Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

[Truman]

Good list but please use "South Walton" or "SoWal" - "30A" is too limiting and too touristy. We need to protect all of South Walton, not just the coastal road, or just the beach strip. We have wonderful rivers, creeks, bay, forests, wetlands, etc. Also "South Walton" covers Inlet Beach and Miramar Beach, Point Washington and Freeport - can't leave them out.

 

[Auburn Fan]

“The back of the beach”

Sounds like “the back of the bus” I think you have it ass backwards; reminiscent of a vile era in our history.

Not everyone can afford the luxury of living behind the private locked gates of segregation.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

“The back of the beach”

Sounds like “the back of the bus” I think you have it ass backwards; reminiscent of a vile era in our history.

From the dune line to the waterline and following whatever county rules that exist with enforcement. That’s how it used to be and how it should be.

Oh great. I suggested a possible compromise to share the lightly used part of our private beach and you mix me in with white supremists. You and Uhlfelder do seem to share in those tendencies.

But I guess that’s what expected based on your well known NO COMPROMISE posture.

BTW, your comment hardly offends as it was directed at just me. Uhlfelder’s, on the other hand, should offend each and everyone of us based on its content AND that it was aimed at each and every BFO in the county who simply desire to protect their private property (thousands of “community” members) guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution - still nothing but crickets from you.


“That’s how it used to be...”. Again more mistruths from you. It only existed for a very short period of time when the county claimed a taking without due process or compensation. I know that’s a concept that you and other CU folks just seem to love when it’s not your property.

So, in the end, you have more than established that you really don’t want to seek a solution addressed by the title of this thread other than your brilliant idea of attempting to modify the behavior of millions of tourists - what a pipe dream.

 

[FloridaBeachBum]

Emerald Drifter, thank you so very much for your constructive post. Great question. Here are my top 10 created for discussion that I am sure will evolve.
"Make 30A Charming" List.

Good forum discourse. Keep it up with credible facts. I’d just add that in free market terms; public beach use supply-and-demand = Density management. As the demand goes up the costs of access goes up. Or you get “beach spreading” resulting in the Tragedy of the [Beach] Commons, and uninvited public use on private property - and the legal consequences. Until the demand is managed (stop TDC $20M a year marketing to start) CU is but a temporary bad long term political policy; because the beach supply is fixed and 50%+ is privately owned. Look at California’s coastal solutions - big government and decades of litigation. Wonder how much infrastructure you could buy and do instead of CU litigation and respecting BFOs property rights?

 

[FloridaBeachBum]

Okay each time there seems to be a willingness to compromise (or at least have a decent conversation) someone (FBB this time) throws a wrench into the works.

mputnal, it’s taken a while to get to your posts. I’m not retired or wealthy enough to have time to be able to post constantly here or social media whenever I want. But I make the time to share with other BFOs and Constitution believers the facts I’ve learned because there is very little facts out there. The majority of misinformation is just; I believe in CU, without the why anyone believes CU, other than the mass majority and “greater good” rules. In America “Well, that’s not the way it works.” Who determines the “greater good” anyway?

I don’t see my positions as “throwing monkey wrenches” but “consider myself to be a realist.” I do want to discuss your two posts to me. First the previous post before the thread was locked #934 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy and your post from this thread #51 What if we focused on solving the problem, instead of wasting time and money on a lost CU cause?.

Preamble. You bring up Deep philosophical subjects, IMO, to a narrow discussion about property rights and public use of private property. Narrow because we could go off subject quickly if you want to delve into “human” philosophy, morals, ethics, political, social, and legal theory, etc. and I understand the attention spans for such discussions are in seconds (or nanoseconds). I’d like to address your posts in parts as I have time. I’m not a philosophy or political science major or attorney, but I have been around and I do homework so I can make informed decisions; not based on in-credible social media fallacies and fancy baseless internet slides.
But in reply to your posts...

#934 Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy
“As long as I am respectful to other humans I have a human right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. That is the only reason we have a Constitution!”
That is a broad deep philosophical and political statement about the human condition.

“respectful to other humans” sounds like the “Golden Rule” expressed in many social cultures over history. OK, but respect and the Golden Rule are expected “human” behavior towards others and does not convey any special rights to you/anyone because you/anyone do what is expected. If you don’t; your rights could be taken by the Government as a consequence and punishment - after due process of law protected by the US Constitution.

The Declaration of Independence (US DoI), not the Constitution, says “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,” But let’s not get too side tracked with “all men are created equal” when many signers owned slaves, or what about Women, or the theological origin of unalienable Rights. Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness - Wikipedia

What is the intent and meaning of “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”? What is the meaning of life? It is a philosophical statement based on western human history in Europe. Human society decides, by our actions and laws. Every human has an opinion that is based on their own world view and political agenda what “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” is. What the courts have held is that some rights are superior and can not interfere with other rights. Freedom to speech does not include yelling FIRE in a theater.

