Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

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

  1. jodiFL

    jodiFL Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,265
    Likes Received:
    452
    Location:
    SOWAL,FL
    Something similar happened right in in SOWAL a few years ago. Some folks had been using a part of a lot for egress (their driveway) for decades. When the new owners of the lot tried to fence it off they went to court and lost 1/4 acre to those folks. "Customary Use"
     
  2. Bob Wells

    Bob Wells Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Messages:
    2,794
    Likes Received:
    683
    Was that at Butler School?
     
  3. jodiFL

    jodiFL Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,265
    Likes Received:
    452
    Location:
    SOWAL,FL
    No this was near Pt. Washington. But I think it is more common than ones would like us to believe.
     
  4. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    176
    Dreamer, Auburn Fan and Blue Mountain Beach Vagrant I wonder if you would be willing to explain why you disagree with my take on this thread. I just want to understand why you side with the power brokers (aka beach exclusion-ist). When I started posting on this thread it was because I felt like finally someone is standing up to disrespect. I think that is where you are coming from. As part of this forum community (minutely small) I have noticed a general disrespect that I believe inhibits the ability to form compromising solutions. So, I first thought that the power brokers were members of this community that also believed that we are losing our civility to disrespectful behavior. However after testing my belief with the power brokers I began to sense their belief in manifest destiny. I have found that humans are very good at justifying destructive behavior with a sense of purpose and these power brokers were very good at this. I became self aware of an underlying message of purpose in their posts: Property rights is the manifest destiny of successful individuals. This theme began to resonate very negative emotions because if we allow the justification of an unequal and unfair distribution of the beach because that is our purpose then it leads to a very few people with those resources and a lot of people excluded from those resources. Is that what you want? This is not a fear emotion but a real consequence of beach exclusion versus public beach.

    The power broker arguments that BFO's have always shared the beach and therefore we The People just want to take something from them is just not the truth. Yes some beach users are disrespectful and that is also the truth. The power brokers again tried to create a sense of purpose with their position to rid the beach of disrespectful people. At first I believed that is a good purpose (and it is) but I soon realized that is not what the power brokers desire. Suddenly, it was all clear that this was not about community, not about property rights and not about disrespectful beach users. No this was about a deep seated belief that human purpose is about success which they define as power over The People. Just think about it. Which side offered compromise? Which side believed in the power of exclusion? Which side believes in principle over good will?

    Listen humans do get emotional and say things that hurt others. Of course that is wrong. But it is also wrong to believe that our primary purpose in life is to own and control such an important resource like our beach. It is important to look beyond the words and become self aware of a higher human purpose. Hope and happiness is all that any of us want right? Beach users go to the beach NOT because they want something that is not theirs but because it gives us hope and happiness. Does that not make any sense to you? If not just explain because I want to understand your purpose in supporting beach exclusion. If you disconnect your beliefs from either political party and just ask yourself what feels right or what feels wrong it helps to see the bigger picture of life. It is easy to let politics think for us or tell us what is right and wrong but you have something inside you that has much more authority in terms of purpose: your conscience. At least I hope we all have one :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
    • List
  5. SUP View

    SUP View Beach Comber

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2019
    Messages:
    18
    Likes Received:
    16
    Location:
    Above Water
    To mputnal, those of us fortunate enough to have beach front property, we are certainly NOT the power brokers to whom you incessantly refer, and never identify. I would assume you'd consider the developers and some local merchants that want more tourists as the power brokers that are pushing for Customary Use. And they NEED Customary Use to enhance their respective portfolios and future monetary gains.

    Your logic, while calm, is certainly not on point. Or logical.
     
  6. EZ4144

    EZ4144 Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2005
    Messages:
    147
    Likes Received:
    21
    I don't want greedy people raping the beach. Or greedy people putting a chastity belt on it.
     
  7. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    176
    SUP View, of course you disagree with my logic! Your truth is in the power over others. My logic is in the search for a better truth. A truth where people see the best in others not worse. You have convinced yourself that The People are all takers just wanting something for nothing. It is a common theme thrown about in politics. I for one no longer buy it or eat it. Your identity is hidden. Your truth is obvious. Buy the resource. Control The People.

