Led away in Handcuffs
- Thread starter rocket136
- Start date
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
A question for anyone: Obviously, this law (murky as it might be) has been on the books for some time. Why are we all of a sudden seeing an epidemic of folks being run off beaches?
Does anyone know of any place this is happening regularly other than in front of the Retreat?
Does anyone know of any place this is happening regularly other than in front of the Retreat?
In Tona-Rama, the FL Supreme Court stated that although the Court leaned toward the public use of the dry beach if the private property had been used by the public for many years without the property owner defending it, each case would need to be decided individually.
IMO, it sounds like if the Inn at Blue Mtn and The Retreat begin defending their property now, they are beginning to defend the property. I'm not sure how long they would have to defend their property from the public use, in order to re-claim it from the public use.
If I look out in my backyard and see some kids fishin' off my boat dock I'm gonna 
and ask if they're 'catchin' anything?' As long as no one's destructing anything who cares.
'It's fun to share'. Maybe a night time 
or could write nice messages like that in the sand real big for early morning viewers from the retreat building. ;-)
and ask if they're 'catchin' anything?' As long as no one's destructing anything who cares. 'It's fun to share'. Maybe a night time or could write nice messages like that in the sand real big for early morning viewers from the retreat building. ;-)
Good question. I don't know the answer, but the following opinion from the Florida Attorney General is interesting, and to me (non-lawyer), it reads as though the Sheriff's Office doesn't have the ability to remove people from the beach, unless the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare is at risk. What do you make of the following?
(Full opinion here)
"Generally, a municipality has civil and criminal jurisdiction over property within its corporate boundaries and may thus regulate and restrict certain activities reasonably calculated to protect the public health, safety, and welfare.[7] This municipal regulatory power is subject to the state's paramount power to regulate and control the use of its sovereign lands. To the extent that any regulation has been preempted by the state or is inconsistent with general law or with regulations adopted by the state, any attempted municipal regulation would be invalid.[8] Further, valid municipal regulations must be reasonable and nondiscriminatory, and they must tend to promote the public health, safety, morals, or general welfare.[9]"
It is suddenly coming about, because of the recent defending of the beach, by property owners erecting private property signs and hiring security guards to run people off. Who knows why they suddenly began this? In addition to The Retreat doing this, the Inn at Blue Mtn is also reportedly "defending" their property. I've also heard of reports of the property owners near Stallworth erecting private property signs, this year.
Yes, it has been happening for the last few years in Destin and the South Walton stretch from the county line east to Sandestin. And here it is the beach service people who are threatening people. They are down right rude to the tourist. In some instances behind some homes, the property owners came unglued at people who set up and didn't know any better. They have threatened and called the Sheriff, but in Okaloosa county no one has been arrested yet.
I have to say I am quite surprised that this is now becoming an issue when it actually has been a HUGE issue for the last few years.
On the other subject, during the beach renourishment, property owners actually laid down in front of the equipment to try to stop the progress. Deputy's were called and persuaded the people to move, however, as the project crossed into the Okaloosa County line, a deputy stood a 24 hour watch right east of the Crab Trap because some of the most vocal people were the owners in the first four houses west of the Crab Trap.
Up in Walton County at Sandtrap Road, the project just skipped that area because of a property owner. The other property owners are talking about suing the one who prevented it because now their homes are in jeopardy.
Apparently there are some deeds out there that state the property owners own property to the water and some into the water. These deeds. in my opinion, aren't even legal because they violate State Statues.
But, these people have instituted law suit after law suit, suing the city of Destin, etc. I really think they should be suing the realtor who sold them the property because, again in my opinion, if they represented the property ownership to the water, then they misrepresented the property.
I know of the property owner you reference and even mentioned him in another thread. He is a former convict and obtained his house as a result of being a "sugar daddy" to a woman who died and left him the house. Guy is a complete A-hole. He has been running people off the beach in front of his house for years.
I hope those suing him win and he loses everything.
Frankly, I don't understand why there are not several law suits of people suing these property owners.
I went to the Chamber of Commerce and ask them if they would initiate a class action suit against these people because they were putting every business at risk of going out of business if they prevented the beach renourishment. The Chamber was at first gun ho, but ultimately decided to form this stupid rally about the benefits of beach renourishment, as if we needed to know that.
Fortunately these individuals did not prevent the renourishment, but it is still in court and we are facing the possibility of giving these property owners the new beach and compensation, both.
The law is full of twists regarding this issue. Reading the FL Supreme Court case of Tona-Rama, IMO, it sounds as though the property owners do have rights to their land and the public does not. The Court states, in Tona-Rama (other cases may vary), that the public has the use of the beach, but not rights to the property(beach). The public cannot set up a vending station or build a seawall, etc. because they have no ownership of the private beach. In my non-legal opinion, I think it could be said that the state, county, nor TDC, have the "right" to nourish the beach, but the public may still be able to use the beach (dry) as they have for many years.
Now, if the property owners refuse to have their property nourished, it sounds as though they maintain the rights to the property. With those rights, also comes liability. Who knows what is likely to happen and who is likely to win cases if a hurricane funnels water and damage to the property owners who forgoe nourishment. It is likely that they will file suit against the State/County for nourishment to the neighboring properties which caused the funnel of damage to their non-nourished beach. If neighboring properties located behind the non-nourished properties become damaged due to the funnel-effect (my word), they will likely have a good case against the property owners who didn't accept the nourishment. They would likely go after the State/County as well. Nourishment and seawalls (similar cases will be likely) is a trainwreck which will happen with time.
Now, if the property owners refuse to have their property nourished, it sounds as though they maintain the rights to the property. With those rights, also comes liability. Who knows what is likely to happen and who is likely to win cases if a hurricane funnels water and damage to the property owners who forgoe nourishment. It is likely that they will file suit against the State/County for nourishment to the neighboring properties which caused the funnel of damage to their non-nourished beach. If neighboring properties located behind the non-nourished properties become damaged due to the funnel-effect (my word), they will likely have a good case against the property owners who didn't accept the nourishment. They would likely go after the State/County as well. Nourishment and seawalls (similar cases will be likely) is a trainwreck which will happen with time.