Emergency BCC Meeting - 8/1/05

[Kurt]

Time to use good common sense like the county did after Hurricane Opal. The method used then saved this beach for nearly 10 years. This is my personal experience on how the 'governnment' in South Walton works. A few days ago, I went to the annex to get a permit to repair our beach walkover. The first person had no idea what I wanted and sent me to person 2. Person 2 said, 'Oh, I''ve been here 3 months and don't know anything about permits. Person 3 got all excited and exclaimed, 'oh, I don't do hurricanes'. Person 4 told me he had only been on the job one day and as he came from the east coast he had no idea how to help me. Person 5 sent me to the tax collector who sent me to person 6 who told me to go to person 7 and get a copy of my deed. I still don't have a permit. I'm on a quest now.

Frustrating I know.

As I posted earlier, the reason the restoration worked after Opal was because things had time to settle and roots take hold, and we had many productive years of natural beach and dune rebuilding. I've heard a lot of people say we know how to fix things cause we did it after Opal. The truth is we were lucky.

We at least got it started anyway. Maybe our hard work and money spent was not wasted because we were lucky. If we had experienced a major event in the interim we would have had to start over again like now.

The county after Ivan said sand fencing ain't gonna happen - maybe that will change now, but don't count on it. I don't have numbers to compare, but I'm pretty sure the number of sea oats and other vegetation that will be planted this time around will be much lower than post Opal.

If a major push happens for dredging, will we abandon the types of efforts we made after Opal and leave ourselves more vulnerable while wading through the slow permit process, and probable lawsuits?

The question is - how many years need to go by before we've done more good than harm. Does it matter? Are we compelled to do something even if we don't know it's right?

 

[sarawind]

Fanceenan, I don't agree that folks are gloating, but I understand how you might feel that way. I feel terrible for beachfront homewners like yourself who are struggling to protect their homes.

I wonder if some of the comments that you take offense to are based on frustration over the arrogance of a few(hopefully the minority) beachfront owners who see the beach in front of their homes as their property, and have fought tooth and nail to try to keep the public off of what they see as their private beach (I'm referring to the recent ruling in Destin). If they had their way, only the lucky few who happen to have property directly on the beach would be allowed to use the beach. Right now, Walton County is fighting a lawsuit filed by a bunch of greedy beachfront homeowners in Seagrove Beach over the Sugar Cliff public walkover. It is my understanding that it was deeded to the County several years ago, which the County acknowledges, but unfortunately it slipped through the cracks and was never officially recorded. Now the owners are trying to seize the beachwalk, claiming it has been abandoned, even though it was not their money that built it in the first place, and even though the county has maintained and rebuilt it after the recent storms. Sugar Cliffs beach access is a well-used walkover in the Seagrove Beach area! This is an example of greedy folks who would love to keep everyone off the beach except for a lucky few who happen to be beachfront homeowners! I believe the hearing is scheduled for August 18.

Unfortunately the actions of a few are making folks feel that all are guilty maybe?

Good luck with your home; I'm praying that our beaches don't see any more devestation for a long time! We deserve a break!

Wow! I had no idea a lawsuit was going on about having private beach. My understanding when I bought here was that our property ended at the vegatation line and the beach belongs to everyone. I've seen one of the condos close by put out signs declaring 'private beach' and wondered how they got away with it. I'm amazed. Not all beach front owners agree with that thinking so please don't tar us all with the same brush. The beach will hopefully remain available for all people.

 

[ktmeadows]

Wow! I had no idea a lawsuit was going on about having private beach. My understanding when I bought here was that our property ended at the vegatation line and the beach belongs to everyone. I've seen one of the condos close by put out signs declaring 'private beach' and wondered how they got away with it. I'm amazed. Not all beach front owners agree with that thinking so please don't tar us all with the same brush. The beach will hopefully remain available for all people.

In the Sugar Cliffs case, they're just trying to seize the public beach access and make it their own private access. In the Destin Case, as discussed in previous threads, a number of beachfront homeowners have campaigned against beach restoration because "the added beach would be public", so even though the owners retain their existing property, they?ll no longer have a private waterfront. I don't know much about California, but aren't many of their beachfronts "private"? It would be a travesty to have that idea spread down here!