Is historical old English “public customary use” of private property common law superior to Constitutional due-process and private property rights BFOs have had since 1776 and have today? Only the courts, not 5 elected politicians, can determine that based on factual legal CU evidence. That’s why 84% of the FL legislators passed the “criminal” 2018 HB631 and the Governor signed creating FS163.035 BFO due-process law. A law that changes nothing about the English doctrine of customary use. FS163.035 stops any other FL county from illegally avoiding BFO due-process by doing what the Walton Commissioners incompetently did to BFOs before April 1, 2017. BFOs are CU Defendants with ALL private property rights and have to prove nor compromise nothing. That is and has been the status-quo. Commissioners are litigating CU to legally change the BFOs property right status-quo.

Can the CU Commissioners (Plaintiff) with the de-novo burden of proof not litigate against 1,193 beachfront parcels and 4,671 BFOs with tax payers millions, have the political will to find a different political solution other than litigate CU (compromise)? Yes; but since 2007 past and present Commissioners have NOT shown any leadership or political will. Only an inept legal solution to shift the public demand for beaches to private BFOs property by force with CU litigation[1]. I and at least 650+ BFOs and 33 BFO attorneys do not expect the Commissioners to respect or accept BFOs property rights or expect antisocial media to NOT continue to vilify BFOs with conspiracies and misinformation - until a court rules. The alternative to litigation is Commissioners and CU believers would have to respect and accept that BFOs have ALL the bundle of property rights; including private use and enjoyment, that may exercise if BFOs so choose. The Commissioners’ Customary Use Committee, vice chaired by Mike Huckabee, made suggestions. Mike Huckabee has had suggestions. BMBV has made suggestions. To no avail.

Many define unalienable or inalienable Rights as; that which cannot be given away, taken away, or denied - that limited, unobtrusive, not-intrusive Governments are create by the Governed/citizens to protect our unalienable rights -- not to be governed by a Despot or King/Queen by “divine right”. US DoI “The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.” Then lists 27 injuries by the King.

Today is the Fourth of July. The United States of America’s Independence day from England 243 years ago. A long time but not “ancient” by any historical “customary” legal standard.

When was the last time anyone read the Declaration of Independence that rejected English rule and many English common laws, as expressed in the Constitution? Declaration of Independence: A Transcription
U.S. Constitution: Table Of Contents

If anyone disagrees say why. Should have credible facts; not shout downs and disrespectful name calling.

Have to go. Sorry for the length. Hard to explain credibly with sound-bite bullets. Maybe next time; “The truth of the matter is that many beach front property owners built structures that block the view of a natural resource that everyone has a right to whether it is with the sense of human sight or touch”. Thanks.

[1] For example former Commissioner and County Administrator Larry Jones wrote his 2008 Master’s paper explaining why CU exists, not if CU exists.

 

[Stone Cold J]

Good list but please use "South Walton" or "SoWal"

Thank you Truman and I agree and will refer to the list as "Make SoWal Charming".

Any of those items you strongly agree?

 

[Truman]

Thank you Truman and I agree and will refer to the list as "Make SoWal Charming".

Any of those items you strongly agree?

haha - Keep SoWal Charming is the traditional phrase.

 

[Stone Cold J]

I’d just add that in free market terms; public beach use supply-and-demand = Density management.

Good point, however we could also take the State Park approach. There are limited number of people and cars allowed and once that limit is reached the park is closed and no one else is admitted that day. There is also not a reason not to charge for parking and public beach access, which will also help reduce some of the crowds to a more manageable level. There is nothing that says we owe free access to day trippers at the expense of local taxpayers.

 

[Stone Cold J]

Truman - good point. Some people think the recent fighting might have tainted some of our traditional charm

So let's try a different approach. Pick one item from the "Keep SoWal Charming" List (or create a new one) and see if that is something that both sides of the debate, along with those sitting in the viewing gallery can agree, and then take that to the BCC to implement on our behalf.

Based on previous posts from other people on both sides of the debate, I will select #8 as potential item, no 3rd party beach chair vending on public beaches during high season (suggest something different if you want).

8. Chair vending during high season limited to only TDC at Regional Beaches (no 3rd party vendors on public beach during high season). Use only TDC ATTENDED chair vendor points and limit the number of TDC rentals available at each Regional Access. Rent beach equipment in public beach areas by the hour (not the day) and don’t set up until people are at the beach and take them down when they leave.


So how about it Emerald Drifter, Truman, Reggie Gaskins, Miznotebook, Bob Wells, Dave Rauschkolb, Florida Beach Bum, Auburn Fan, Dawn, mputnal, Mike Jones? Is there something that we might all agree and support?

 

[FloridaBeachBum]

Good point, however we could also take the State Park approach. There are limited number of people and cars allowed and once that limit is reached the park is closed and no one else is admitted that day. There is also not a reason not to charge for parking and public beach access, which will also help reduce some of the crowds to a more manageable level. There is nothing that says we owe free access to day trippers at the expense of local taxpayers.

I like the pay as you go fee access (like State Parks or private amusement parks [Disney World] the greater the demand the higher the fee) for limiting the overall beach density, access, and public impact; but how do BFOs investment benefit for public use of their private property, accommodate weekly rentals with beach use, or accommodate BFOs who choose to have private use and enjoyment of their private property they pay Walton property taxes on for that right of use? Many pay $25,000 or more just in property taxes. Not including liability insurance... Who decides the price of admission?