New posts

Lake View Too

SoWal Insider
Nov 16, 2008
7,229
3,796
Eastern Lake
Not sure what the point of Kelo is to Walton private beachfront property rights, or the 1951 Keto (not Kelo) US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, linked in L.C. Bane's original post, #738 Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy

So back to more CU malarkey.

It's interesting to read back over old newspapers. Like newspapers, Sowal "Local Government" thread goes back to 9-22-2005 Local Government and Groups
How BOFs are "greedy" if they want to enjoy their Constitutional private property rights, that BFOs, not the public, pay property taxes on to the MHWL. It is interesting to see the history of public/private-beach beliefs, ignorance of private property laws and the Constitution then too, and predictions of impending economic doom, just like today 14 years later.

Seems the South Walton economic predictions of economic doom since 2005 based on opinions and beliefs, if you look at the growth and tourist tax revenue over the past 14 years, are NOT credible.
Beach destinations are public demand & in Walton 50% private supply. Inept Commissioners' unmanaged growth, TDC public expectations marketing, and antisocial media-lies are at the crux of the public customary use of private property discourse today. The property owner paid a premium for the title to the beach/supply and pays the local property taxes required to own the beach/supply, with all the property rights any other Walton County property owners has. The Commissioners' TDC have annually spent $20,000,000 and next year has budgeted $29,000,000 to bring more tourist/demand here with no plans to educate the public what is acceptable behavior and woefully ineffective beach code enforcement. A sheriff doing his best to avoid enforcing property rights. Kudos to the Deputies who have to endure staged for social media altercations by attorneys who should know better.

Since 2007 the Commissioners have tried to figure out how to change the legal title on the private beach supply. First by creating beach with a $173 Million tax payer paid 3.8 Million cubic yards of crappy not-white, shell-ridden, off-shore sand 50 year plan, and a legal perpetual government private property construction easement.

Then when BFOs exposed the Commissioners/TDC less than trasparent beach fortification plan and 94% of the (1,192 parcels) BFOs rejected the property easements; (2) the politically elected Commissioners just unilaterally declared war on private property rights with an archaic English aristocratic common law on the private beach/supply without BFOs Constitutional due process. Requiring the FL legislators and Governor to step in and pass a private property legal due-process law (FS 163.035) to prevent any other FL county from doing what Walton Commissioners were stupid enough to legally try to do.

Commissioners' tried a legal strategy to force BFOs into being the Plaintiff, with the burden of proof to show BFOs Constitutional property rights was superior to an old English common law of custom. That's back-***wards. A super majority of FL legislators, and the Governor connected those dots and rectified that due-process ruse before the courts could have. Saving tax payers millions of dollar in legal fees.

Today CU believers, incited by Commissioners spending many millions of tax payers dollars to litigate an ancient English common law against 4,671 BFOs have a strategy to fan the flames of the masses on antisocial media - the only problem with that strategy - what if BFOs private property rights prevail in court!? Commissioners' will have 4,671 really really angry BFOs who will have had to endure this Commissioners' and antisocial media's CU legacy. CUnCourt

The first, and perhaps, the only rule in propaganda is: If you keep telling a lie over and over and over and over and over again, the populace will start to believe it is true. That’s what this thread is all about.
 

L.C. Bane

Beach Fanatic
Aug 8, 2017
492
160
Santa Rosa Beach
Yes my link was bad. This was mentioned several times and I aknowleged this. I don't know why it didn't copy over correctly. I can't go back and edit/fix it. My post was in reply to the 5th Amendment Taking Clause comment made by Poppaj. The quoted response that included the bad link was "the Supreme Court held that general benefits which a community would enjoy from the furthering of economic development is sufficient to qualify as a 'public use.'"

Now that semantics are out of the way.....

Interesting read below.

Customary Use Facts
 

Mike Jones

Beach Fanatic
Dec 24, 2008
338
181
Yes my link was bad. This was mentioned several times and I aknowleged this. I don't know why it didn't copy over correctly. I can't go back and edit/fix it. My post was in reply to the 5th Amendment Taking Clause comment made by Poppaj. The quoted response that included the bad link was "the Supreme Court held that general benefits which a community would enjoy from the furthering of economic development is sufficient to qualify as a 'public use.'"

Now that semantics are out of the way.....

Interesting read below.

Customary Use Facts
Don't allow yourself to be bullied. The bullies on this thread don't realize (or probably care) that they stand out like a sore thumb in the garden that is the SoWal forum. I've seen it before. They leave as victims when they realize that bullies can't exist here.

Typical pattern for bullies on SoWal - arrive suddenly, become aggressive very quickly, get frustrated, flail about, get butt hurt, cry victim.

You can see the pattern playing out on this thread as plain as day.
 

L.C. Bane

Beach Fanatic
Aug 8, 2017
492
160
Santa Rosa Beach
Don't allow yourself to be bullied. The bullies on this thread don't realize (or probably care) that they stand out like a sore thumb in the garden that is the SoWal forum. I've seen it before. They leave as victims when they realize that bullies can't exist here.

