Tampa Bay Times
9/9/18
Hundreds pack meeting on beach access in Florida Panhandle
The issue of 'customary use' becomes part of the political dialogue in the 2018 election.
SANTA ROSA BEACH — Hundreds of people crowded into a high school auditorium Saturday for an emotional meeting in the ongoing political struggle over public access to the Panhandle's pristine beaches.
The crowd of 800-plus at South Walton High School and the intensity of views were the latest signs of how strongly people feel about this quality-of-life issue after Gov. Rick Scott signed a bill that makes it harder for cities and counties to pass local laws protecting public beach access.
The law (HB 631), which attracted little public attention in the 2018 session of the Legislature, is seen as a direct response to Walton County's adoption last year of a beach access law that has been challenged unsuccessfully by private property owners.
"I believe the notion of a 'private beach' is an oxymoron," said Dave Rauschkolb, a Seaside restaurant owner and a leader in the battle to preserve public access to beaches, known as customary use.
Josephine Brown, 92, of Seagrove Beach, wearing a sticker that said "CU at the beach," said her family has been enjoying the beaches of South Walton for six generations with no problems until now.
"We had bonfires. We camped out," Brown testified. "Those days are gone forever, but still, we would like to maintain a little bit of that personal closeness that we always had with the beach."
Lynn Fitzgerald, who has owned a home on Miramar Beach since 1994, said her property deed, like many, extended to the mean high tide water line but that "we never had a problem." Making things worse, she told officials, is the proliferation of commercial vendors renting out beach chairs and umbrellas to sunbathers.
Asked about the governor, she said: "This is going to hurt him. It will also cause tourists to leave Destin and go to Orange Beach (Alabama)."
Scott, who in July signed an executive order that sought to blunt the new law's enforcement, may hear from residents Sunday when he makes a campaign appearance at The Donut Hole in Santa Rosa Beach.
Tom Ballantine, owner of a condominium complex at Seagrove, said: "I'm a Christian. God made the beach and it's open to all of God's people." He got a thunderous round of applause.
Afterward, Ballantine said he did not think the controversy would have any effect on Scott's senatorial ambitions. "I really like Rick Scott," he said.
Avalon Beach homeowner John Vundschow took a different view. He said a proposed new county customary use ordinance is an illegal taking of private property without just compensation, in violation of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
More than 5,000 people have joined a Facebook group, Walton County Ideas for Visioning and Quality of Life, where the beach access issue is by far the major topic of conversation.
More than 7,000 residents have signed affidavits in support of a new county beach access law in an effort organized by a new non-profit group, Florida Beaches for All. The Walton County attorney, Sidney Noyes, said she was overwhelmed by the response.
Saturday's meeting was to have been the first legal step by a Florida local government to comply with the new law.
But the county discovered that 13 affected property owners did not receive legal notices of the meeting as required by law, which could put the county in legal jeopardy if it took any formal action. So a vote was postponed until November and county officials took public comment for nearly three hours instead.
Walton County is solidly Republican, but in interviews, people at Saturday's meeting singled out Scott for criticism and said he should not have signed the bill into law. In casual conversations, people dressed in tropical shirts and flip-flops toss around "HB 631" like an epithet.
Mike Hepner, a Miramar Beach X-ray technician who wore a "UNF Ospreys" T-shirt (his daughter is a student there) and is a registered independent voter, said he's less likely to vote for Scott because of his decision to sign HB 631.
"Definitely," Hepner said. "I believe the beaches were put here by God for our use and we want to keep it that way. I will vote for people who are for keeping customary use."
https://www.tampabay.com/florida-politics/buzz/2018/09/09/hundreds-pack-meeting-on-beach-access-in-florida-panhandle/
Replies
193
SWGB
Private beachers explaining their position:
Beach Fanatic
Do the beach codes apply to the new "private" beaches? Is code enforcement even allowed on them?
SoWal Insider
Do the beach codes apply to the new "private" beaches? Is code enforcement even allowed on them?Good questions. What if someone was drowning in front of PRIVATE BEACH ? Can individuals walk past the orange cones to help save them?
