Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

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

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dawn

    Dawn Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Messages:
    857
    Likes Received:
    231
    I don't see hate or division. I see you attacking members of this forum who have stated their position, which happens to be opposed to yours. You are inciting. DO NOT FEED TROLLS PEOPLE!!!
     
  2. Reggie Gaskins

    Reggie Gaskins Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2018
    Messages:
    153
    Likes Received:
    94
    Location:
    Blue Mountain Beach
    Dawn,
    Since you brought it up...
    Logical facts and law that are not in one's favor do not equal hate.

    Hate is evidenced by direct attacks with specific intended harm and pain. I'd be happy to share with you hundreds upon hundreds of screenshots full of direct hateful attacks against individuals and BPO's as a group, complete with threats, personal information including places of employment, children's names, addresses, and membership organizations. These screenshots will include physical threats. They are all public and published for all to see. They are all coming from very vocal and documented CU supporters.

    I would challenge you to find even one from a BPO.
     
  3. Dawn

    Dawn Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Messages:
    857
    Likes Received:
    231
    Get real SIR! You just called out two members of this forum for hate. Have you no shame?
     
  4. Dave Rauschkolb

    Dave Rauschkolb Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,003
    Likes Received:
    666
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    Oh, yes, the two or three individuals who have screens-shotted and blogged what they say is “evidence” of harassment and threats from CU supporters....we’ve all heard this before, this false narrative has been painted over and over again. To try to imply that somehow the more vocal leaders of Customary have individual control over others in social media or are inciting attacks as you have characterized them is completely ridiculous and untrue to the core. No vocal leaders that I know of who are Customary Use supporters have made or attacked or threatened anyone. I have seen individuals reacting to certain Social media posts with emotion and used bad language and made threatening remarks on both sides but to try to characterize the fantasy that they’re all under some sort of Svengali control is utterly ridiculous on ether side. And, regarding all this screenshot-ing that the handful of beachfront owners have done...talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Reggie, it’s becoming clearer and clearer who you might be...more crumbs than a New York deli.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
  5. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    88
    Location:
    SRB
    Walton County is in Court because the old BCC tried to TAKE constitutional property rights from legally deeded private property owners OUTSIDE of the judicial system. Taking property rights outside of a judicial ruling would be in court with or without HB 631. The court process would be more complicated and cost more without HB 631, but the reason it is in court is solely because the BCC attempted for the first time in Walton County History to TAKE property rights way from a targeted group of citizens.

    Interesting that the targeted group of citizens have been vilified on social media (facebook and twitter) by one of the Plaintiff Attorney groups in this lawsuit. This is also a first for Walton County (possibly the State of Florida).

    The vote by the old BCC to sue private property owners was under the guidelines that it was ANCIENT, REASONABLE, WITHOUT INTERUPTION, AND FREE FROM DISPUTE in a rush after the BCC election but before the new BCC took office and the BCC was told by the activists "not more than a dozen BPO's will object". The activists have certainly established this is anything but free from dispute...

    And you are correct, CU was made a platform issue and Bill F. was thrown under the bus because he would not say "Sue the BPO's not matter what it costs the tax payers of Walton County" and publicly declare "No Compromise" or risk defeat. So yes the "CU Ultimatum with No Compromise" was a rally cry and the man who has done more for Walton County lost. Sad day for Walton County.
     
  6. bob bob

    bob bob Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2017
    Messages:
    405
    Likes Received:
    93
    Location:
    SRB
    Sounds familiar. One or 2 beachfront people spending all their days stirring up trouble. Banned from Facebook and now spewing here.
     
  7. SUP View

    SUP View Beach Comber

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2019
    Messages:
    48
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Above Water
     
  8. SUP View

    SUP View Beach Comber

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2019
    Messages:
    48
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Above Water
    The whole issue has never been about Customary Use or Beach Access. It is about Corporate Use and Corporate Access.

    Public beach access has always been available in ample supply - but not always on the "front row". And that seems to be the rub for a lot of people that come to the water. You can't blame them for wanting an unobstructed view of the water, but they do not have that right on someone else's property. And the BFO's have the right, and the responsibility, to control what happens on their land. Liability falls solely on the property owner and, as such, the right to maintain and control belongs to said owner.
     
  9. Reggie Gaskins

    Reggie Gaskins Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2018
    Messages:
    153
    Likes Received:
    94
    Location:
    Blue Mountain Beach
    Not sure what you're talking about. I'm not from New York, and I don't hang out in Deli's. I'll only eat bread if it's gluten free, fewer crumbs.

    Quit trying to play detective, and address the problems with lawyers, and wealthy business owners running FBFA. How can that elite class of rule and LAW breakers attack the common citizens and then blame them for the fight y'all started? Asking for a friend.
     