Typical pattern for bullies on SoWal - arrive suddenly, become aggressive very quickly, get frustrated, flail about, get butt hurt, cry victim.

You can see the pattern playing out on this thread as plain as day.

The irony is that they are actually unifying us to a degree. Me, Poppaj, Lake View Too and some others don't agree on much but on this topic we actually share some common ground (no pun intended).
 

Poppaj

SoWal Insider
Oct 9, 2015
8,965
4,250
Yes my link was bad. This was mentioned several times and I aknowleged this. I don't know why it didn't copy over correctly. I can't go back and edit/fix it. My post was in reply to the 5th Amendment Taking Clause comment made by Poppaj. The quoted response that included the bad link was "the Supreme Court held that general benefits which a community would enjoy from the furthering of economic development is sufficient to qualify as a 'public use.'"

Now that semantics are out of the way.....

Interesting read below.

Customary Use Facts
Link was defective and obviously no fault of yours. Easily rectified by simply googling the case you referred to.
 

FloridaBeachBum

Beach Fanatic
Feb 9, 2017
463
112
Santa Rosa Beach
Yes my link was bad. This was mentioned several times and I aknowleged this. ... The quoted response that included the bad link was "the Supreme Court held that general benefits which a community would enjoy from the furthering of economic development is sufficient to qualify as a 'public use.'"
Interesting read below.
Customary Use Facts
OK on the Keto link. We all make mistakes. But there is a difference between semantic and facts.
What makes the FL Senate sponsor of 2018 HB631 read interesting to public customary use of private property advocates?

No one ever answered questions about Kelo. Did anyone read Kelo and understand the facts of the case?
Only a quote about Kelo taken out of context. "the Supreme Court held that general benefits which a community would enjoy from the furthering of economic development is sufficient to qualify as a 'public use.'" So? What does that have to do about Walton private beachfront and the legal doctrine of old English custom?

Is the point that Kelo permits any public use economic development of any private property, like private beachfront property?
Or did Kelo determine that a governmental taking of private property and making that previously private property, not available to the public, but to a different private property owner justify a police power eminent domain condemnation litigation?
If your definition of bulling is presenting facts about unsubstantiated beliefs - you have an odd definition of bulling. Can you give specific examples of bullying besides "there just is!".
#756 posts and counting. Not leaving anytime soon but will just ignore the repetitive meaningless LV2 posts in violation of SoWal Terms of Use 3.2 (a) Be courteous. ... do not deliberately disrupt discussions with repetitive messages, meaningless messages or "spam."

What public customary use of private property facts are you all offering?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Poppaj

SoWal Insider
Oct 9, 2015
8,965
4,250
OK on the Keto link. We all make mistakes. But there is a difference between semantic and facts.
What makes the FL Senate sponsor of 2018 HB631 read interesting to public customary use of private property advocates?

No one ever answered questions about Kelo. Did anyone read Kelo and understand the facts of the case?
Only a quote about Kelo taken out of context. "the Supreme Court held that general benefits which a community would enjoy from the furthering of economic development is sufficient to qualify as a 'public use.'" So? What does that have to do about Walton private beachfront and the legal doctrine of old English custom?

Is the point that Kelo permits any public use economic development of any private property, like private beachfront property?
Or did Kelo determine that a governmental taking of private property and making that previously private property, not available to the public, but to a different private property owner justify a police power eminent domain condemnation litigation?
If your definition of bulling is presenting facts about unsubstantiated beliefs - you have an odd definition of bulling. Can you give specific examples of bullying besides "there just is!".
#756 posts and counting. Not leaving anytime soon but will just ignore the repetitive meaningless LV2 posts in violation of SoWal Terms of Use 3.2 (a) Be courteous. ... do not deliberately disrupt discussions with repetitive messages, meaningless messages or "spam."

What public customary use of private property facts are you all offering?
In LC Bane’s post, the one that caused you to freak out over a bad link, he asked in bold letters and I quote, "Is that Plan B (if needed)?"
 

Bob Wells

Beach Fanatic
Jul 25, 2008
3,430
1,404
  • Thanks for the clarification from the Senator. Now if she could come up and explain it to all, because obviously her intent is important.
  • Yes my link was bad. This was mentioned several times and I aknowleged this. I don't know why it didn't copy over correctly. I can't go back and edit/fix it. My post was in reply to the 5th Amendment Taking Clause comment made by Poppaj. The quoted response that included the bad link was "the Supreme Court held that general benefits which a community would enjoy from the furthering of economic development is sufficient to qualify as a 'public use.'"
    [*]
    Now that semantics are out of the way.....

    Interesting read below.

    Customary Use Facts

 

BlueMtnBeachVagrant

Beach Fanatic
Jun 20, 2005
1,289
375
What makes the FL Senate sponsor of 2018 HB631 read interesting to public customary use of private property advocates?
I had the exact same question when I read the link to Kathleen Passidomo’s website. What is the point of referring to it from a CU supporter’s viewpoint? Truly an open minded question.
 
New posts