Open question for beach front homeowners, their lawyers and their politician friends

According to sunbiz.org....Lince doesnt even own BF. But to be honest I havent checked the property records of Walton CO. so it could be that she just hasnt updated her business info with the state.

According to sunbiz.org....Lince doesnt even own BF. But to be honest I havent checked the property records of Walton CO. so it could be that she just hasnt updated her business info with the state.

This is offensive. This is what the mob does on Visions group. Next you'll be trying to find my employer and have me fired.

Shannon

If you try to steal a universal human right that has existed for centuries, you should expect near universal condemnation. You are going to get reactions from everybody, some more prone to confrontation than others. What did you expect? You are ruining a whole lot of people’s property values, but more importantly, their enjoyment of beach life, both locals and visitors. If you are trying to tell me that Lince and Huckabee did not see ordinary people customarily using the beach when they first looked at the property they bought, you are quite delusional.

Delusional? You doing introspection for a change?

Human right that has existed for centuries? Must be nice to be in possession of divine knowledge. I think it abundantly clear you neither know nor care what the law says.

Ruining property values? Talk to the BCC and your buddies on that one, pal. You will note the Assessors opinion to the contrary and reconcile that how?

And I presume the ordinary people you are so sure were on the beaches in question at the times in question had signs or labels, big ones, identifying them as trespassers were in fact present and set up on the dry sand. Oh, you have an affidavit with documentation, I forgot. You do have documentation, right?

Take a deep breath. Your cerebrum could use some oxygen.

This is offensive. This is what the mob does on Visions group. Next you'll be trying to find my employer and have me fired.

Shannon

Well.. you have said several things on this forum that offend me so I guess we're even. And as far as your work goes...I couldnt care less.

Delusional? You doing introspection for a change?

Human right that has existed for centuries? Must be nice to be in possession of divine knowledge. I think it abundantly clear you neither know nor care what the law says.

Ruining property values? Talk to the BCC and your buddies on that one, pal. You will note the Assessors opinion to the contrary and reconcile that how?

And I presume the ordinary people you are so sure were on the beaches in question at the times in question had signs or labels, big ones, identifying them as trespassers were in fact present and set up on the dry sand. Oh, you have an affidavit with documentation, I forgot. You do have documentation, right?

Take a deep breath. Your cerebrum could use some oxygen.

I have the Miller Report for the ancient part. I have a pretty good hunch that 8,000 affidavits might be examined to prove people were enjoying these beaches during the general times I’m talking about. I do not have day to Day info and neither do you. My point is the people that have bought property here through the ages have been aware of the friendly freedom and unobstructed customary use. Please provide documentation of anything that would disprove this. And do it in court, not here.

This is offensive. This is what the mob does on Visions group. Next you'll be trying to find my employer and have me fired.

Shannon

Why is it offensive for a citizen to research info that is recorded and provided for public viewing?

Prior to HB631 there were two rulings in Walton County in two separate cases that upheld Customary Use. One was the "Alford" case and I don't know the name of the other one. The Blessey Case, the Federal Case filed a few months ago with the aim to have Customary Use ruled unconstitutional was just dismissed. Those are the cases I am referring to. So far it's 3 to zero in favor of Customary Use. I am wary of anyone touting "compromise" instead of letting the Judge decide after our BCC votes to proceed.

Dave Rauschkolb, wrong again. There has been NO “... cases that upheld Customary Use.” If you can not remember the name of the cases I doubt you read them, much less understood them.

In summary the first Federal case, not "in Walton County", you site challenged; Walton beach sign ordinance violated beachfront owner’s Constitutionally protected Amendment I rights and challenged commissioner’s customary use ordinance.

The beachfront owners prevailed on count one and the court ruled Walton commissioner’s beach sign ordinance violated owners Constitutional First Amendment rights and struck down the commissioner's ordinance text that violated owner rights. March 2018 the court ruled the customary use challenge was found moot following passage of HB631 preventing local government from violating owners customary use due process rights and prevented elected commissioners from declaring customary use without due process in court FIRST as Plaintiffs with the burden of proof.

