

You won't get an argument from anybody that the county government has been AWOL when it comes to growth management. Does it seem like a good idea to instantly compel the entire beachgoing community to confine their activities to less than 25% of the beaches they use to enjoy? Fun fact: only about one quarter of all those "public beaches" ya'll talk about have any parking whatsoever.

 

What’s the point? No private property condemnation litigation has been taken by the Commissioners to offer market fair value for.

If your point is the dry sand beach is worthless because State and local Government has used its police powers to regulate uses and construction of private property beaches that does not make the property unbuildable or have no value. Government could just as well not use their police powers or authorize exception to their police powers and permit construction - making the private property more valuable. Like a fishing pier or a private beachfront property amusement tower like in the Daytona Beach Tona-Rama case. Might want to look up Florida’s Burt Harris Act too that provides relief to private landowners when a law, regulation, or ordinance inordinately burdens, restricts, or limits private property without amounting to a taking under the U.S Constitution.

 

I'm taking responsibility for not being totally versed in all the legal minutia of this extremely complex situation. I think I have built up a small degree of reliability on this website and I am simply trying to express my sentiments about the situation, and in that regard, some people agree with me. You can't change how people feel with a barrage of legal facts, and that is all this thread has been about: trying to put a PR spin on an ugly situation.

 

But is that the responsibility of the private property owner who paid fair market value for all the bundle of rights in the title granted by the US and Florida land grants and pay taxes on for what is described in their deeds to the MHWL?
That Commissioners want to shift their failures to manage Walton county beach supply & demand growth onto private property owners should be run out of town. Many of the previous Commissioners are already gone. Commissioners authorize the TDC annually to spend $20,000,000 a year to bring more tourist here, that mostly benefits local beach-side businesses, not locals and not private property owners, and just raised the tourist tax to 5%. Stop the taxes and let those tourist dollars go back into the local economy and grow jobs, not bureaucracy. Where is the outrage from the community and social media for that??

 

My point is the same constitution that keeps being referenced here as proof of protection says land can indeed be taken for public use. All the whining in the world will not change a fact.

 

I get it LV2 but if you want to make informed decisions; what property law is not complex? You have to take the time to understand the facts and the law. You know, the laws that embody America morals and beliefs. http://morallaw.org/resources/key-documents/the-united-states-constitution/
Call the facts PR if you want, make uninformed decisions if you want, believe you are right by taking social media rants at face value if you want; but you will not make decisions based on facts or the law - just like the Commissioners and that will cost tax payers millions and ill will for the community.

 

Then stop the FS163.035 litigation and start government police-power property-condemnation litigation to pay fair market value. Why do you think Commissioners are litigation CU? Because they think they can get something for nothing and it costs them personally no money to try - just tax payers millions.

 

I just wish you would stop talking about Money. I'm sorry you don't want to see that enjoying the beach is a spiritual thing.