Beach Lover
Since you posted the news article titled "Court finds that Walton County has proved customary use on 95 beach parcels", I'll respond to your comment above as I assume you believe the county proved customary use on 95 properties even though those 95 parcels did not intervene. My contention is that the county DID NOT PROVE ANYTHING regarding customary use and the county prevailed only by default. That is my point.$50,000 to DEFEND your parcel ? You make it sound like a foreign army was going to land on YOUR beach and establish a fort. { Well that did happen a lot in past history}
So if one does not intervene, then it's ok for the government to confiscate your private property rights? You're making a BIG ASSUMPTION why some owners (max of 95 out of 1194 parcels) did not intervene... that they are ok with the public using their property.
Here are a few explanations of those who elected not to intervene:
1. Their parcel is located far enough away from a public access that the public cannot conveniently access it anyway. Why spend legal fees on something that in the end won't really change beach usage density on their property?
2. Some people have been owners of beach front property for many, many years. They got in "on the cheap" and don't necessarily have the funds to hire an attorney. On the other hand, you may have a relatively new beach front owner who is financially stretched with increasing insurance rates, taxes, etc. Or you may have an owner who knew they were going to sell and decided not to intervene since the results would not benefit them.
3. With all the somewhat effective hype that customary use has existed since "time immemorial", there were probably some who felt that they would lose the case and decided not to spend the money to fight what they perceived was a losing battle.
4. I'm confident that were some who were misguided as to if the county was to lose the customary use case, that they would somehow benefit without having to hire an attorney.
Fighting the county cost a lot of people a lot of money just to defend their private property rights. It cost us over $50,000 to defend our parcel.
So when you said, "Some property owners may not have intervened in the lawsuit because they are fine with the public using the beach recreationally as has happened for many years", you might be right for a very small few. But the other explanations are more likely.
The reality is you are "defending your parcel" from normal people, locals and tourist.
It must really bug you when you realize you financed both sides of the litigation.
Here is a FACT, our local economy is based almost exclusively on TOURISM.
IE, Families coming down to enjoy THE BEACH, and spend those vacation dollars
that keep our economic engine running. They don't want hassles, or drama, they just want to hang out on the beach by the water. If that becomes to much of a hassle,
then no tourist and no tourist money, no money no economy, no economy no jobs, well you get the picture.
I advise you, and all the other beach front owner fighting the county, to keep in the back of your mind the fact that YOUR beach could very easily GO AWAY in the next big hurricane to hit here.
It has happened many many times in the past, and will happen again.
Just check out some pictures of Mexico Beach after Michael, a short five years ago.
Beach Lover
Well, it does bug me that the WCC pushed forward legal action, to the tune of $10M+ of "OUR" money, for a suit that it was unlikely to win. And of course did not. We all know that Walton County provides every property owner a deed that encompasses a tax responsibility and a personal liability responsibility. Imagine being told by elected officials that those responsibilities will remain with the owner "but we are taking full access to your property". And having people on your property you cannot control, but for whom you have responsibility. Really? Most Americans would take a stand against that type of government action.
That money could have gone to a lot of good spots in Walton that need to be addressed like infrastructure, schools, and tourism. Monies could have been directed to promoting the beautiful underutilized public beaches, Grayton State Park for one, that are available to everyone. A great marketing campaign would benefit everyone.
That money could have gone to a lot of good spots in Walton that need to be addressed like infrastructure, schools, and tourism. Monies could have been directed to promoting the beautiful underutilized public beaches, Grayton State Park for one, that are available to everyone. A great marketing campaign would benefit everyone.
Beach Lover
Well, it does bug me that the WCC pushed forward legal action, to the tune of $10M+ of "OUR" money, for a suit that it was unlikely to win. And of course did not. We all know that Walton County provides every property owner a deed that encompasses a tax responsibility and a personal liability responsibility. Imagine being told by elected officials that those responsibilities will remain with the owner "but we are taking full access to your property". And having people on your property you cannot control, but for whom you have responsibility. Really? Most Americans would take a stand against that type of government action.ALL Florida beaches USED to be available to EVERYONE! And MOST still are!