The other recent Federal case you site I summarized previously. The court said the case was not ripe because Walton had not acted to litigate customary use in the state court yet, although we all know the hearing and vote is a formality, no doubt the commissioners will litigate, and was dismissed “without prejudice”. Which can be litigated again when it becomes ripe in November.

I agree NO compromise. Should the commissioners litigate and beachfront owners property rights prevail I for one will enforce my private property rights to the fullest extent of the law. No more grace and free use to trash, drive, smoke, leave pet waste, or human waste.

You are ZERO (0) for 3 on your legal analysis. If you think of the other case post it here. Facts not fluff or you should stick to serving beer; not legal analysis.

I have the Miller Report for the ancient part. I have a pretty good hunch that 8,000 affidavits might be examined to prove people were enjoying these beaches during the general times I’m talking about. I do not have day to Day info and neither do you. My point is the people that have bought property here through the ages have been aware of the friendly freedom and unobstructed customary use. Please provide documentation of anything that would disprove this. And do it in court, not here.

Walton commissioners (and you) have the burden of proof under the rules of evidence in court - not beachfront owners.

Have you or @ShallowsNole found proof of the County's control line (CCL) regulations from your previous post? Goes to your expertise and credibility. But I could be wrong - prove it - don't say it.

According to sunbiz.org....Lince doesnt even own BF. But to be honest I havent checked the property records of Walton CO. so it could be that she just hasnt updated her business info with the state.

How do you know? Could be a Trust or LLC with a different name. DOES NOT MATTER regardless.

Walton commissioners (and you) have the burden of proof under the rules of evidence in court - not beachfront owners.

Have you or @ShallowsNole found proof of the County's control line (CCL) regulations from your previous post? Goes to your expertise and credibility. But I could be wrong - prove it - don't say it.

I’m not sure it’s that relevant to any of this. You just seem to want to think you know everything. And I expect that’s really not the case.

I’m not sure it’s that relevant to any of this. You just seem to want to think you know everything. And I expect that’s really not the case.

Just go ahead and call FBB “arrogant”. Seems to be the catch-all adjective these days.

.....And let me make this truly clear: you brought this upon yourself. You knew there was customary use when you bought your property......

Your posts have ZERO credibility with comments like this.

Your posts have ZERO credibility with comments like this.

I got another open question for you, since there seems to be real evidence that Rick Scott's Red Tide is heading this way in medium concentrations (which could go higher at any time), who is gonna clean up the f**king dead fish? You? In Panama City Beach, I have heard, they have trucks that vacuum them up every morning. So now it appears your arrogance could cause a public health crisis. Unintended consequences can be very unfortunate.

I’m not sure it’s that relevant to any of this. You just seem to want to think you know everything. And I expect that’s really not the case.

No it's not the case but when one has facts and the other has emotional fiction it's not hard to seem that way.

No it's not the case but when one has facts and the other has emotional fiction it's not hard to seem that way.

Dude you need to chill out. Very uncool for you to come on here and start insulting people who are the heart of our community.

I got another open question for you, since there seems to be real evidence that Rick Scott's Red Tide is heading this way in medium concentrations (which could go high at any time), who is gonna clean up the f**king dead fish? You? In Panama City Beach, I have heard, they have trucks that vacuum them up every morning. So now it appears your arrogance could cause a public health crisis.

"Rick Scott's Red Tide"? Or are you blaming beachfront owners for Red Tide too and a public health crisis? No emotional fake facts here. The fish are in public waters and on the public foreshore beach property. How about the public? Walton commissioners?

"Rick Scott's Red Tide"? Or are you blaming beachfront owners for Red Tide too and a public health crisis? No emotional fake facts here. The fish are in public waters and on the public foreshore beach property. How about the public? Walton commissioners?