    If you are going to complain about developers and merchants and monetary gains please share with us about your good fortune and truth that allows you to own and exclude people from the beach. I can live and let live so I do not envy your good fortune. Neither do The People. You are wrong about my logic. I can only conclude that you are wrong about Truth.

    I ask you beach exclusion-ist about compromise. Instead of finding a way to keep the beach open to the public you misdirected the conversation. It is obvious that it is unfathomable for you to compromise on exclusion. Your right to exclude people from the beach is the opposite of community, goodwill or conscience. You have disconnected your conscience from The People at least on this subject. I believe that if you win the right to exclude people from the beach it will not give you that feeling of success that you think it will. You still have time to compromise on exclusion while getting many of the things you say are important: beach density, beach behavior, vending, future development etc. I don't believe you care about those things as much as you care about beach exclusion. Prove me wrong...
     
  8. FloridaBeachBum

    FloridaBeachBum Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2017
    Messages:
    388
    Likes Received:
    77
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    On this thread many Constitutional property rights supporters brought up many facts and questions about CU, for any beachfront owner that was interested about what CU is and is not. Any CU believer still care to list and define the multiple ancient legal criteria of an archaic English doctrine of custom? The Walton CU attorney Theriaque listed some historical criteria and was posted earlier in the thread.

    I stopped replying to the baseless CU opinions, CU feel-good emotional beliefs proclaimed as logic and “truth”, we v them propaganda, and EZ attacks on property rights because everyone has an ....... and opinion and you can’t fix ......... Does “The People” not include all American citizens regardless if you reside in Walton or Tallahassee or Tennessee or own beachfront property? Does American law not apply to all of the American People”? Does the government (legislative, judicial, and executive branches) represent all American people and protect individual rights and private property rights as defined by the Constitution and rule of law or just “the people” defined by CU believers?
    Mark Twain said; 'Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference.' Mark Twain was a pseudonym for famous writer Samuel Langhorne Clemens. Samuel’s pseudonym did not make his observations any less valid.

    Funny no one questions the CU believers anonymous user names or beliefs; just property rights user pseudonyms? Hypocritical and irrelevant.

    What is the difference between the “good fortune” of owning bayfront or beachfront (or any private property); other than one is more desirable than the other? The self defined political and economic philosophy “power” psycho babble opinions makes one feel good I suppose but is not based on the facts or law.

    “Give me free beaches or give me death!” Really? What about the 13 miles of free publicly available South Walton beaches and 825 miles of FL foreshore beach? For my deeded property to the MHWL (or landward of the ECL) - Don’t Tread on Me!

    CU believers can call Reggie “delusional” but no one can describe CU believers baseless opinions as delusional without being censored on this thread within minutes [Page 63]? Sad. “Just stating the facts.”
    Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
    Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
    Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

    Facts please. CU believers can post vague references to unknown court cases (from Tallahassee?) and SoWal (Pt Washington?) about deeds, fences, surveys claiming customary use victory? Sounds like a prescriptive easement or adverse possession cases and I’m not even an attorney. But CU believers question and attack property rights supporters court cases? Hypocritical.
    Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
    Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
    I invite anyone to post any legal case that a court ruled any private property in Walton or Leon counties were subject to customary use. Otherwise the opinions are wrong, not credible, or relevant to the thread.

    CU believer can post about a court case that has nothing to do with CU and declare CU victory? Wrong, not credible, relevant, unbelievable.
    Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

    CU believer posts an old NW FL [fake] News about Destin’s lack of law enforcement like it’s new news? Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
    Simple solution, property owners obtain a survey of the ECL (or MHWL) and property boundaries, post the boundary line corners, just like described in the 2015 Walton Sheriff trespass SOP and law enforcement enforce the law. Not enforcing the law is a dereliction of the Sheriff’s public duty.

    Let the CU baseless opinions and shout downs begin.

    CUnCourt
     
  9. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    22
    Location:
    SRB
    Just the facts?

