That is what a lot of beachfront owners here prefer. Destruction and seawalls before sharing. I'll never understand that level of greed, selfishness and stupidity. Is it that deplorable to have poor folks flying kites in your view?
No Pinellas beach renourishment until all beachfront owners sign off
Col. Booth told a packed crowd Friday at a beach renourishment meeting at the Indian Shores Town Hall that the Corps would not be renourishing any beaches until it gets 100 percent agreement from a…www.wfla.com
I wonder what the tune will be after a major erosion event here? Letting your property get destroyed before you allow the public to potentially use your beach seems a little drastic to me.
Walton County Customary Use in the News
- Thread starter Teresa
- Start date
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
By DOTTY NIST
Walton County has filed motions for summary judgment (MSJ) seeking to affirm a right by the public to customary recreational use of the dry sand area on a total of 192 beachfront parcels.
The motions were filed in Walton County Circuit Court on Aug. 25 as part of Walton County’s ongoing customary use complaint/lawsuit, which was originally brought to court in December 2018. The original lawsuit had applied to 1.194 beachfront parcels, with hundreds of the owners of those parcels having then opted to intervene in the lawsuit in opposition to the county effort.
More recently, there have been settlements and dismissals removing the vast majority of the 1,194 parcels from the lawsuit.
Nine motions for summary judgment were filed on Aug. 25 applying to parcels in nine different areas of the beach. These include: Santa Rosa Beach (27 parcels); Beach Highlands (six parcels); Dune Allen Beach (three parcels); Blue Mountain Beach (34 parcels); Grayton Beach (three parcels); Seagrove Beach (30 parcels); Seacrest (37 parcels); Eastern Lake Beach (19 parcels); and Inlet Beach (34 parcels).
According to the motions for summary judgment, most of the owners of parcels involved in these motions have not intervened in the lawsuit. The remainder, the owners of 22 parcels, did intervene but are “pro se,” not represented by an attorney but representing themselves in the lawsuit.
In the motions, Walton County contends and provides evidence of the public’s use of the parcels involved having been “ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and free from dispute.” These are the essential elements set forth in the landmark 1974 City of Daytona Beach v. Tona-Rama decision by the Florida Supreme Court for the public to acquire a right to the recreational use of privately-owned beach property by means of “custom.”
Read more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Walton County has filed motions for summary judgment (MSJ) seeking to affirm a right by the public to customary recreational use of the dry sand area on a total of 192 beachfront parcels.
The motions were filed in Walton County Circuit Court on Aug. 25 as part of Walton County’s ongoing customary use complaint/lawsuit, which was originally brought to court in December 2018. The original lawsuit had applied to 1.194 beachfront parcels, with hundreds of the owners of those parcels having then opted to intervene in the lawsuit in opposition to the county effort.
More recently, there have been settlements and dismissals removing the vast majority of the 1,194 parcels from the lawsuit.
Nine motions for summary judgment were filed on Aug. 25 applying to parcels in nine different areas of the beach. These include: Santa Rosa Beach (27 parcels); Beach Highlands (six parcels); Dune Allen Beach (three parcels); Blue Mountain Beach (34 parcels); Grayton Beach (three parcels); Seagrove Beach (30 parcels); Seacrest (37 parcels); Eastern Lake Beach (19 parcels); and Inlet Beach (34 parcels).
According to the motions for summary judgment, most of the owners of parcels involved in these motions have not intervened in the lawsuit. The remainder, the owners of 22 parcels, did intervene but are “pro se,” not represented by an attorney but representing themselves in the lawsuit.
In the motions, Walton County contends and provides evidence of the public’s use of the parcels involved having been “ancient, reasonable, without interruption, and free from dispute.” These are the essential elements set forth in the landmark 1974 City of Daytona Beach v. Tona-Rama decision by the Florida Supreme Court for the public to acquire a right to the recreational use of privately-owned beach property by means of “custom.”
Read more >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
No more Customary Use on Walton County beaches, Sheriff speaks on enforcement options
WALTON COUNTY, Fla. (WMBB) — Customary use is no more on Walton County beaches. Approximately 39 beach property owners settled in a lawsuit with county commissioners meaning the public …
www.mypanhandle.com
Probably the last busy fall break for Sowal.
Read that article this morning. Only 39 settlements and the rest are truly private? 2024 tourist season is going to be interesting.No more Customary Use on Walton County beaches, Sheriff speaks on enforcement options
WALTON COUNTY, Fla. (WMBB) — Customary use is no more on Walton County beaches. Approximately 39 beach property owners settled in a lawsuit with county commissioners meaning the public …
Probably the last busy fall break for Sowal.
Or non-existent.
Anyone know exactly what this means?
“These new rules only apply to properties east of Tops’L State Park. To the west are renourished beaches that are open to the public.”
The renourishment they did west of topsail about 20 years ago made the beaches public. That's why beach owners oppose renourishment. Instead of seeing it as a benficial and necessary step to maintain the beach and protect property they see it as the people stealing "their" beach.
Does this include beaches at Tops’l, Seascape, and condo complexes etc?
Last edited: