I thought this was going to be a producrive thread for a minute.
More blog material I suspect. Oh well. Aaaand bye.
More blog material I suspect. Oh well. Aaaand bye.
Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
- Thread starter Reggie Gaskins
- Start date
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
I appreciate the tone of your posts thus far in this thread.
Looking at one of your suggestions highlighted above, might you also be looking at all this in the exact same light as many CU proponents, with a sense of entitlement? IOW, why should that distance be measured from the wet sand? Why not offer the public the use of private property on the back part of the beach instead? Of course, there would need to be some sort compensation for this as well.
But you, I and everyone else who understand the position of Dave Rauschkolb, Dave Uhlfelder and most other CU proponents, realize COMPROMISE is NOT in their vocabulary and won’t happen, period.
If CU is ultimately defeated in court (which is predicted by me), then the only choices we, as a community, have is to implement the 6 bullet points that are contained in the first post of this thread (at a minimum).
So here’s more of the misinformation being perpetuated by Dave Rauschkolb. We know that people who read SoWal are much more informed than those on some of the other Facebook pages.
Again, one of the 4 criteria to validate customary use is definitely not economics or the economy of any kind. From a legal perspective, it’s not even debateable at all.
So on FB again, more misinformation is allowed to continue to roll along without any rebuking comment from Dave Rauschkolb:
D.H. - “Customary use is the only way to maintain the economy that S Walton County has grown to depend on. To say nothing of beach economies everywhere”
Dave Rauschkolb - “amen to that. whatever happens here will happen in the rest of florida and America; that's why CU must prevail.”
Can it be any more obvious regarding the amount of pandering along with misinformation that goes on? So many people being misled by the “leaders”.
Again, one of the 4 criteria to validate customary use is definitely not economics or the economy of any kind. From a legal perspective, it’s not even debateable at all.
So on FB again, more misinformation is allowed to continue to roll along without any rebuking comment from Dave Rauschkolb:
D.H. - “Customary use is the only way to maintain the economy that S Walton County has grown to depend on. To say nothing of beach economies everywhere”
Dave Rauschkolb - “amen to that. whatever happens here will happen in the rest of florida and America; that's why CU must prevail.”
Can it be any more obvious regarding the amount of pandering along with misinformation that goes on? So many people being misled by the “leaders”.
Last edited:
The economy is an issue, locals care about it. So do second homeowners, rental owners, including most beachfront owners. I don't get from your post that anyone is trying to make the economy part of the legal debate. But rather a practical part. Every issue your opposition brings up doesn't have to be part of legal debate.
Apparently the last thread was locked because it became personal. Let's stay on the issue instead of beating on specific people so we can keep the discussion going please.
Public CU of private property is a legal doctrine and ONLY a legal debate. Public use of all of Walton's and the US beaches is a belief or political agenda. The Government can tell private property owners HOW to use their property; Commissioners can NOT tell private property owners WHO can use their private property. "It is just that simple."
The CU impact on the local economy is a political BELIEF, not based on any facts, and the WHY Commissioners' only legal solution to shift the public beach demand burden to private beachfront owners, without compensation, for their decades of inept management of Walton County growth and public beach supply v. demand disaster Commissioners have created and antisocial media has aggravated this agenda by demonizing BFOs. I guess Commissioners just believe their own $20,000,000 a year TDC beach marketing that all Walton beaches are publicly owned beaches available to everyone - except the ones who pay taxes on it.
There is NO evidence since 2007 when the Commissioners first contemplated CU or since April 1, 2017 ordinance or July 1, 2018 due-process state law, that public customary use of private property, has had or will have any affected on tourism; with or without CU. Just look at the Walton TDC TDT bed taxes. Sometimes (baseless) doom and gloom could be a (antisocial media) self fulfilling prophecy though.
The TDC bed tax is UP 17.8% YTD.
The Commissioners and outspoken CU believers must have used voodoo economics to "predict" impending economic ghost town if CU is not legal. NO credible facts support economic ghost town predictions.
January 2019 TDC TDT Report #96 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
April 2019 TDC TDT Report #646 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
April 5, 2019 Report: Walton County top-performing local economy in Florida
Okaloosa and Bay counties do not have customary use ordinances (nor do 65 other counties) and the real estate market is increasing as well as Walton's.
That Walton real estate and economy will collapse is baseless (fact-less) fear mongering. Even if there is a downturn the supply will not meet demand and property values will continue to appreciate - just like after the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
#29 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
Beach Supply and Demand
#552 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
#668 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
If an individual makes a statement of belief, opinion, or facts in the public forum; should the forum not be able to respond by name to express a different belief or dispute the belief with credible facts to the contrary and NOT be labeled as a personal attack or bullying - especially with credible facts? It has not be someone speaking for a group (or maybe he has) that has made controversial in-credible CU or property rights statements and repeat them over and over again ad nauseum. The question is and has always been; Why does anyone believe in CU and what justifies CU litigation against 1,193 private property beachfront parcels and 4,671 BFOs?
And if you want to talk about personal attacks how about all the BFO name calling most would never say in front of their mother or children. Where's the concern and outrage about that?
Last edited by a moderator:
There is a difference between sticking to the issue and responding respectfully, and cyber bullying. I am assured that what has been going on here will not be allowed to continue. If your aim is to get banned and cry fowl then carry on.
Our constructive forum here has always been an asset to our community. The beachfront owners that have invaded recently in a coordinated campaign are not welcome here unless they can't post respectfully and without attacking people.
Constructive forum??
So why isn’t Jensky banned with her very recent male anatomy reference on a fresh thread seeking a bit more conciliatory tone? Same holds true for all the others with all their name calling? Is it maybe children deserve a second, third, fourth chances? No, the real reason is hypocrisy, IMHO. I and my fellow private property have only introduced FACTs and opinions backed up with FACTs throughout this ordeal for which we are undoubtedly condemned by the CU movement. And the facts are not what the CU movement want to hear or acknowledge.
And now a leader makes yet ANOTHER VERY RECENT ANALOGY to beach front owners being “criminals”. I guess that’s a bit better than being referred to as a Na... oh never mind - you get what I’m saying.
If there is any real hope of working anything out, FBFA must purge the current “leaders”. How can something ever be worked out when the “leaders” have stated for a fact that they will not compromise?
The CU people need to put their foot down and denounce the hardline approach. Otherwise if CU is defeated (which will take SEVERAL years either way), the county will be in the same shape it is today. The only difference will be that beach front property will cost EVEN MORE to obtain for the public.
So why isn’t Jensky banned with her very recent male anatomy reference on a fresh thread seeking a bit more conciliatory tone? Same holds true for all the others with all their name calling? Is it maybe children deserve a second, third, fourth chances? No, the real reason is hypocrisy, IMHO. I and my fellow private property have only introduced FACTs and opinions backed up with FACTs throughout this ordeal for which we are undoubtedly condemned by the CU movement. And the facts are not what the CU movement want to hear or acknowledge.
And now a leader makes yet ANOTHER VERY RECENT ANALOGY to beach front owners being “criminals”. I guess that’s a bit better than being referred to as a Na... oh never mind - you get what I’m saying.
If there is any real hope of working anything out, FBFA must purge the current “leaders”. How can something ever be worked out when the “leaders” have stated for a fact that they will not compromise?
The CU people need to put their foot down and denounce the hardline approach. Otherwise if CU is defeated (which will take SEVERAL years either way), the county will be in the same shape it is today. The only difference will be that beach front property will cost EVEN MORE to obtain for the public.
Was the FBFA's Stand the Sand event (which ignored the required TDC Beach Permit) set up to escalate the conflict and generate more donations to pay for the FBFA's lawyers? I wonder if they also set up the beach banner just to raise more funds?
We must find a way to work together to decrease the conflict instead of escalating it even more. The BCC lawsuit against the private property owners may be in the court for 10 years before it is resolved, with more and more conflict (and money spent) every single day. What are we going to do for the next 10 years while this is in court?
Everyone used to talk about the "good ole days" of walking miles without seeing anyone else one the beach. Now everyone is talking about ghost chairs, litter, pollution, parking, mega rentals, entitlement behavior, and taking private property without payment "because it should not have been sold in the first place".
The root cause is more tourists than 30A can possible handle, which is destroying our sensitive ecosystem. This is a very RECENT issue. We need to first REDUCE the number of tourists to a level that that our infrastructure is capable of handling. Look at what is happening to the number of turtles "false crawls" or the recent posts of people walking over nests that are roped off? Are we going to let the BCC fill in the Coastal Dune lakes so more Mega Rentals can be built? How many more sensitive wetlands and conservation areas are we going to let the BCC can turn into housing developments?
We are so focused on arguing about Customary Use and Private Property Rights that we have lost sight that we are DESTROYING 30A, I am not talking about a destroying our "legacy", I am talking about PHYSICAL DESTRUCTION of 30A by too many people in an extremely sensitive ecosystem. Even if you took EVERY beach front private property, you would still have this problem if you don't manage the number of tourists.
This is a tourist density issue. All of the other issues are a direct result of that root problem. The State of Florida restricts the number of people allowed on a State Park at any one time. Even Hawaii is taking action to restrict tourists so something will be left for future generations. Why would we ever consider letting the BCC make 30A a free for all?
Maybe it is time to make 30A a toll road with Walton County Residents and tax payers getting a permit...
Last edited:
A lot of people feel the pressure of runaway tourism. The solution is for preservationists and business conservatives to be on the county commission instead of pro-development, more heads in beds types. Good, reasonable leaders setting the tone of quality over quantity.
Keep SoWal Charming!
Why do you think you know my "aim" and that it is to "get banned"? What have I done to get banned for in your informed opinion?
Wow. BFOs have "invaded" South Walton and SoWal!? That's not conciliatory. Is inflammatory and seems like attack on people's motive. Then BFOs "are not welcome here unless they can't post respectfully and without attacking people." But you just attacked by accusing BFOs of "invading" too? Seems BMBV has a point.
Are you including this list of CU advocates that have attacked BFOs too? #493 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy .
What issue would you like to stick to and respond to respectfully? How about if without CU South Walton will be a ghost town?
Or an outspoken repetitive CU claim that BMB owners quiet title of "public" (private) beach?
Last edited by a moderator: