Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

Well it would appear mputnal might, just might, be seeing the light of day regarding the concept of compensation for a taking. Then he says, "Seriously what do you think the beach is worth?" My answer, EVERYTHING. Any other answer would be disingenuous.

The only reason we're having this discussion is because of the beach. The County wants to spend millions on legal fees to take private beachfront property for nothing with no compensation. Why? Because it's the beach. EVERYTHING in our local economy, rightly or wrongly, NOW depends on the beach. Local real estate and management companies depend on the beach. Restaurants depend on the beach. Beach vendors depend on the beach. TDC depends on the beach with their 4% (soon to be 5%) tax. The State of Florida depends on the beach with the added 6% (+ 1% to Walton) sales tax. Walton County Tax Assessor depends on the beach (increased tax collection via enhanced beachfront property values). Walmart and Publix depend on the beach. Hell, even SoWal.com depends on the beach. The list goes on and on and on.

BUT all of the above dependencies DO NOT LEGALLY JUSTIFY CUSTOMARY USE one bit, not even a smidgen. Remember the 4 benchmarks?

Dave, on the other hand, can't let go of the $400 quiet title nonsense even though he's been properly educated by folks here a lot smarter than me. Assuming his answer is sarcastic (I'm trying to give him the benefit) I would swear he's just trolling now trying to get a rise from people like myself. Dave can't/won't even answer a sincere simple question regarding compensation without terminating his post with yet another "Goodbye". In my very humble opinion, this is NOT the way that the Chairman of Florida Beaches for All should be representing the group and its other members.

Again, Dave can leverage his investments for more and more restaurants and net profit and continue to be a master maker and marketeer of more mai tais to the masses. And the more people, the merrier. But when little ole me just wants to be left alone with my little piece of legally recorded private property that we've owned LONG BEFORE all this customary use stuff came up OR to be compensated for our investment / risk, we're painted as ...... well you know. And I'm sick of it. I'm confident that I speak for at least 99% of the beachfront parcel owners who filed motions to intervene and probably a lot more of those who didn't file but are sitting on the sidelines. And that's a lot of good folks with a direct vested interest and not just an opinion.

 

Excellent post. You did a good job of explaining in detail what most locals feel... We are being dumped on.

 

BMBV, Okay now I understand why the County had no choice except to take this to court. You might speak for the 99% but I hope not. I am not opposed to BFO's being fairly compensated for sharing the beach but this is the thing. Based on your own words it is not about fair and reasonable compensation but rather a desire to have what is called a "wind fall". You are the ultimate capitalist! This is the very reason why capitalism is failing The People. No Judge and Jury would ever agree to compensating you by the tune of "everything"! You and the power brokers keep misusing the word "taking". Legally it is NOT a taking because you still have "use" of the beach. It is more like an "easement" which is a sharing. After interacting with you and the power brokers I understand completely why the county had to spend money this money on a law suit because you want "everything"! It all comes down to money and power and you desire a lot of it. Compared to what The People are asking which is a simple sharing of the beach with you, it seems that you are the one who wants to take and take and take!!!

So you and the power brokers are a lot of noise to keep the BPO's in the lawsuit. It is hard not to get emotional from all the rantings from you and the power brokers. I generally don't take sides but I feel compelled now to become a CU activist. Thank you for helping me realize the inequity in your arguments!

Dave, I am ready to join up. Where do I sign?

 

BMBV has been on this forum for years. He is different from the legalese posters whose lives are consumed by the lawsuit. He has lived in a condo on the beach for quite awhile. He has a front row seat next to the Blue Mountain Access which has gotten very crowded in season and has very little "public" beach attached. He has a problem seeing any beauty in SoWal. He can't see past the umbrellas and tents to the amazing Gulf. (Personally I would move to a quiter place instead of fuming day and night.)

I like that he is always up front and has very specific grievances (although his vitriol for one community member in particular is tiresome) that stem from a time when things in his neighborhood were quiet. Now he is the ultimate example of "I was here first, go away" and "get off my lawn kid".

 

Dave,
Don’t tell my wife it’s not epic, I’ve convinced her I have 60,000 followers. She thinks I’m hot again!

