Public vs Private Beach [threads merged]

[Mike Jones]

@Danny Glidewell makes a very good point about our government promoting our beaches for all to come and enjoy. The TDC has never advertised "Come enjoy our beaches, or at least some of them. Please enjoy yourself on our 26 miles of coastline, but watch where you step".

Tourism is what is driving this argument, and because we invited tourists, that should end the argument.

Nobody said we can all use the beaches for recreation, But with exceptions, like enjoy the beach, except the plot in Blue Mountain Beach that begins 540 feet east of the Blue Mountain Beach Access and ends at 610 feet east of the Blue Mountain Beach Access. If somebody thinks a deed changes that, they're wishing on a star.

It's ridiculous that we have to have this discussion. I disagree that we need to buy beachfront for public use. Because of customary use we already own the right to use it.

 

[Danny Glidewell]

Mike Jones, I hope you are right but purchasing the beachfront property removes the doubt. It also allows for amenities such as bathrooms, walkovers and picnic facilities to be built near the shore.

 

[Porkchop]

I love how every argument made on this site for taking the private property of others is based in the theory of entitlement and simple jealously over what another has and another does not.

Blame the property owner for their ability to obtain property that most all desire, yet cannot afford...or were unable to obtain them (your) selves.

It's all the fault of those damn rich beach front owners...

Entitlement? Simple jealousy? Ha... Humans have an ancient RIGHT to access the coastline. The Romans knew this, which is why they codified it into law. We know it, which is why we will reverse the misdeeds which led to this situation. Nobody blames you John, and to believe that we're jealous of you would mean that, were it possible, we would also attempt to "own" a piece of the beach. We don't want to own it John, we want to share it.

 

[John G]

Entitlement? Simple jealousy? Ha... Humans have an ancient RIGHT to access the coastline. The Romans knew this, which is why they codified it into law. We know it, which is why we will reverse the misdeeds which led to this situation. Nobody blames you John, and to believe that we're jealous of you would mean that, were it possible, we would also attempt to "own" a piece of the beach. We don't want to own it John, we want to share it.

Good lord, I'm going to try this one last time.

I never have said I am in favor of preventing the flow of people walking the beach, from East to West or vice versa, never!

I have said repeatedly, that blame for this issue lies with BCC, TDC and WCSO.

BCC - failed to purchase additional property and refuses to do so. They thought renourishment would pass. It didn't. Epic Fail.

TDC - Dawn M., and her crew marketed the hell out of this area and we're very, very successful in driving numbers of visitors Up, while quality went Down.

WCSO /Adkinson created an SOP, specifically designed to not be enforceable. Multiple pages of B.S., while our neighbor to the west (OCSO), has about a half page document outlining their enforcement. You don't see these problems over in Okalossa do you? Wonder why?

So again, why attack private property owners when the real culprits are right in front of you?

Reason #1 - too ignorant to see the facts.

Reason #2 - too convenient to use this problem to attack the "haves".

The Better South Walton Movement has already felt the push back on this, with more to come.

The real solution is to allow things to get back to normal, when people didn't have to post signs, chain off territory, etc.

This is done by correcting the negative behavior on BOTH sides.

I really don't see a full on protest March designed to flip the middle finger at people being all that smart.

I do think we can do a better job educating our visitors about how things work (worked), around here.

But, historically, this County loves to let Attorneys make lots of money of its incompetent behavior, this shall be no different...

I think this will be an interesting summer.

 

[Dave Rauschkolb]

On the issue. some tourists are A holes and some are awesome. But a few bad apples set the tone, even leaving trash, using glass and dogs off the leash. That's ridiculous! But all tourists are now represented by the bad ones. Good tourists need to condemn the bad ones. Ruining the beach experience with pee in dunes, glass on beach, dogs off leash and leaving trash behind needs to stop and we need to speak out.

The Walton County beach activities ordinance addresses all bad behavior and all concerns.

 

[Dave Rauschkolb]

 

[Dave Rauschkolb]

Good lord, I'm going to try this one last time.

I never have said I am in favor of preventing the flow of people walking the beach, from East to West or vice versa, never!

I have said repeatedly, that blame for this issue lies with BCC, TDC and WCSO.

BCC - failed to purchase additional property and refuses to do so. They thought renourishment would pass. It didn't. Epic Fail.

TDC - Dawn M., and her crew marketed the hell out of this area and we're very, very successful in driving numbers of visitors Up, while quality went Down.

WCSO /Adkinson created an SOP, specifically designed to not be enforceable. Multiple pages of B.S., while our neighbor to the west (OCSO), has about a half page document outlining their enforcement. You don't see these problems over in Okalossa do you? Wonder why?

So again, why attack private property owners when the real culprits are right in front of you?

Reason #1 - too ignorant to see the facts.

Reason #2 - too convenient to use this problem to attack the "haves".

The Better South Walton Movement has already felt the push back on this, with more to come.