I know that most beach front owners are not like the above describes, and it would certainly be unfair to put all in that category. Unfortunately, there are always a few bad apples no matter where you go!

 

[Fanceenan]

Smiling Joe, My Karma is fine!! Thank you!

 

[Paula]

Maybe all the folks in California should have had the good sense not to build there as earthquakes happen. They must leave their homes, doncha think? Everyone along a river bank or on any coastal lands in the United States better pack up. Lightning may strike and tornadoes may spin by so people who live around that possibility better hit the road. Everyone around Mt. St. Helens should relocate. My word, stuff happens. Please belay the preaching.

I'm one of those people who wouldn't live in California because of the unpredictability of earthquakes. I even get a little nervous when I'm in California visiting relatives about once a year because in the back of my mind I wonder if that's when the "big one" will happen. I had the opportunity to live in California, but turned it down because of the risk of earthquakes.

I don't have the same feeling about living or owning property on the coast of Florida (well, near the coast, we're across the street from the beach) because I believe that we have a national warning system for hurricanes so we can certainly keep people safe by giving them enough time to leave the area when a hurricane is coming and stay safe. I definitely would leave if there was a significant hurricane warning.

And, as for our property, I feel it is "property". Losing it would undoubtedly hurt a lot (because we'd lose a piece of our life dreams and it would be such a shock). It would significantly affect our retirement plans both in terms of the financial hit. We would need to work much longer than planned to make up the financial loss and -- even with insurance -- we'd have to pay a considerable out-of-pocket amount to rebuild. Of course, we'd also lose the sweet peace of mind of having a place of our own in SoWal to go to. When we bought our property on the coast we had to seriously consider and plan for the possibility that we would lose our property by living so close to the coast, and we decided to do so anyway.

But, for me, the big difference between earthquakes (California) and hurricanes (Florida) is that, although both could result in the loss of property and be emotionally and personally devastating for a while (a long time), we would not be at risk of losing our lives.

All that said, perhaps I'd be singing a different tune if it was my property that was damaged or lost -- I definitely realize that.

 

[Smiling JOe]

Wow! I had no idea a lawsuit was going on about having private beach. My understanding when I bought here was that our property ended at the vegatation line and the beach belongs to everyone. I've seen one of the condos close by put out signs declaring 'private beach' and wondered how they got away with it. I'm amazed. Not all beach front owners agree with that thinking so please don't tar us all with the same brush. The beach will hopefully remain available for all people.

Many deeds for Gulf-front property in Walton County note the legal description for the southern line as going to the Mean High Water line.

 

[sarawind]

Many deeds for Gulf-front property in Walton County note the legal description for the southern line as going to the Mean High Water line.

If I'm understanding what the Mean High Water line is then I realize how people can think they own the beach. Is the MHW line the same as High Tide or the Seaweed Line?

 

[Smiling JOe]

If I'm understanding what the Mean High Water line is then I realize how people can think they own the beach. Is the MHW line the same as High Tide or the Seaweed Line?

My understanding is that it MHW is the mean high tide line. I have not heard of it being refered to as the Seaweed Line. I am unfamiliar with that term.

Before H. Dennis, an owner at or near Sunrise Beach, I cannot recall which one, had his beach roped off with signs and sand fencing saying no tresspassing, keep out, etc.

 

[southof30A]

My understanding is that it MHW is the mean high tide line. I have not heard of it being refered to as the Seaweed Line. I am unfamiliar with that term.

Before H. Dennis, an owner at or near Sunrise Beach, I cannot recall which one, had his beach roped off with signs and sand fencing saying no tresspassing, keep out, etc.

The beach is for everyone - once we get past that, the world gets a whole lot easier. Just don't leave trash or junk on "our" beach in front of my property. We just have to learn to respect one another.

 

[sarawind]

My understanding is that it MHW is the mean high tide line. I have not heard of it being refered to as the Seaweed Line. I am unfamiliar with that term.

Before H. Dennis, an owner at or near Sunrise Beach, I cannot recall which one, had his beach roped off with signs and sand fencing saying no tresspassing, keep out, etc.

The 'private beach' signs I saw were at or near Blue Nine where there was also new sand fencing. This was before Dennis. Maybe they didn't walk people walking near the fences? People were walking by by the dozens so the sign wasn't working.