You are prohibiting any trespassing on "private property" including County vehicles. The fish are on YOUR property (so you claim) but the effects will be felt by everyone. Unintended consequences are a b**ch.

Dude you need to chill out. Very uncool for you to come on here and start insulting people who are the heart of our community.

bob bob, dude you know what they say about pointing fingers. I don't name call, call people dimwits-you have, use inappropriate words or blanked out words, or encourage the heart of the community to attack property owners with disgusting words and unfounded accusations, go on someone's property and destroy private property, post stickers in public with f-word in someone's name, use innuendo, post conspiracy theories with zero evidence, at least I do some homework before posting. Dude, I said it was not the case that I think I know everything. To state a fact is not an insult. I'm sorry you find the post insulting and uncool. Chill out.

bob bob, dude you know what they say about pointing fingers. I don't name call, call people dimwits, use inappropriate words or blanked out words, or encourage the heart of the community to attack property owners with disgusting words and unfounded accusations, post stickers in public with f-word in someone's name, use innuendo, post conspiracy theories with zero evidence, at least I do some homework before posting. Dude, I said it was not the case that I think I know everything. To state a fact is not an insult. I'm sorry you find the post insulting and uncool. Chill out.

Your whole being is uncool. No doubt you have no clue. The beach is for beach lovers, not haters.

Coming soon to a "private beach " near you. Who is going to clean it up? Yeah, you're damn right I'm emotional.

You are prohibiting any trespassing on "private property" including County vehicles. The fish are on YOUR property (so you claim) but the effects will be felt by everyone. Unintended consequences are a b**ch.

If Walton declares a health crisis or an emergency they don't need beachfront owners permission but Walton has to restore any private property they damage, if any. I and no other beachfront owner I know have never claimed the public foreshore beach seaward of the MHWL.

Customary use of private property is about property rights not health crisis or true emergency services. Take the emotion out of this and think it through. It's about property rights - the same property rights you have. Constitutionally protected property rights - if elected politicians want the property rights owners have had and have today they have to pay the owner fare market value for them or prove to a judge someone else has superior rights to the property owner's rights first. If the owners prevail the Walton commissioners could be responsible of ALL attorney fees - just like Walton will pay property owner's attorney fees in the Alford case Dave R sited, as I understand. Bet you and the community did not know that fact - not something the commissioners or Dave R would publicize. Politicians can not just declare private property rights no longer exist and give to the public without due process. Once the commissioners and the "heart of the community", of which I am one, respect other's property rights and stop the vilification of property owners things would get better.

And what many people paid $100 for quiet title to median high tide level.

Fine - I hope the judge sees what little was invested to kick people off of their beaches.

And median high tide is NOT the wet sand on any given hour.

Your whole being is uncool. No doubt you have no clue. The beach is for beach lovers, not haters.

I love my beach property that I earned and paid for with the knowledge that I have all the property rights you do. I like watching people walking the the beach. I hate no one. I do dislike local commissioners using tax payer's money and "the community" from claiming private property rights without due process -- property that I pay tens of thousands of dollars in property taxes to the MHWL. If you think I or any beachfront owner do not pay taxes on the deeded property boundaries we own; prove it with facts.

I like watching people walking the the beach. I hate no one.

Then pour yourself a drink, kick back, and watch.

I have the Miller Report for the ancient part. I have a pretty good hunch that 8,000 affidavits might be examined to prove people were enjoying these beaches during the general times I’m talking about. I do not have day to Day info and neither do you. My point is the people that have bought property here through the ages have been aware of the friendly freedom and unobstructed customary use. Please provide documentation of anything that would disprove this. And do it in court, not here.

The Miller Report is farcical, and I'm being as charitable as possible. And your ignorance or willful disregard of the law is tiresome. The mandated presumption of any judge hearing a CU suit MUST be that the allegation of CU is WRONG, and the burden of proof lies entirely with the county. The BFO does not have to put up a defense, though he may do so. The BFO has no burden of proof whatsoever.