  10. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    88
    Location:
    SRB
    Anyone who claims to know who Reggie's is like someone bluffing with a pair of 10's on a Sunday night.

    Most importantly, what does it matter? Let's get back to the issues. So far Walton County has spent over a millions dollars and more at risk in the attempt to TAKE property rights against the US Constitution and the Florida Property Bill of Rights.

    Do you think the US Supreme Court is going to side with the BCC TAKING Property Rights?

    Let's spend some time cleaning up the Vendor Beach Chair issue and protecting our unique ecosystem.
     
  11. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,193
    Likes Received:
    190
    Reggie, when you call out hatred you need to be more specific. If someone disagrees with you it does not mean they hate you. Words are important but in a forum like this many people hide their identity so they can be more... lets say theatrical or dramatic. You have to admit that hardly any of the BPO's use their real names so there is a mistrust built in to the nature of this forum or any forum. I despise the name calling on both sides. Speaking only for myself I did ask some questions to FBB (mainly because of the word count) and the answers changed my mind about BPO's in general. I admitted that it is unfair of me to do this but because of the lawsuit you are all linked together. I try hard to be fair and draw accurate conclusions but sometimes we do make assumptions without really knowing someone and I do apologize for that. I believe in keeping the door open unless it closes but this door will not even budge to be open. The BPO position of exclusion actually believes that the door is made of stone and not meant to be a door at all. Your position does not stop there as it goes on to shame anyone who does not believe the CU position of beaches belonging to The People. Drama. Theater. Polarizing rhetoric. Do you disagree that the Exclusion side called The People entitled, socialist, Marxist, uneducated, emotional etc. Yes it happened on the CU side as well but you keep complaining that the CU side is nasty...well do you not see a problem with this? I understand why you do not use your name but I feel like it is important to use your name and take ownership of your position. Otherwise you might be called a troll. I have been called a troll on this forum even by some administrators so I understand how it feels. Not cool. That word is meant to diminish your value. Since I use my name it is particularly unpleasant but I got over it. The people who called me that do not know me. Move on dot come is my motto in this forum in relation to the name calling. It should not happen but it does.

    I think I should clarify my position so you understand who I am a little better. I believe in civility and community. I do not believe in unearned entitlements. I happen to believe that the "Beach" is open to the public no matter what the legal description reads on the deed. I do believe that the court needs to decide the issue of Customary Use which is the legal Precedent. I "wish" there could have been a compromise. Neither side knows what that Judge will decide. I assume he will be under "pressure" to side with property rights. Pressure comes from power so we will see where the power is. You, Reggie, FBB and others are razor sharp in your belief that you have the power in Property Rights. After my discussions in this forum and other people I believe that if you are right then the State will have no choice but to take the property in the form of eminent domain. I hope you will not be able to exclude anyone from the "Beach" unless they are being disrespectful. Reason being is that I believe you are so caught up in justifying your good fortune to own and build on the sand dunes that it has blinded you to fairness, equality and the equal distribution of resources. You are also angry with The People who call you names, disrespect you and you believe "took" your property. I get it so why would I believe you are in a sharing mood? FBB's post left me with no room for supporting the right of exclusion. Yes, I trust the BCC CU position more than I trust the BPO position of exclusion. I do understand your disagreement with my opinion.
     
  12. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    88
    Location:
    SRB
    mputal, thank you for your posts and clarifying your position.

    1. The BPO position of exclusion actually believes that the door is made of stone and not meant to be a door at all.

    There are many BPO's and many different positions. Each property owner can make their own decision about their private property. That is a fundamental point of USA property rights. This is NOT a "position of exclusion", but an position of "not allowing the BCC to TAKE property rights and FORCING property owners to accept unlimited occupation of their legal deeded private deeded property against their will". These are two different items. Each property owner can make their own decision on who and how many and what equipment they allow. Just because one BPO allows beach equipment on their deeded property only if you are renting their property does not mean it is force exclusion over all 26 miles. Of course a good portion of that 26 miles (~13 miles) is either county owned, State owned, or State controlled.

    2. I happen to believe that the "Beach" is open to the public no matter what the legal description reads on the deed.

    That statements sounds like you do not accept the fact that for generations people have purchased legally deeded private property and have constitutional property rights. Is it only legally deeded property next to the shore that you don't accept have property rights or does that also include land next to coastal dune lakes, next to state parks, next to state forests, or next to scenic views?
     
