Emergency BCC Meeting - 8/1/05

[JB]

How was the project funded? Based on what we saw on our last trip, the beaches seem to be faring well. Guess it was a LONG project? Hope the county re-thinks this option. Whadayathink?

I have no idea how they payed for it. I'm sure someone here does. My guess is they either implemented a tax increase or floated a bond issue.

 

[Smiling JOe]

MarineBiology451, or anyone else who knows,
What are some of known and potential effects of dredging the sand and pumping it onto the beach?

 

[Beachlover2]

I can't imagine dredging not effecting the marine life - we are entering their environment - not just to visit as in swimming or surfing - but relocating it much like a hurricane or tornado.

I am so torn on this subject.

 

[SlowMovin]

Regarding the taking of Gulf-front homes. I was using a twisted sense of humor. If you read earlier posts, you will see that we are all pissed about the ruling of the Court concerning eminent domain.

Thank you for clearing that up. I have started--and then self-deleted, due to too much temper--three responses to the original post you made wrt eminent domain. I'm glad to see it was not meant seriously (although I worry that some readers may have taken it as such and agreed).

This eminent domain issue is an even bigger problem, IMHO. I can live with the risk that I may lose my properties due to natural disasters. I can even accept (albeit unhappily) that they may be seized to make way for a highway, utility right-of-way, etc. But I cannot abide the thought that the government might decide to simply give them to someone else for their own private gain.

 

[ktmeadows]

Thank you for clearing that up. I have started--and then self-deleted, due to too much temper--three responses to the original post you made wrt eminent domain. I'm glad to see it was not meant seriously (although I worry that some readers may have taken it as such and agreed).

This eminent domain issue is an even bigger problem, IMHO. I can live with the risk that I may lose my properties due to natural disasters. I can even accept (albeit unhappily) that they may be seized to make way for a highway, utility right-of-way, etc. But I cannot abide the thought that the government might decide to simply give them to someone else for their own private gain.

I think the majority of us who've been keeping up with the posts and come to know (and enjoy) Smilin Joe's sense of humor knew it was just a tongue-in-cheek comment

If anything, I took it as a jab at the ridiculousness of the emminent domain takeovers that have been reported by the news media lately.

 

[Smiling JOe]

...This eminent domain issue is an even bigger problem, IMHO. I can live with the risk that I may lose my properties due to natural disasters. I can even accept (albeit unhappily) that they may be seized to make way for a highway, utility right-of-way, etc. But I cannot abide the thought that the government might decide to simply give them to someone else for their own private gain.

Watch out, you are in Walton County and Cindy Meadows has only one vote.

 

[SlowMovin]

Watch out, you are in Walton County and Cindy Meadows has only one vote.

I know...believe me, I am worried.

I understand that Florida has somewhat stronger protections against eminent domain abuse than some states, but I don't think it's enough. Worse, there have been some attempts to weaken what protection there is. Unless something gets put in place to stop it now (while the Kelo v. New London ruling is still fresh), then I fully expect it to start happening in South Walton before the end of this decade. Those most at risk will be the older single-family dwellings on or near the beach (you listening, Grayton?).

Anyway, didn't mean to hijack the thread. Maybe we should start a new one (or re-start the old one) on this subject.

 

[Kurt]

I know...believe me, I am worried.

I understand that Florida has somewhat stronger protections against eminent domain abuse than some states, but I don't think it's enough. Worse, there have been some attempts to weaken what protection there is. Unless something gets put in place to stop it now (while the Kelo v. New London ruling is still fresh), then I fully expect it to start happening in South Walton before the end of this decade. Those most at risk will be the older single-family dwellings on or near the beach (you listening, Grayton?).

Anyway, didn't mean to hijack the thread. Maybe we should start a new one (or re-start the old one) on this subject.

Who knows what will happen in the future. I believe it would take so much money to buy gulf front properties that we would have to stop making bombs. So you are safe.

Although, if I were a gulf front owner right now I might welcome a nice offer from the people instead of losing all through eminent domain by the next hurricane.

 

[Smiling JOe]

Who knows what will happen in the future. I believe it would take so much money to buy gulf front properties that we would have to stop making bombs. So you are safe.

Although, if I were a gulf front owner right now I might welcome a nice offer from the people instead of losing all through eminent domain by the next hurricane.

In theory, just as someone mentioned about Gal., TX, if we get hit hard by more forceful storms and much more erosion is caused, you may not own enough property onto which to build anything. As a Gulf-front owner, you own to the Mean High Tide level (correct me if I am wrong) which will vary over time. If that line moves to the roadside of your property, you don't own anything. If all of your buildable lot is washed out to see, the property value decreases to nothing and could be easy pickings for the Gov't to take for cheap. I doubt it will happen like this at any time in the near future, but it sure sounds potentially feasible in theory. The price that the Gov't has to pay is the fair market value at the time of the taking. If there is no buildable space, the fair market value would be very low.

 

[SlowMovin]

I believe it would take so much money to buy gulf front properties that we would have to stop making bombs. So you are safe.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. I don't have full facts on this yet but I don't think the government has to pay the going market price. My understanding (which may be wrong) is that the government hires an appraisor who sets a price based upon his/her inspection of the property. If the owner rejects the price, it goes to court ordered mediation. If no settlement is still reached, it goes to a jury which determines the price.

Without going into all the possibilities, I can see a lot of peril for the (former) homeowner in the above process.