Customary use wins in Federal Court!

[Matt J]

Not here, but another Florida county:

Judge rules against Pinellas County waterfront homeowners in public beach access fight

Judge says property owners must share ‘dry sand areas’

www.cltampa.com

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

I really thought that after all this time, someone would comment on Matt's post. I guess this sadly confirms that most of the old "stand your sand" folks have departed SoWal and hang out in Facebook land where I first caught wind of all this.

I have to admit that this and other articles regarding the Pinelles Customary Use ruling point to a real and obvious problem:

Something is really screwed up regarding the notion of CU when Pinelles County is compared with Walton County. Some of you might have been right when you said Walton County caved in too early. I wondered the same thing but I didn't lose too much sleep since this expensive litigation was brought to an end in favor of private property rights. More importantly, at least Walton County was shown that they just can't take private rights away without due process regardless of the outcome (as opposed to simply passing a customary use ordinance without any due process).

If anything, from the perspective of CU advocates, one has to question why the county gave in before the trial when they were going down the seemingly exact same path that Pinnelles County did (and in a similar time frame).

The obvious issue now is that the settlement CANNOT BE REVERSED. As known, the Walton County commissioners settled the customary use lawsuit "with prejudice" which means the case cannot be appealed.

NONE of the commissioners were "smart enough" to come to the conclusion on their own to stop the customary use litigation and throw in the towel. Yet, somehow, the acting county attorney apparently convinced them to do so. After seeing the outcome at Pinelles County, I and others have to wonder why.

On the flip side, I'm not sure that CU in Pinnelles is a done deal. Is the U.S. Supreme Court still an option for the beach front owners?

Any factual opinions would be appreciated.

 

[Dawn]

Anything new to add?

 

[bob1]

I really thought that after all this time, someone would comment on Matt's post. I guess this sadly confirms that most of the old "stand your sand" folks have departed SoWal and hang out in Facebook land where I first caught wind of all this.

I have to admit that this and other articles regarding the Pinelles Customary Use ruling point to a real and obvious problem:

Something is really screwed up regarding the notion of CU when Pinelles County is compared with Walton County. Some of you might have been right when you said Walton County caved in too early. I wondered the same thing but I didn't lose too much sleep since this expensive litigation was brought to an end in favor of private property rights. More importantly, at least Walton County was shown that they just can't take private rights away without due process regardless of the outcome (as opposed to simply passing a customary use ordinance without any due process).

If anything, from the perspective of CU advocates, one has to question why the county gave in before the trial when they were going down the seemingly exact same path that Pinnelles County did (and in a similar time frame).

The obvious issue now is that the settlement CANNOT BE REVERSED. As known, the Walton County commissioners settled the customary use lawsuit "with prejudice" which means the case cannot be appealed.

NONE of the commissioners were "smart enough" to come to the conclusion on their own to stop the customary use litigation and throw in the towel. Yet, somehow, the acting county attorney apparently convinced them to do so. After seeing the outcome at Pinelles County, I and others have to wonder why.

On the flip side, I'm not sure that CU in Pinnelles is a done deal. Is the U.S. Supreme Court still an option for the beach front owners?

Any factual opinions would be appreciated.

Are you one of the Aholes who were posting screenshots of this forum on Facebook and smearing good community members out of context?

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Are you one of the Aholes who were posting screenshots of this forum on Facebook and smearing good community members out of context?

I guess I am an Ahole - only because I personally spent many thousands of dollars fighting customary use. But I have absolutely no idea what you're talkin about regarding "posting screenshots of this forum on Facebook and smearing good community members out of context."

Sheesh, I fought customary use like the plague for many reasons. Nothing to hide there as anyone can search on this forum through the many years. In my post above, I simply point out the parallels between Pinellis County and Walton County. But instead of questioning why the county threw in the towel before trial (as opposed to Pinellis County), you attack me because I'm the only thing you can see for now. You appear to be so blinded by "hate" that you can't see that I'm throwing you CU folks a bone. Why would I smear anybody at the same time?

It seems to me that you and your brethren should really be questioning why the BCC and the acting county attorney settled the case with prejudice before going to trial, especially in light of the Pinellis County CU outcome (a little hindsight, of course). I just assumed the acting county attorney knew something we did didn't. But whatever it was, with the information presented in the news article, it really does make one wonder why the acting county attorney and Walton County BCC caved in.

BTW, can you or others share the "smears" you mention here? Which Facebook page did they take place in? Inquiring minds want to know.

 

[bob1]

I guess I am an Ahole - only because I personally spent many thousands of dollars fighting customary use. But I have absolutely no idea what you're talkin about regarding "posting screenshots of this forum on Facebook and smearing good community members out of context."

Sheesh, I fought customary use like the plague for many reasons. Nothing to hide there as anyone can search on this forum through the many years. In my post above, I simply point out the parallels between Pinellis County and Walton County. But instead of questioning why the county threw in the towel before trial (as opposed to Pinellis County), you attack me because I'm the only thing you can see for now. You appear to be so blinded by "hate" that you can't see that I'm throwing you CU folks a bone. Why would I smear anybody at the same time?

It seems to me that you and your brethren should really be questioning why the BCC and the acting county attorney settled the case with prejudice before going to trial, especially in light of the Pinellis County CU outcome (a little hindsight, of course). I just assumed the acting county attorney knew something we did didn't. But whatever it was, with the information presented in the news article, it really does make one wonder why the acting county attorney and Walton County BCC caved in.

BTW, can you or others share the "smears" you mention here? Which Facebook page did they take place in? Inquiring minds want to know.

Thanks for the bone. You're an awesome neighbor.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Thanks for the bone. You're an awesome neighbor.

You're too kind.

 

[UpNorth]

This seems petty. If I purchased a property and randomly had strangers walking around in my backyard I’d have an issue with that; totally understandable.

The rebuttal of course is entitlement and something around “you don’t own the beach/water”. To which the response is fairly straightforward. Well, thats debatable, but YOU certainly don’t! Next.

 

[Jane]

If I purchased a property and randomly had strangers walking around in my backyard I’d have an issue with that; totally understandable.

This comparison has been made many times totally ridiculous.

 

[PJJ]

This seems petty. If I purchased a property and randomly had strangers walking around in my backyard I’d have an issue with that; totally understandable.

The rebuttal of course is entitlement and something around “you don’t own the beach/water”. To which the response is fairly straightforward. Well, thats debatable, but YOU certainly don’t! Next.

Tell me you've never been anywhere else in Florida without telling me you've never been anywhere else in Florida.