  13. SUP View

    SUP View Beach Comber

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2019
    Messages:
    48
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Above Water
    Along side any Property rights issue is that of property liability. I have spoken with Sydney Noyes and Sara Comander when she was on the WCC, regarding the property liability for the BFO's if all of the beach were available to the public. Sara told me the WCC was looking in to that issue and she would get back to me. I never heard a word from her. I also mentioned to Sara that there was an opinion that the WCC was prepared to spend between $10M and $15M on the lawsuit to gain public beach access. She told me that it may be more than that. Makes you wonder what the motivation would be for the WCC to take a somewhat reckless stance with OUR TAX MONEY on a lawsuit that has no guarantee of going the way preferred by the WCC. And it is ALL OF US who are contributing tax dollars to the county.

    I also spoke to Ms. Noyes about the property liability issue and she replied that the County would not assume liability for anyone's private property. I asked her, as a BFO, if I would be liable for any injury, issue, problem, etc.. on my property as a result of public access. Her reply: "Yes you are!". That was a surprising answer.

    I am not a lawyer, but it would be hard to imagine the highest court, much less any court, would levee a private property owner with the responsibility of liability when they would not control who goes on their property.
     
  14. Dave Rauschkolb

    Dave Rauschkolb Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,003
    Likes Received:
    666
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    Prior to all this nonsense (HB631) there was no liability at all for Beach front owners. Can you show me one instance in the history of Florida where someone who owned property on the beach was liable for something that happened on the beach? I’d love to see it.
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
  15. SUP View

    SUP View Beach Comber

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2019
    Messages:
    48
    Likes Received:
    30
    Location:
    Above Water
    Both insurance companies on 30A that handle our property let us know that there would be several "dominoes" that would fall if CU were implemented. One is that rates would certainly go up. I also confirmed this with a larger property insurance group Destin. They also offered that if "legal issues" were to rise after CU was in place, there would be some insurance groups that would no longer offer that liability insurance. The fact that Sara Comander confirmed the WCC was looking into this "and it is a concern" is also telling.

    All it takes is a Michael Avenatti self-promoting, self staging, type attorney to file against a BFO after someone steps on a broken bottle and the flood gates will open. There might even be that type of attorney on 30A.
     
  16. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,193
    Likes Received:
    190
    What I believe does not have any legal value. It is my opinion as a human being. So, no I do not accept the legal description on a deeded property that gives you the right to exclude people from the beach. I believe that sand dunes existed prior to the building and therefore the land is part of a natural resource. You should feel fortunate that you were given permits to build on the sand dunes and at the very least share the beach with the public. I know why you are making this about the power of property rights. I am just being honest when I say that I do not trust your power to exclude. I am NOT judging anyone. If I owned property on the sand dunes I might also try very hard to justify exclusion and my right to own and build on a sand dune. I would like to believe that I would ignore my right to exclude anyone from the beach. I am sure I would complain about the noise, trash, furniture etc. BUT even if I did complain my wife would remind me of the power of sharing my good fortune :) My father also set a good example in his handling of those fishermen at his dock. I am sure that many BPO's believe the same way I do and I wish I could apologize to each one. If BPO's win the lawsuit it will not be what you think. I understand that you seem to have a clear conscience about the right to exclude. Speaking for myself I would not be able to sleep at night if I went down to the beach to tell someone to move because MY family wants that spot or because they did not earn the right to be there or because of any other reason except blatant disrespect which I am pretty sure does not happen very often.
     
  17. BlueMtnBeachVagrant

    BlueMtnBeachVagrant Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,288
    Likes Received:
    189
    Rediculous .
     
  18. EZ4144

    EZ4144 Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2005
    Messages:
    194
    Likes Received:
    37
    Razor wire coming soon to a beach near you.
     
  19. Dave Rauschkolb

    Dave Rauschkolb Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,003
    Likes Received:
    666
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    Malarkey
     
  20. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    150
    Likes Received:
    88
    Location:
    SRB
    looks like someone bet on a pair of 10's

    Landers v. Milton
    Ralph v. City of Daytona Beach
    Harbor Beach Surf Club, Inc. v. Water Taxi of Ft. Lauderdale, Inc.
    Andrews v. Department of Natural Resources, State of Fla.
    Bryan v. City of West Palm Beach
    White v. Hughes
    Lomack v. Mowrey
    Harris v. City of Neptune Beach
    Landa v. Charles S. Whiteside, Inc.
    Wamser v. City of St. Petersburg, 339 So.2d 244, 246 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)
    Breaux v. City of Miami Beach
    Kendrick v. Ed's Beach Service, Inc.
    Avallone v. Board of County Com'rs of Citrus County
    McPhee v. Dade County
    Janes v. Consolidated Inns of Daytona Beach
    Florida Dept. of Natural Resources v. Garcia

    About 1300 cases total..
     
    Last edited: Jul 24, 2019
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page