But DR, here’s what we can discuss. Back in the 70’s, the private beaches along 30A in Seagrove, Blue Mountain, Dune Allen, etc..., were all advertised and sold at the same standard real estate metric. I bought my first private beach property as advertised with that metric. Remember what it is? It is Dollars per linear foot of private beach waterline. Some of them actually referred to them as “Dune Sales”. I’ve heard that Mr Allen spoke of selling his “dunes by the foot”. In 1978, that was ~$300/linear foot of private beach. In 2004, a week before Ivan, real estate adds were published at $48,000/linear foot of private beach. After Ivan, Dennis, Katrina, Economic crash, and Horizon, in mid 2010, it was about $15,000/ft. Today, it seems to be ~ $40,000/linear feet of private beach waterline. You can’t deny that real estate was sold as such. You can’t just revise history to meet your narrative. Here’s the good news... you’re only off by two zeros! (Per foot)

 

Selling dunes and reducing the beach to dollars is very depressing to most of us.
Too bad beach dreams have turned nightmarish.

 

Without capitalism, you wouldn't be in a position to post on this site.

And as noted previously, the WCC's and the county attorney have both told me personally that the property liability will still remain with the property owners if CU were implemented. I don't know of a location in the US were the liability of publicly used property is the responsibility of a private citizen for that property. Not really the "easement" you noted as local governments maintain the liability for those.

Still haven't heard any CU supporter agree that the county should have approached the BFO's for a discussion that could lead to a resolution. Particularly before wasting our tax money on legal action that could take years and not be ruled in their favor. It's not too late. AND again, the WCC's and TDC don't seem to be able to provide an accurate number of how many people the lack of public beach access affects. Why is that? One of the better statements made at a county meeting was directed at the WCC's and CU supporters - "you seem to be a solution looking for a problem".

I wonder about that also.

 

Capitalism is not a religion. Even if money is your GOD.

 

Really discouraging that your comment is the only thing you can come up with regarding private property rights vs. CU.

I know it’s hard for CU people to visualize the thousands of respectable people who feel the exact way I do. But they are out there, no question. It’s easier to demonize an individual such as me and a few other BFOs who are vocal on SoWal than to attack Rosemary, Seaside, Watersound, Watercolor, Alys Beach and other “faceless” developments. But then you know that already. That’s why you do it.

And Reggie is still 100% correct that we’re losing our 30A legacy partly because of all the personal attacks on beach front owners from thinkers like you.

I do appreciate the other kind words however.

 

You are your words. With enough posts a person's character is revealed. We know who you are. We know the type of person you are. We know what the truth is. Contrary to your words, thankfully not very many want to exclude us from the beach which we grew up on. However the ones who do have money and are using it to destroy our community while blaming it on a minority of visitors who have bad manners. You would like people to believe that you are saving us from the invading hordes of barbarians with coolers. Shame on you and your cohort of owners and packs of lawyers.

 

Tyler T your posts are much appreciated. It helps to have a visual of BMBV's frustrations and I do understand why he is upset. I would rather go back in time when it was quieter but here we are and the emotions on both sides are high. The legalese posters are nothing more than high powered agitators brought in by a few BPO's. I do feel bad for the BPO's that were mislead. Bottom line is that we have to be reasonable and respectful otherwise conflicts will increase and suddenly this becomes a nightmare. It is a bad situation made worse by just a handful of people. I really don't like the deception!

 

Not always true.

 

RG, boasting your wealth is not a good idea. The People are learning every time you post. The problem with wealth is that it is insatiable. You will take more and more away from The People. Eventually the oppression of losing our resources like the beach to people like you will cause The People to lose hope. I don't understand how you sleep at night with all the deception. Apparently money and power is very very important to you. This thread has played out because you have exposed who you are and who you are not. Same with the others. Never was about community. Just dirty politics.

Just in case your conscience comes back on line why don't you tell us who you are? We might all be impressed! Are you the trojan or the horse? Or wait a minute. Are you...naw you couldn't be!