    OK Dave, mputal, and others, please answer following:

    1. Florida Property Rights, as passed by the State and posted on the Walton County Web Site, documents "Right #2" is the Right to use and enjoy your property, and "Right #3" as the Right to exclude others from your property.

    True or False?

    2. A Walton County Property Owner has Property Rights granted by the State of Florida as posted on the Walton County Web Site

    True or False?


    3. Unlimited Access to day camping on private property against the will of the property owner in Walton County has been interrupted

    True or False?


    4. Unlimited Access to day camping on private property against the will of the property owners has been, and remains, under dispute.

    True or False?
     
  10. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    176
    FBB property rights is not the issue here. This thread was about community and who is to blame for the change along 30A. You say it was the developers, The People (which include local government) and CU. You blame everyone but yourself for building on the sand dunes blocking views and access. You say it is your right to do so. You keep pivoting to beach exclusion as the only value that matters. You refer to yourself no different than Mark Twain using a fake name. You are no Mark Twain Sir! Stay on subject. How does beach exclusion benefit anyone but yourself?

    You are going down a new path of accusatory destructive behavior. Are we your subjects and you the King? I did not support CU until I understood your message of power and authority over others. You call us fools and baseless creatures existing in your domain. You attack The People's character. You are not honest or correct about The People. You have sold your conscience to a destiny that benefits only you. We The People are learning why not to trust any of your words. You have nothing to offer this community but conflict. You seem to enjoy it.

    Stone Cold J you have proven how easy it is for you to try and deceive us with case law. Why would anyone feel compelled to believe that you have any authority to ask any more questions?
     
  11. bob bob

    bob bob Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2017
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    67
    Location:
    SRB
    And the sock puppets are back in town.
     
  12. bob1

    bob1 Beach Comber

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    27
    Likes Received:
    4
    Not that I really care about who is anon or not, as that is so middle school. But there is a valid point when one side posts anon but calls out people on tho other side by their real name. That's chickenshit. And then their is the obvious fact that most of the anti public beach people on here all seem to speak alike, use the same words, and post in spurts together. Pretty obvious it is one or 2 people posting under multiple names. And no BMBV I am not including you as a sock puppet and I think you're too old to know what one is or how to be one. :lol:
     
  13. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    176
    BTW the case law I referred to when answering AF's question is real, is the truth and involved my family. If you are searching in Leon and Walton Counties you will not find the court case that I refer to. My opinions are mine alone but that court case is a fact. Another fact: as much as you think you know law you have NO idea how a Judge will decide a case like this. The elements of property law are complex and the legal arguments very important. Facts do not always add up like we think they should. BPO's should be aware of this.
     
  14. kayti elliott

    kayti elliott Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2014
    Messages:
    86
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    Freeport
    Do they have customary use in places like Martha's Vineyard and Newport, Rhode Island?
     
  15. BlueMtnBeachVagrant

    BlueMtnBeachVagrant Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,183
    Likes Received:
    127
    Private Beaches at Martha's Vineyard (interesting read even though it's 12 years old). We certainly don't have the following two "issues" - both sides are now loud and legally armed:

    "... For almost two-thirds of Martha’s Vineyard’s beaches are legally, if not always in practice, closed to the public. And on no subject is the influence of hush money more apparent.
    “I’m warning you in advance,” said Dan Waters when I rang him to say I was doing a story on beach access, and to ask for a copy of his poem, “you will pay the consequences. You’re breaking that rule [of silence] by writing this article.
    "


    AND BFO property lines only extend to the MHWL not 1650 feet out beyond that:


    "But before we get to that, a little history about private beaches. It all goes back to colonial times. A 1647 law, intended to encourage property owners to invest in wharves and boat yards, gave them ownership of beaches adjoining their land. Not just to the dune line or even to the high-water mark, but to the low-water mark, or to any tidally exposed land out to 1,650 feet beyond the high-tide mark."


    Succinct observation on author's part:


    "The private-beach law has been contentious ever since, it seems, people decided bathing in the sea was quite fun. And there is no question most Islanders – indeed, most residents in the state – think it appalling. Except, of course, those who have access to a private beach. Like babies and monopolies, private beaches seem dreadful things until you have one of your own."