The real solution is to allow things to get back to normal, when people didn't have to post signs, chain off territory, etc.

This is done by correcting the negative behavior on BOTH sides.

I really don't see a full on protest March designed to flip the middle finger at people being all that smart.

I do think we can do a better job educating our visitors about how things work (worked), around here.

But, historically, this County loves to let Attorneys make lots of money of its incompetent behavior, this shall be no different...

I think this will be an interesting summer.

Ignorant to see the facts? The fact is that up until a few years ago anyone and everyone in South Walton walked and played and set up chairs on any area of the dry sand without being harassed. As more and more tourists arrived this heated up and beach front homeowners got frustrated with the activities happening behind their beaches. The Walton County Beach Activities ordinance was adopted to address bad behavior but one or two BFHs decided this was a time to lawyer up and see if they could challenge the Florida Supreme Court ruling in Tona Rama vs Daytona beach by restricting and stopping the customary use of the sandy portions of the beach behind their homes.

You say "I do think we can do a better job educating our visitors about how things work (worked), around here." The way it "works" is "The City of Daytona Beach v. Tona-Rama, Inc., was ruled by the Florida Supreme Court as a means by which the public can establish rights to utilize the dry sand areas of Florida beaches for traditional recreational uses." Up until this false claim of restriction of use by BFHs we all used the beaches without harassment. My idea for a walk on the beach is not a "Flash Mob" or a "Hippy Dippy" protest as it has been characterized. The walk on the beach is merely a reconfirmation that all areas of the dry sand both through both private and public property are available for use by any person.

This is not a protest or the middle finger. I have the highest respect for all beach front homeowners many who are my friends. In fact most I talk to would not dream of stopping people from using the beach behind their homes and are disgusted with the signs and the harassment taking place. I respect the fact that some people are not behaving correctly behind their homes and it is not a taking of private property in any way. It's just defending the well behaved use of the beaches as regulated by the Beach Activities ordinance in Walton County.

As an aside, the ABSW board takes no position on any issues except seeking solutions to the betterment of South Walton. I am only one of many private citizens who feel they have the right to peaceably access the dry sandy areas of the beach as we all have since humans walked upright.

This will be settled in the courts and hopefully a much higher court than Walton County but in the mean time people will be empowered to use the beaches as they always have. And for now, with Tona Rama vs Daytona Beach ruling by the Florida Supreme Court, the public has the upper hand. For now, no person has the right to stop anyone from accessing the dry sand. There is no law on the books that can stop any of us from using the beaches of South Walton as we always have and that is the truth.

 

[John G]

The Walton County beach activities ordinance addresses all bad behavior and all concerns.

Dave R., Do you feel this is being properly Enforced? Yes or No?

 

[Dave Rauschkolb]

TLDR: What's stopping the voters of this jurisdiction from putting a new tax—levied on beachfront property—onto the next ballot?

--

John G's enlightened position—that the rights of private beach property holders should, in all instances, be respected and the letter of law enforced—has me thinking:

In so far as we live in a quasi-democracy, he's correct. While the "customary use" issue could take quite a long time to adjudicate, might a more expedient (and more democratic) solution to the lack of public beach access be to levy a special assessment on all beach-front private property?

Say, $1,000 per square foot of sand, per year, calculated north-to-south from the vegetation line to the historical mean high water mark (which the owner's own surveys, signs, and mercenaries security guards, describe as being several hundred feet into the Gulf) and east-to-west by the property boundaries.

The revenue generated (~$24.3B per year) could then be spent to purchase additional public beach, with a portion allocated to conducting a census of the Blue Mountain Beach Dune Snake.

The assessment would continue until such time as the public's need and desire for beach access is well-met. Should the property owners fail to pay the special assessment, a lien would be filed against the downland portion of the property and said property surrendered and forfeited to the county (and ultimately disposed of into the public trust.)

But that wouldn't be necessary because....

The assessment wouldn't actually cost the property owners anything. Their costs would simply be passed along to the vacation rental customers. While this might result in a slight "uptick" in rental rates, it would at the same time address what John G has quite accurately identified as the very root of the controversy: the calibre of vacation rental customers. As we all know, the less financially endowed are also the most ill-mannered. Special assessment means no more noisy rule-breakers.

It is clear that this assessment represents a win for ALL of South Walton and I'm confident that it will garner the full support and backing of both the public at large and (who having already established themselves as an exceedingly generous group) the beach property owners!

P - Preserve private property owner's rights
I - Improve the calibre of vacation rental customers
S - Secure beach property for public use and conservation
S - Snakes in Dunes!

Porkchop, you are hilarious and brilliant. I have been very much enjoying your informed, articulate posts

 

[Teresa]

Bumper stickers coming soon to local cars... Thanks to local friends for coordinating the effort. It's one small way to get the word out. These will be available at many local businesses, in different colors, soon.