 

Why would someone need to expose their name to validate their point for you? Whether it’s from Mickey Mouse or Ruth Bader Ginsberg is of no consequence. It’s the substance of their opinion that matters, unless their lack of a real name is all you have to throw back at them.

 

Because those who call out the opposition by name while hiding are cowardly. HIiding behind sock puppets and lawyers lends no credibility to said opinion.

 

Rachael, I respect your comments very much however I could not disagree with you more. Humans are clever and manipulative. We use words to do many things like inspire or inform but also to manipulate and agitate. I assume that you and I both care a lot about truth. Truth is the opposite of deception. If you go back and read the posts from RG and SV you will find deception mixed in with some facts and outright deception in others. For example, Sup View posted about 10 or 12 court cases that he said proved a certain point. Someone found that not one of those cases proved his point. Sup View was deceptive which is the opposite of truth. He did not think we the people are smart enough to fact check. Well, someone did. Reggie Gaskins started this thread knowing that most BPO's do not mind sharing the beach with respectful people. Every one of his post is meant to agitate and manipulate BPO's into believing that the big bad government and the loser people are trying to "take" away their property. He goes on to say that the local government "never once" offered to work with the BPO's which is wrong on so many levels. First level is that local government worked with every BPO in allowing you to build on a sand dune which gives you exclusive views of the beach and Gulf of Mexico. IMO I believe that the county assumed that the beach would be shared in return for those permits to build on the sand dune. Reggie also says that he is not affiliated with politics and that he and his family have been part of this community for a long time. I believe in the phrase: trust by verify. All I am asking is for Reggie Gaskins to verify he is who he says he is because he has made accusations about many things here on this thread. I think it is a fair question. Don't you agree?

 

From mputnal: "For example, Sup View posted about 10 or 12 court cases that .he said proved a certain point. Someone found that not one of those cases proved his point. Sup View was deceptive which is the opposite of truth."

Uh, no. You might consider reading my posts a few more times. ALL factual and simple for you to verify. Sidney Noyes is easy to reach. As are the folks at the TDC.

The facts that I have written don't agree with your "opinion" of beach front owner's property - and that is clear to all. If your claim is that the county "worked with" BFO's by selling them property out to the MHWL, your definition of "work" is far different than the norm.

Sky screamers are not the path to any meaningful resolution.

 

That's EZ for you to say.

 

Tyler, honestly, that's not my core concern. My core concern is government overreach, telling me that I cannot exclude ANYBODY from my private property. Until this CU law suit and propaganda against BFOs came in to play, running you off our private beach was way down my priority list. I'm not saying it's now at the top but it's definitely moving up. "You" fully encouraged your BCC to create this great divide. And you expect me to treat uninvited beachgoers the same as I did before this mess? It's too late for that.

Oh Tyler. can you not find a spot on a public beach?

 

Rachael, pardon me it was Stone Cold J who listed those court cases.

I believe that you power brokers are either one in the same or like professional wrestling where it is a tag team of grown men mocking a sport. It is organized so well that it looks real but it is not. There are some skills involved which makes it look real. Dirty politics is the same way. Skilled actors using words meant to manipulate and agitate. That said I do believe in an honest debate regarding the facts. IMO the county has made some serious mistakes in giving out those permits that limits the resource and damages the resource. Wealth always takes advantage of The People with pockets full of money. They can afford to pay for a tag team of lawyers to find ways around rules. They threaten everyone with lawsuits. Maybe the county just preferred to give them what they want in return for sharing the beach with the public instead of fighting all the waivers that their large buildings require on the shifting sand of the sand dunes. You see wealth are given rights that The People do not have. They have privileges that most of us do not have. Immediate gratification is a human trait and when you have enough money it creates an unlimited desire for as many resources as one can accumulate. That is the purpose of a power broker. Social media is a tool. Wealth is learning how to manipulate this tool. The smart CU supporters got out of this conversation early on. The dumb ones like myself stubbornly want to believe that you can have an honest conversation with these people. Unless they come clean and tell us who they are you really can't have a real (honest) conversation. I believe if you are going to be accused of "taking" the beach (aka stealing) without paying for it then I should know who is accusing me. Is that not fair?