Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

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

  1. stone packard

    stone packard Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2018
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    niceville
    I'm still chuckling about the affidavits that were given away like Halloween candy that people from all over the country signed. It reminds me of the petition that people were talked into signing, demanding that a Hampton Inn not be built in Seagrove Beach. My wife even signed the petition because a friend, who lives at Rosemary Beach asked her to.
     
  2. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,103
    Likes Received:
    184
    SP, if your wife reads your post I doubt you will be chuckling. I would also not be so accusatory that the affidavits are based on a whim including your wife's. You are not as entitled as you seem to think. You seem to view the public (We The People) as somehow less than you yet real people with real identities showed up and put their name on an official document. Accusing the people of both ignorance and lack of integrity. Not very smart.
     
  3. stone packard

    stone packard Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2018
    Messages:
    57
    Likes Received:
    13
    Location:
    niceville
    Perhaps you didn't understand what I wrote. My wife signed the anti-Hampton Inn petition, not a CU affidavit. She's very intelligent and she knows that any sworn statement has serious implications and is not to be taken lightly.
     
  4. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,103
    Likes Received:
    184
    SP, good response. I agree.
     
  5. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    54
    Location:
    SRB
    Dave, this is Case 08-CA-000006 (the 2008 court case from Edgewater Beach Owners Association) and not 18-CA-00547 (BCC Customary Use Lawsuit). In addition, the Judge did not opt to not rule, he requested the lawyers submit final documents by next Tuesday so a ruling is not due yet.

    What was very interesting was court document 08-CA-000006 #128 on the Deposition of Larry Jones and when asked if "the County was trying to establish all the customary uses mentioned in the Complaint on Edgewater’s beach, Mr. Jones response is “I don’t have an answer for that”.

    What about you Dave? Do you have an answer for the following:

    WHY it is reasonable to remove property rights from legally deeded private property owners which have NEVER been challenged before, and WHO has shown going to every single parcel in the 26 mile beach from the mean high tide line to the dunes is without interruption, and lastly WHEN did this issue become WITHOUT DISPUTE as specified in the County Lawsuit?

    I look forward to reading the Dan / Dave depositions when they are released so we can finally hear their answer
     
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2019
  6. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,103
    Likes Received:
    184
    Scj, I object. Asked and answered...many times over.

    I hope not many people are reading this thread because there is nothing new here. The only reason I keep posting is because this subject matter is profoundly important for the future of this community, for this State and for this Country. Working class, middle class and politically moderate people are losing the battle for a voice in deciding issues such as this. Extremism, elitism and lots of money has a voice and we need to be aware of what is happening before we lose a resource that should be shared and enjoyed by ALL the people not just a few. The people behind this campaign for private beach are not here to protect anything but their power over the resource. They do not want to share anything but that is not what motivated me to stand up. It is human to be selfish. As much as we don't want to admit it we all have selfish behaviors. That is not our problem the way I see things. These movements that mislead, misdirect and divide with repeated bombastic rhetoric are anti-social behaviors. Anti-community. Trust me these people do not care about the community being over-developed, over populated and lack of sufficient infrastructure. They have disconnected from this community and even worse than that from working class/middle class people in general. They have money and they have power. They are probably not aware that they abuse their power from repeatedly justifying and believing in their self importance. They are feeling joyous about the state of our Justice System which they believe will support their desires for more more and more. It is the nature of humans to want more than we need so I understand them. I understand them but I am aware of what the future will look like if they are not checked. There is only so many resources to go around like our beautiful beaches. They want more of it which means there will be less of it for we the people. For me this is not about protecting property rights from the socialist as they want you to believe. This is about we the people standing up to check elite abusive power. There is no good reason why we can not develop rules to respectfully share the beach where everyone is happy not just a few. There is no good reason why we have to let a political party tell us how to think and what to fear. It is about standing up for yourself and most of all the future generations of your family...
     
  7. Reggie Gaskins

    Reggie Gaskins Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2018
    Messages:
    144
    Likes Received:
    87
    Location:
    Blue Mountain Beach
    We are fast approaching 100,000 thread views, 2,000 comments, 100 pages. Epic discussion folks. Twice this week this thread had 1,000 views per day. This subject IS of great interest. The details and facts DO matter. Sunlight and truth ARE important.