    A customary-ish taking (for just walking) was overturned because Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court said compensation was required:

    "One of the most delightful stories about private beach access concerns former President of the Massachusetts Senate William Bulger, who took it upon himself almost thirty years ago to change the law, after having himself been ousted from a private beach. For fifteen years, from 1976, he filed bills annually, simply trying to get walking – not sunbathing or picnicking or nude frolicking, just walking – added to the list of things people could do. In 1991, he finally succeeded; the law was changed to give the public the general right to walk along wet sand areas between dawn and dusk.
    But it was a quixotic victory. The state Supreme Judicial Court quickly determined property owners would have to be compensated for the loss of market value incurred by having the hoi polloi on their property."

    I'll save you the trouble of looking up hoi polloi...."the masses, the common people, the populace, the public, the people, the multitude, the rank and file, the lower orders, the crowd, the commonality, the commonalty, the commons, the third estate, the plebeians...". Again I'm just the messenger.


    Not even sure that eminent domain is an answer based on below:

    "Bulger replied with another piece of legislation, requiring the Department of Environmental Management to select a piece of property to be taken by eminent domain, as a test case. Nothing ever happened. Bulger later declared the whole saga the biggest disappointment of his political career.
    "


    Value of beach access - and once again, I'm just the messenger folks. You should read the full context in the article to understand the setup:

    " “If you bought a beach key as an investment you’d be doing spectacularly well,” said our lawyer, “considering that twenty-five years ago they probably cost $5,000, and now they’re worth $350,000 plus.” "


    Hopefully this will liven up the thread with some thought provoking posts instead of knee jerk personal attacks. I think we should all be past that by now.
     
    Last edited: Aug 28, 2019
  16. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    176
    I do no believe the Judge will rule on property rights vs customary use. Even if it were I don't believe it to be a slam dunk for public exclusion. It seems to me that a Judge will consider the criteria by which the county approves beach development. It is very likely that the county lawyers will link the beach development approval process with easements for public beach use. The agreement with St. Joe may be sufficient evidence to make this connection. I believe the Judge will rule that Deeds will need to be modified to include the public use easements. Just an opinion.

    I also believe that the beaches at Martha's Vineyard are substantially different than Florida beaches in terms of public use. I doubt sunbathing with the much lower air temperatures is hardly considered a use. Borrowing from the power brokers (and maybe Perry Mason): I object: Irrelevant nonsense or Emotional nonsense or Baseless opinion etc. etc. etc. :)

    If I were a BPO I would compromise on beach exclusion and just go count your money for distraction when the beach is crowded with loser common people of which I am a member. Come on lighten up...you asked for thought "provoking" :)
     
  17. BlueMtnBeachVagrant

    BlueMtnBeachVagrant Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,183
    Likes Received:
    127
    I'll count my $350,000 after you buy my "beach key" otherwise I won't have to endure you, the crowds and the rest of the hoi polloi . I can live with that number. Deal?

    BTW, isn't that quite a valuation based on your idea that it's too cool to sunbathe in Martha's Vineyard during the summer? Too cool? Really?
     
    Last edited: Aug 29, 2019
  18. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    952
    Likes Received:
    176
    Okay lets negotiate. I will give you the right to take $350,000.00 worth of beach sand from the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico. Using your "number" that would be about one five gallon bucket full of sand. To sweeten the deal I will throw in the bucket!
     
  19. bob bob

    bob bob Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2017
    Messages:
    321
    Likes Received:
    67
    Location:
    SRB
    Taking sand is illegal.
     
  20. kayti elliott

    kayti elliott Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2014
    Messages:
    86
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    Freeport
    I have to laugh at all this, especially the BS that Martha's Vineyard is substantially different from the beaches here. By law, what difference does it make? The fact is that in places like Martha's Vineyard, where only the elite are allowed on the beaches, the "elite" are quite different than the "capitalist pigs" who want to bar all the good people from enjoying "The People's Beach". The elite ritzy New England foks are the super rich who only claim to be socialists.
     

Share This Page