I’m not a big fan of the anti-social media. Just mass ganging on - without facts - just emotional knee jerk reactions - and shout downs for having different opinions just because they are different - even if supported with facts. I wish I could make these facts shorter to the little CU misinformation bullets that are posted as facts. Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy It’s interesting to read the real not so polite positions of outspoken CU “Komrades” incredible, as in not credible, baseless antisocial media, similar to what was witnessed on this thread and others. Hopefully this won’t get deleted or I get banned for “Komrades” since Rauschklob used the description on SoWal first. I guess it’s just cute to spell with a K. Is it really behavior that caused the CU vs Private beach issue? The new trend on anti-social media is creating this illusion that there are just a “handful” of “anti-CU” BFOs “Komrades” and of course the celebrity BFO, to sensationalize whatever CU lie of the day about him is. This anti-social media campaign to expose the BFOs incredible evil plans to stop the public from using “their” beaches, is a CU tactic to incite the masses and expose the evil BFOs with the “truth”. But is fanning the flames the Walton Commissioners started, and may destroy what’s left of south Walton’s legacy - the premise of the thread. "... stopping beach nourishment [beach fortification] WAS indeed the first step in their [BFOs] plan to deny the use of our beaches." Facts please or just a not-credible, baseless, conspiracy theory! How FBFA think they know about BFO “plans” is just not credible if you know the facts. Creates a good BFO greedy “boogie man” to focus the mass of vitriol. But NOT credible. From the 2016 Walton Commissioners’ failed beach fortification (Federal Hurricane Storm Damage Reduction plan) was defeated by those handful of “sneaky” BFOs? Beach fortification on private property with 3.8 CY of off-white off-shore sand, that a judge ruled did not meet Commissioners’ own white sand ordinance. An ordinance that any beachfront owner would have to comply with. Even outspoken CU advocates didn’t think that was a good idea. Fact. 94.22% of the 1,193 BFOs rejected Commissioners’ private property easements. Why? Because the Commissioners were not transparent of the sand facts, BFOs connected the dots what Commissioners’ real intent was, and do not trust the Commissioners then and now. It did not cost 1,193 BFOs money to intervene in the Commissioners’ and TDC’s inept beach fortification plan easements; just reject by mail or refuse to return the Commissioners’ 50 year (really perpetual) legal private property easement. Only a “handful”, 94.22%, of 1,193 BFO saw through the Commissioners’ ruse and made their thoughts known. Before the Commissioners’ even shelved beach fortification in March 2016 they were talking about public “beach access” or aka public customary use of private property. February 23, 2016. Walton Commissioner Chapman starts customary use beach access agenda. Not once did Chapman consider or mention beachfront owner property rights, who owns 50+% of the beachfront. Why? BCC February 23, 2016 Regular Meeting Video Click and press Play in new window. Commissioner Cindy Meadows asks about a Public Beach Access “Emergency” Order for public to use private property but is cautioned by the County Attorney. Why? Because of bad sand or bad public behavior? BCC February 23, 2016 Regular Meeting Video Two years later a “handful” of BFOs and a celebrity BFO convinced 29 out of 36 FL Senators (80.6%) and 95 out of 126 FL Representatives (84.8%), including local Representative Brad Drake to Vote for 2018 HB631. 83.8% of the 2018 FL legislators and the Governor. House Bill 631 (2018) - The Florida Senate A “handful” of BFOs owners convinced 124 Yeas, including Brad Drake, to vote for HB631 is just NOT CREDIBLE. That a “handful” of BFOs convinced 650+ of the SAME 1,194 (about 54+%) private beach parcels, owners to spend their own money to intervene, including Seaside developer and other prominent beachfront owners, would be in-credible for a “handful” of anyone to accomplish. I wonder how many BFOs are going to “ride the coattails” of the 54% of the intervening BFOs instead of spend their own money? If there was no legal expense, like with beach fortification, I’m guessing there would be more than 54+% of the 4,761 BFOs intervening. Me and a “handful” of BFOs are willing take the time to shine the light of truth and facts on the CU myths. We are just the TIP of the 4,671 BFO iceberg, BFOs are angry at the Commissioners and anti-social media vitriol, that is certainly not discouraged by leading outspoken CUers. BFOs are communicating and organized to any threat to private property rights as needed (thanks to the Commissioners' failed beach fortification). BFOs can connect the Commissioners’ public use of private beach dots too. BFOs have long memories, and we don’t have to incite the masses to make our case, might does not make right in America, the rule of law does. BFOs have only just begun the fight for our due process and Constitutional rights. Remember the Titanic and the iceberg. CUnCourt.