    Our commitment to the community, to keep the 30A quality of life, to keep our beaches protected from rampant abuse and overuse, and retain our 30A Legacy remains our focus. Putting millions of more people in homes and on beach will destroy our slice of heaven, forever.

    Thank you to all who have contributed sensible content and thought. We appreciate intelligent discourse about community issues. We don’t however, have time for extreme emotional distractions and nonsensical, irrelevant propaganda. There are differing positions on this hot topic, and as we thoughtfully discuss here, we are seeing the major gaps in some of those baseless positions being exposed in court.

    The prognostication of death and despair without CU have now been proven unfounded. Things are quieting down again. We all need to watch the county officials closer, that has been the big takeaway.

    But regardless of who wins, doesn’t matter, the protracted fight over
    Customary Use Will Destroy Our 30A Legacy.
     
  8. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,103
    Likes Received:
    184
    Reggie/Regina (his/her words of identity) is the leader of this elite belief in self importance. Notice the words "extreme emotional distractions and nonsensical, irrelevant propaganda, baseless opinions" directed at those that disagree. Heck I am a registered republican and fiscal conservative and I strongly reject this elitism. Propaganda comes from those with elite power. Repeated rhetoric is the clue. They want you to fear that someone is coming to take something away from you. These beaches have been shared since the beginning. This is not about property rights. It should be about how a changing community deals with the issues of infrastructure, civil behavior and recreational access to the sandy beach. They will not compromise on their desire to exclude people from the sandy beach. Lack of compromise is another clue of propaganda. Hidden identities are a clue of propaganda. Their facts are one-sided, misleading, misinterpreted, misrepresented and thrust upon us like a flaming sword down our throats. They do not want to here any voice but theirs. They believe they own the sandy beach. They don't. The State of Florida owns the sandy beach as it moves seaward to landward and then up and down the beach. They will dispute any fact that does not support their movement toward private beaches. The bottom line is we ALL want the sandy beaches to be recreational not confrontational. Common sense will make this happen. Not a campaign of propaganda to divide us and provoke us...
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
    • List
  9. Dave Rauschkolb

    Dave Rauschkolb Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    938
    Likes Received:
    629
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    "Things are quieting down again". Anonymous Reggie, Of course it quieting down, It's winter time; however your fantasy that Customary Use supporters here and all over the State will somehow go away, be silenced, intimidated or change their minds to supporters of the rights of exclusion or private property rights on our beaches is just that, a fantasy. (To use the bold as BMBV, Stone Cold J and other fake persona's here use ridiculously to add emphasis to their private beach propaganda) CU in Court and beyond. Our beaches are a shared resource, they always have been. Happy to work for improving unseemly behavior with enforcement near public accesses to solve this but exclusion of anyone from the dune line to the water line is a nonstarter. See you Tuesday Anonymous Reggie or Regina. And there is no doubt that PRIVATE BEACHES WILL DESTROY OUR 30A LEGACY!
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2019
  10. Reggie Gaskins

    Reggie Gaskins Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2018
    Messages:
    144
    Likes Received:
    87
    Location:
    Blue Mountain Beach
    Sorry gang, many much smarter people than me, or is it I? I can’t ever get that right! Anyway, much smarter dudes & dudettes here, on this thread, repeatedly, have taken each of the foundational claims of first - the CU requirements by law, and next - the claims by the CU leaders. Each of those claims and covenants have been deeply discussed, researched, and evidence of false premise and illegitimacy have been presented here. That’s what intelligent people does.

    We’ve openly welcomed the other side to join the conversation but instead, they offer what you see above. False premise, wishful circumstance, tin foil hat entitlement theory, purposefully misleading images, and downright tantrums. Never a factual discussion.

    No, this is not a court. But this is what passionate, interested, intelligent leaders do. Discuss, challenge, break down facts and law, research ideas. Come to proper conclusion. Since no one has yet offered any direct defense of any of FBFA “CU facts”, after they’ve been proven false, and their ”Leader” has refused a public discussion now after dozens of invites, we’ll report, you decide.
     