That money could have gone to a lot of good spots in Walton that need to be addressed like infrastructure, schools, and tourism. Monies could have been directed to promoting the beautiful underutilized public beaches, Grayton State Park for one, that are available to everyone. A great marketing campaign would benefit everyone.
Beaches are what make Florida special, and we have one of the best in the state.
beach | bēCH | noun a strip of land covered with sand, pebbles, or small stones at the edge of a body of water, especially by the ocean between high- and low-water marks: fabulous sandy beaches | walking along the beach at sunset | [as modifier] : a beach bar.
SWGB
Well, it does bug me that the WCC pushed forward legal action, to the tune of $10M+ of "OUR" money, for a suit that it was unlikely to win. And of course did not. We all know that Walton County provides every property owner a deed that encompasses a tax responsibility and a personal liability responsibility. Imagine being told by elected officials that those responsibilities will remain with the owner "but we are taking full access to your property". And having people on your property you cannot control, but for whom you have responsibility. Really? Most Americans would take a stand against that type of government action.
That money could have gone to a lot of good spots in Walton that need to be addressed like infrastructure, schools, and tourism. Monies could have been directed to promoting the beautiful underutilized public beaches, Grayton State Park for one, that are available to everyone. A great marketing campaign would benefit everyone.
Underutilized? Grayton State Park is full by 8am every morning during the summer.
Based on your comments about how that money could have been spent shows how little you know about our local government.
Why is it private beachers don't have this attitude in public? Wear shirts, make bumper stickers, what's the matter Colonel Sanders? CHICKEN?
SoWal Insider
Well, it does bug me that the WCC pushed forward legal action, to the tune of $10M+ of "OUR" money, for a suit that it was unlikely to win. And of course did not. We all know that Walton County provides every property owner a deed that encompasses a tax responsibility and a personal liability responsibility. Imagine being told by elected officials that those responsibilities will remain with the owner "but we are taking full access to your property". And having people on your property you cannot control, but for whom you have responsibility. Really? Most Americans would take a stand against that type of government action.“to the tune of $10M+ of "OUR" money, for a suit that it was unlikely to win”
That money could have gone to a lot of good spots in Walton that need to be addressed like infrastructure, schools, and tourism. Monies could have been directed to promoting the beautiful underutilized public beaches, Grayton State Park for one, that are available to everyone. A great marketing campaign would benefit everyone.
Win or lose some fights are worth fighting no matter the cost.
Beach Lover
Underutilized? Grayton State Park is full by 8am every morning during the summer.
Add Deer Lake State Park to this... I've seen cars lined up on the shoulder of 30A waiting to get in.
SWGB
Add Deer Lake State Park to this... I've seen cars lined up on the shoulder of 30A waiting to get in.
That original list was a real "let them eat cake" situation, but then are we shocked that private beachers are completely out of touch?
SWGB
If you're watching the BCC meeting this is leading to what sounds like a full time county staff of 18 full time beach ambassadors. Regardless of Sheriff or TDC this is a ridiculous waste of tax payer money.
$1.2-$2.4 million
$1.2-$2.4 million
Beach Fanatic
I believe our County had to spend whatever it takes to protect beach access for the public. Whether we agree with the settlement or not we have a new reality for beach access, beach safety and all the emotions on both sides. I personally hold one man responsible for this mess and I think we all know who that is. He started this fight and just like someone else we know he incited others to do the dirty work and then left the scene to one of his many other luxury properties. Yes there are problems with numbers of people at our beaches and a few are not respectful but we seemed to be managing it before the County was left with no choice but the Customary Use Lawsuit. I believe they would have won in the courts including the Supreme Court but it would have been expensive. The problem as always is money and these wealthy people that I speak of has access to a never ending stream of it. There are many issues here in my opinion but one of the biggest is the loss of public lands to wealth. I think our County is trying to protect our beaches the best it can with limited funding. Yes they can do better just like all of us can do better so I think we somehow have to get beyond the politics and find ways to get along and work together. I hope that is not an impossible wish...
