Posted on 03/23/2022 3:02:38 PM PDT by Jacquerie
A Walton County circuit judge has rejected a challenge to the constitutionality of “customary use,” a concept that has long allowed the public to use parts of beaches that are privately owned.
Judge David W. Green issued a 10-page ruling Monday that turned down arguments by Northshore Holdings, LLC and Lavin Family Development, LLC, which own property along the Gulf of Mexico and contended that customary use violates the state and federal constitutions. The Florida Constitution ensures public access to portions of beaches “below mean high water lines,” often described as wet areas of beaches.
But customary use involves dry-sand areas of beaches above the mean high water line that are often privately owned.
Green pointed to a 1974 Florida Supreme Court opinion that allowed the public to use those areas of beaches. He wrote that he is “without authority to enter a judgment finding the doctrine of customary use as established by the Florida Supreme Court unconstitutional as a violation of the prohibitions against taking of property without just compensation or without due process of law.”
Walton County has been part of a series of legal battles about beach access, at least in part sparked by a controversial 2018 state law that put restrictions on customary use. David Theriaque, an attorney for Walton County, issued a statement Tuesday that said Green’s ruling “is an important step in keeping the beaches of Walton County free and accessible to residents and guests.”
To say someone owns a beach must mean they own some property under water too. Seems silly. If they want a private beach then they should buy a private island.
The Lavin Family, huh?
Well, some properties do own the beach - above the high water line. They also own and have to maintain the sea grapes.
As far as access - anyone can walk on the beach in FL. However they have to use public access areas and parks to get there. You can’t just walk up some driveway and through a private backyard to get to the beach.
this argument goes back to my Grom days in FLA and SoCal... seemed like the best breaks were always near “Private Beaches”. we always “went anyways!!”
It is tough for those owners of land that get the bums and litterbugs though or the heavy crowds. I sympathize with them there...
That’s why I would never live on the ocean, but Ya get what ya pay for....maybe.
Two words...
Land mines.
Chum the water
You need to read up on riparian rights.
If you own waterfront property, you own up to the high tide area.
If you own on a lake, you own the bottom on an angle to a point in the center of the lake.
Private property rights should always override the public’s rights.
That’s better than land mines. Not quite as obvious.
Good ruling by the court
After a hurricane these landowners are busy asking for government aid in rebuilding...
Good, keep the public beaches accessible to the public. Let the landowner control their land above the high-water mark. Very tried of folks continually trying to block public access to public lands, including beaches.
In Oregon the beaches are considered state highways and no private entity owns the beach. We have a beachfront vacation home and know we cannot restrict anyone from walking along the front of our house or even sitting down for lunch on the sand in front of our house. Most people are respectful and don’t encroach onto our property.
In Florida, the tourists will climb the steps to your Gulf front home and stare in your windows, use your outdoor shower, and maybe even bust up your wooden beach furniture to build a fire.
“In Florida, the tourists will climb the steps to your Gulf front home and stare in your windows, use your outdoor shower, and maybe even bust up your wooden beach furniture to build a fire.”
They’ll also come in your house, go upstairs, lay down on your bed, and watch the Smurfs with your dog.
Did you see the one where Papa Smurf took a crutch and smashed the sh*t out of a guy with a red hat? Did you see that one? You want to see that one?
Hey, the Kelo decision is a double edged sword. All you have to show is that it improves the tax base to justify a taking. Walton just has to point out how important tourism is to the tax base.
It’s funny that it finally works out for once for the working class schlub. California screws too many people out of beach access.
Around here the property line is all the way out to low tide. Comes in handy for mooring balls for boats and rail systems for hauling out.
I never said building a multi million dollar mansion in a known hurricane zone was a sign of intelligence.
I don’t think we should have to pay for their lack of intelligence.
All I’m stating is that they have riparian rights.
Florida uses riparian rights? Interesting. I thought all the formerly Spanish states used prior appropriation. Texas uses both and can be a complete mess.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.