  11. bob1

    bob1 Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2010
    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    6
    Pointing out the obvious Huckabee doesn't need help making himself look bad he is very good at it.
     
  12. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    54
    Location:
    SRB
    One of the requirements in the county lawsuit, which the BCC claims is true, is that taking property rights without compensation (right of exclusion) is "without dispute". If this is really under dispute, wouldn't this be overturned at the US Supreme Court level if Judge Green agreed with the county's claim that removing property rights without compensation is ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and without dispute?

    Many believe taking property (removal of the "right of exclusion" property right) without compensation might be against State and Federal Laws. Why not just buy property instead of trying to take it without compensation? If Walton County thinks they can generate Billions of tax dollars (as stated in the 2016 BCC Special Workshop) by bringing in unlimited tourists with unlimited beach equipment (which may or may not destroy our unique ecosystem) why would they risk millions ($50,000,000) on lawyers, and a huge delay (10 years), on something that may get overturned by the US Supreme Court and just buy more property now?

    Is it not obvious to anyone that this issue is under great dispute?
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2019
  13. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,103
    Likes Received:
    184
    Public recreational use is not being disputed. Private beach is being disputed. The sandy beach has always been shared. Private beach suddenly became an issue because elite wealth and power do not want to share the beach anymore. Elite wealth and power are anti-social autocrats. They hide their identity. Is it not obviou their purpose?
     
  14. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,103
    Likes Received:
    184
    Public recreational use is not being disputed. Private beach is being disputed. The sandy beach has always been shared. Private beach suddenly became an issue because elite wealth and power do not want to share the beach anymore. Elite wealth and power are anti-social autocrats. They hide their identity. Is it not obviou their purpose?
     
  15. Dave Rauschkolb

    Dave Rauschkolb Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    938
    Likes Received:
    629
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
  16. BlueMtnBeachVagrant

    BlueMtnBeachVagrant Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Messages:
    1,266
    Likes Received:
    178
    Dearest Dave,
    I “smiled” ear to ear when I saw your post above. Thanks for the moment!
     
  17. Stone Cold J

    Stone Cold J Beach Lover

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2019
    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    54
    Location:
    SRB
    Mputnal, please read the lawsuit, court documents, and the Larry Jones deposition. Private Property is not, nor has ever been disputed by Walton County. The County fully acknowledges the private property deeds that extend from the Mean High Water Line (MHWL) to the Toe of the Dune. There is absolutely no current court challenge to the ownership of private property.

    What is being challenged, first by Ordinance and now by a lawsuit, for the first time in the history of Walton County starting in 2016. Is that the BCC wants the Private Property Right (Right of Exclusion) removed from Private Property owner (up to the toe of the dune) and transferred for the exclusive determination of the BCC.

    Please read the minutes of the 2016 BCC Special Workshop and see that in attempt for financial gain of billions of tourists dollars, the BCC decided to change the pre-2016 strategy of purchasing property and converting to Public Beach with appropriate facilities, and instead remove private property rights with zero compensation. The County claims the property is still owned by the private property owner but only the BCC determines who, how many, and what equipment, can be on their deeded property against the will of the property owner. It is the “entitled frisbee law” on steroids (sarcastic comment and not a real law).

    There is no challenge to the ability to swim, fish, or walk the entire 26 miles of Walton County shoreline, or the entire shoreline of Florida. That is controlled by the State of Florida and not the private property owner. This lawsuit is about removal of property rights (right of exclusion) from the property owner from the MHWL to the toe of the dune, for the exclusive determination of the BCC. This is not about “co-ownership” or “sharing”. The end result is forced occupation against the will of the property owner.

    The property owners have already shown they will not give up property rights without going to the Supreme Court. Do you think the Supreme Court is going to transfer the Right of Exclusion to the control of the BCC to chase tourists’ dollars?

    Again, please read the lawsuit, court documents, deposition, and 2016 BCC Special Workshop Minutes.
     