Beach Fanatic
It must really bug you when you realize you financed both sides of the litigation.That's about the only thing that i (and thousands of others) can absolutely agree with you. The rest of your post is just repetitive gibberish that's filled with false assumptions and is about 10 to 15 years too late to the debate.
Edited
Beach Fanatic
I personally hold one man responsible for this mess and I think we all know who that is.You got me!
Yes they can do better just like all of us can do better so I think we somehow have to get beyond the politics and find ways to get along and work together. I hope that is not an impossible wish...You could start by not demonizing private property owners for protecting their constitutional rights against the county with out of control commissioners who were easily led down the primrose path by some influential but misguided constituents.
Tourism will survive. I believe the county still has the option to buy easement rights to lots that are adjacent to public beach accesses... something the county should have done to begin with. But THEY were the ones who got GREEDY and wanted everything for nothing.
Of course, the county's other tactic is to try to push for beach nourishment for the "east" part of the county that has not had any beach nourishment. After defending private property rights with lots of money and anguish, I sincerely doubt enough property owners will let that happen. It's already failed once, before the customary use litigation.
And quit blaming Huckabee. You are a deeper thinker than that, I think.
The lawsuit would have occurred without him. His initial presence then absence did not affect the outcome. And that's a fact.Good to hear from you.
Edited
Beach Fanatic
Deeds for beaches was a terrible mistake. Good government would correct it and make all Beach public throughout Florida. I guess the old "doesn't pay to sue city hall" has been flipped like so many other things greed has ruined in America, especially states like Florida trashed by lawyers, politicians and their corporate masters.
SWGB
You got me!
You could start by not demonizing private property owners for protecting their constitutional rights against the county with out of control commissioners who were easily led down the primrose path by some influential but misguided constituents.
Tourism will survive. I believe the county still has the option to buy easement rights to lots that are adjacent to public beach accesses... something the county should have done to begin with. But THEY were the ones who got GREEDY and wanted everything for nothing.
Of course, the county's other tactic is to try to push for beach nourishment for the "east" part of the county that has not had any beach nourishment. After defending private property rights with lots of money and anguish, I sincerely doubt enough property owners will let that happen. It's already failed once, before the customary use litigation.
And quit blaming Huckabee. You are a deeper thinker than that, I think.
Good to hear from you.
It's telling that you say it's not about greed and yet here you are ready to sell easements and access rights.
Squint all you want, but you're not getting through that needle.
Beach Fanatic
You got me!What Huckabee did for this County is unforgivable. Yes there were issues that needed to be solved and the County tried. We can debate whether they tried hard enough but the point is Huckabee is wealthy and because of his wealth and power we the public are losing valuable resources. Let that sink in a bit. Wealth and power taking away a resource that we will never get back. It is not about tourism to me. It is about whether future generations will have access to this valuable resource. You just want to blame government for all our problems and we can agree on some things but not this. Wealth is going to keep taking more from us both and we have to stop letting two party politics get in the way of common sense. If we keep our Democracy we the people will have a say in government but if we lose our Democracy then Wealth will be in full power. You know this is right. Don't let the emotion of political ideologies confuse this issue. The left/right political ideology we have in this country is going to kill our democracy.
You could start by not demonizing private property owners for protecting their constitutional rights against the county with out of control commissioners who were easily led down the primrose path by some influential but misguided constituents.
Tourism will survive. I believe the county still has the option to buy easement rights to lots that are adjacent to public beach accesses... something the county should have done to begin with. But THEY were the ones who got GREEDY and wanted everything for nothing.
Of course, the county's other tactic is to try to push for beach nourishment for the "east" part of the county that has not had any beach nourishment. After defending private property rights with lots of money and anguish, I sincerely doubt enough property owners will let that happen. It's already failed once, before the customary use litigation.
And quit blaming Huckabee. You are a deeper thinker than that, I think.
Good to hear from you.
Beach Fanatic
It's telling that you say it's not about greed and yet here you are ready to sell easements and access rights.Hey Matt, I normally resist engaging directly with your posts for obvious reasons. But you can't help yourself when the only way you can rationalize the state of affairs is due to "greedy people" and inferring that I must be greedy as a result of my owning property which happens to be beach front.
Squint all you want, but you're not getting through that needle.
I don't feel greedy at all for buying property with a deed that legally specifies its boundaries. And with that deed comes all the private property rights associated with it. The only difference in your mind is that you think everyone should be entitled to use that private property. Customary Use has been argued, litigated and legally shut down. The county has signed off on it. You will eventually acquiesce to this as well as private property rights. Let it go.
I fully understand how emotional an issue this is. AND IT'S A TWO WAY STREET with a clearly divided line.
Matt, I don't come out and call you a socialist or communist because of your feelings for customary use and total disregard for private property rights. It just seems that it would be courteous that you not call individuals greedy simply because they are beach front owners protecting private property rights. As a matter of fact, the term, "greed", has lost most of its impact to me after years of its use from posts like yours.
Now, back to directly commenting on your post, "It's telling that you say it's not about greed and yet here you are ready to sell easements and access rights."
That's total BS and a desperate attempt by you to validate your personal emotions regarding the situation.
I don't see any FOR SALE signs by any private property owners for the dry sand part of their property. You may not aware but the county could possibly condemn the property by eminent domain against the wishes of the private property owner. Would that make the private property owner greedy then?
I know you'll never see the other side. I just feel a little obligated to shine a light on your seething disdain for private beachfront property owners. Then again, you do a good job of that on your own.
Beach Fanatic
We can debate whether they tried hard enough but the point is Huckabee is wealthy and because of his wealth and power we the public are losing valuable resources.I think you give Huckabee way too much credit. Hang in there, this country will be socialist before you know it.
Beach Fanatic
I think you give Huckabee way too much credit. Hang in there, this country will be socialist before you know it.LOL Huckabee gave himself way too much credit
Go back and read his comments.I really hope there is something called regulated capitalism so that we all have a piece of the pie instead of monopolized wealth. Your fear of socialism is not justified and you know it. You like me have a hard time with change but the older I get the more I understand that change is inevitable and we should accept that which is common sense. If we stay divided into two groups we will all lose personal freedoms and the quality of life that public lands have given us. Hang in there and you will find this to be true.
Beach Fanatic
Hey Matt, I normally resist engaging directly with your posts for obvious reasons. But you can't help yourself when the only way you can rationalize the state of affairs is due to "greedy people" and inferring that I must be greedy as a result of my owning property which happens to be beach front.Here is the truth about greed...we all have it in our DNA. Some of us just can't admit it. Once we accept it we can look in the mirror and find a better self because admitting the truth is very important for a purpose driven life to be a good steward of this miracle called life. Rules of behavior are absolutely necessary and that could have been managed. What we have now is destructive in society because of emotion. It is much easier to get angry than it is to use reason. People will take sides and then hate each other instead of using that part of the brain that uses reason. Society requires all of us to use reason unless you want to live alone isolated from each other. In my opinion the purpose of life is to grow into a better human being with balanced social behaviors. I think we should put up signs along 30A that says Slow Down Social Construction Ahead
I don't feel greedy at all for buying property with a deed that legally specifies its boundaries. And with that deed comes all the private property rights associated with it. The only difference in your mind is that you think everyone should be entitled to use that private property. Customary Use has been argued, litigated and legally shut down. The county has signed off on it. You will eventually acquiesce to this as well as private property rights. Let it go.
I fully understand how emotional an issue this is. AND IT'S A TWO WAY STREET with a clearly divided line.
Matt, I don't come out and call you a socialist or communist because of your feelings for customary use and total disregard for private property rights. It just seems that it would be courteous that you not call individuals greedy simply because they are beach front owners protecting private property rights. As a matter of fact, the term, "greed", has lost most of its impact to me after years of its use from posts like yours.
Now, back to directly commenting on your post, "It's telling that you say it's not about greed and yet here you are ready to sell easements and access rights."