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2019
  18. FloridaBeachBum

    FloridaBeachBum Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2017
    Messages:
    435
    Likes Received:
    92
    Location:
    Santa Rosa Beach
    The irony of Dave Rauschkolb’s meme image is Micky owns the coat and has the right, mputnal’s “power”, to keep the coat, but chooses too give or share the jacket at Mickey’s own expense (that makes Mickey’s Greatness). Winnie the Pooh did not demand Mickey give him his jacket because he always had since 1970 or since humans made jackets. Pooh did not go on social media to disparage or misinform the public that Mickey was a greedy and selfish person because he did not give him his jacket.

    No politician declared an ordinance or went to court as Plaintiff to demand that Mickey and those with jackets will share their coat with everyone else that does not have a jacket and take away Mickey’s choice to give/share or not.

    Since 2015 BPOs have had the choice to “stake out” their surveyed property boundaries and the Sherriff has had a trespass SOP to enforce lawfully recognized beachfront private property rights to the MHWL that beachfront owners have had since US land grants and have today. Since 2018 Walton ordnance BPOs have had the right to place signs on their property boundaries - to the MHWL. Most, 99.999%(?) BPOs have chosen not placed signs on their beach property but could and have chosen to share. Most BPOs including me have the right to choose to share or not - like any American property owner and have shared our legal property. I don’t consider myself Great (see definition) for sharing according to Rauschkolb’s meme. Or anyone not great for not sharing. I just play by the rules and laws (Constitution) and expect everyone else, including those with the Power to make laws, to too. That BPO grace does not mean BPOs gave up that Constitutional right to quiet uninterrupted enjoyment if they so CHOOSE. But if CU believers of an old English common law doctrine of customary use and Walton commissioners declare BPOs do not have the choice and shall share their property with everyone! CUnCourt

    “What is greatness in a person?” Greatness - Wikipedia
    I doubt mputnal will agree with Dave Rauschkolb’s meme Greatness definition.
    "anti-social autocrats." Nice. Namaste.
     
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2019
  19. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,103
    Likes Received:
    184
    SCJ, this forum is a court of "public" opinion. Why don't you go out and talk to the local community and actually get a sense of the organic part of human existence? Or if you if you want to be a lawyer find yourself a court of law and practice the inorganic words of man. I took a lot of inorganic chemistry for my education and so I do understand it's purpose but human life needs so much more in the pursuit of LLH. On this thread and as Reggie/Regina put it we have "intelligent discourse". Unfortunately people like myself who use common sense is frowned upon. Apparently that thought comes from a warped sense of self importance. I suggest you research by observation and community interaction. Your questions about the Supreme Court has been asked and answered several times. Before doing your research go back and read my posts. I think it obvious that there is an abuse of power. I sincerely hope it will go to the Supreme Court where intelligent discourse will use all the tools in the tool box not just a straight line approach.

    FBB, your attempt to twist a simple gesture of sharing is so predictable and tons of funny. Being funny is a compliment by the way. Twisting the truth not so funny. Listen, you even admit that the beach has been shared in the past for public recreational use. You say it was a choice to share the beach and yes that is greatness. No stakes. No fence. Public beach. So what happened. You blame it on the County for delcaring Public/Traditional/Customary Use. Was that not the way you have admitted it the way the beach was used? Listen you can twist and shout and turn somersaults but it will not change the FACT that these beaches have always been shared with the public. You can quote the Constitution all you want but when it goes to the Supreme Court where all the tools are being used it will be a much higher level of intelligence than what you will find reading the posts on this thread. You have educated me a plenty on how an abuse of power can manifest itself for the destiny of private beaches. There is a common sense type of thinking that you and yours have failed at. Common in that human life is organic. Sense in that you are able to see the big picture of human life. Unless you have sold your soul you should try that Eastern Philosophy of connection to each other instead of individualism.
     
  20. mputnal

    mputnal Beach Fanatic

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2009
    Messages:
    1,103
    Likes Received:
    184
    BTW I do agree with that definition of Greatness but only when it applies to the greater purpose of life. The definition fails for the individual. There are a handful of exceptions...all in the company of Jesus...not you or me for sure :). Equality is greater than inequality. Fairness is greater than unfairness. Sharing and caring is greater than not sharing and uncaring. Do you have a better understanding now of greatness?
     

Share This Page