That's total BS and a desperate attempt by you to validate your personal emotions regarding the situation.
I don't see any FOR SALE signs by any private property owners for the dry sand part of their property. You may not aware but the county could possibly condemn the property by eminent domain against the wishes of the private property owner. Would that make the private property owner greedy then?
I know you'll never see the other side. I just feel a little obligated to shine a light on your seething disdain for private beachfront property owners. Then again, you do a good job of that on your own.
We can thank Mike for his part in all this social destruction we have here on our beaches. I know that my opinions do not matter to you and I can accept that but at least try to understand that life has a better purpose than believing that we own something that should be shared...with rules of course.SWGB
Hey Matt, I normally resist engaging directly with your posts for obvious reasons. But you can't help yourself when the only way you can rationalize the state of affairs is due to "greedy people" and inferring that I must be greedy as a result of my owning property which happens to be beach front.
I don't feel greedy at all for buying property with a deed that legally specifies its boundaries. And with that deed comes all the private property rights associated with it. The only difference in your mind is that you think everyone should be entitled to use that private property. Customary Use has been argued, litigated and legally shut down. The county has signed off on it. You will eventually acquiesce to this as well as private property rights. Let it go.
I fully understand how emotional an issue this is. AND IT'S A TWO WAY STREET with a clearly divided line.
Matt, I don't come out and call you a socialist or communist because of your feelings for customary use and total disregard for private property rights. It just seems that it would be courteous that you not call individuals greedy simply because they are beach front owners protecting private property rights. As a matter of fact, the term, "greed", has lost most of its impact to me after years of its use from posts like yours.
Now, back to directly commenting on your post, "It's telling that you say it's not about greed and yet here you are ready to sell easements and access rights."
That's total BS and a desperate attempt by you to validate your personal emotions regarding the situation.
I don't see any FOR SALE signs by any private property owners for the dry sand part of their property. You may not aware but the county could possibly condemn the property by eminent domain against the wishes of the private property owner. Would that make the private property owner greedy then?
I know you'll never see the other side. I just feel a little obligated to shine a light on your seething disdain for private beachfront property owners. Then again, you do a good job of that on your own.
I believe the county still has the option to buy easement rights to lots that are adjacent to public beach accesses...
Those are your words correct?
Nothing requires you to engage, but you get butt hurt clutch your pearls and hunt and peck a response overnight.
You can act offended all day long, what you and your ilk have done to this county is disgusting and wrapping yourselves in the constitution is laughable. You and all the other private beachers should be vilified and shammed publicly. Again, none of you brag about it in person despite being your own personal saviors. Long after you're gone I'll point at your house and tell my nieces and nephews that man traded his eternity for sand.
Beach Lover
Look at jasmine dunes in sea grove. Judge green gave them beach front in last 3 years. The tax appraiser gave tax deeds . Went infrontvof judge green who granted deeds. Never had a county commissioner question it or signed posted. Look at any deed in gulf shore manor of beach . All were given in last 20 years. So basically the tax people and judge green gave away beach and commissioners never stopped it. Then they let judge green be the one who decides outcome. Ethics complaint should be done
Beach Fanatic
Greedy is the way beachfront owners are seen by the other 99.999%, like it or not.
Maybe they're not all disgusting but following the directions of their masters, the lawyers and politicians.
Disgusting? That's the people who actually put property lines on sand and dunes and first profited. They are the ones who should be vilified.
Maybe they're not all disgusting but following the directions of their masters, the lawyers and politicians.
Disgusting? That's the people who actually put property lines on sand and dunes and first profited. They are the ones who should be vilified.
SWGB
Greedy is the way beachfront owners are seen by the other 99.999%, like it or not.
Maybe they're not all disgusting but following the directions of their masters, the lawyers and politicians.
Disgusting? That's the people who actually put property lines on sand and dunes and first profited. They are the ones who should be vilified.
You should probably learn why beach front property was deeded to the water. It's very interesting and only speaks to the old ways of Walton county.
Checking your forum account
Please wait while we verify your forum account.