The debate over public beach access in Walton County reached a crescendo at the latest Walton Board of County Commissioners (BCC) meeting when a proposal to file an amicus brief in support of public access in the controversial Dune Allen beachfront sparked a passionate and divided discussion, ultimately ending with a compromise to draft a formal resolution and vote on it at their next meeting instead.
A ruling this month by an appeals court threw out a summary judgment in favor of beachfront property owners, who claimed that they owned land all the way to the Gulf.
Commissioner Danny Glidewell, who faces a primary challenge for reelection in August, sought to take a ‘proactive step’ by asking the county attorney to draft a ‘friend of the court’ brief in a lawsuit involving Dune Allen, Inc., and 11 homeowners over whether the beach is public or private under the doctrine of Customary Use. The push for the brief, which supporters argued was necessary to protect the county’s tourism-driven economy and public trust, met resistance from Commissioner Dan Curry and BCC Chair Brad Drake, who feared the legal action could ‘cripple’ ongoing, undisclosed efforts to secure public beach use.
Glidewell explained to the rest of the commission that he believed the county needed to file an Amicus Brief, because the negative publicity the County’s tourism industry has received from the well-publicized beach confrontations over the last decade and a half.
“This issue has been an issue for 15 years, and the stretch of beach we are talking about is probably as controversial as any of them.” He then added, “You’ve got the ‘Backstreet Boy’ problem…And you’ve had all sorts of people thrown off the beach, allegedly, and it’s just a problem…I believe our legal team would tell you that’s [Dune Allen is] a public beach.”
Tony Anderson, Commissioner for the southeast portion of the County, seconded Glidewell’s motion.
Despite Glidewell’s assertion to the contrary, Deputy County Attorney Matthew Richardson told the commission he wasn’t so sure to file a brief as a way to assert beachfront as publicly usable land would hold water. Glidewell countered that he’d spoken to absent County Attorney Clay Adkinson and their conversation reinforced his assertions. “For 15 years, almost, we have been on the defensive, we have been pushed, and we’ve never tried to be proactive. This [the amicus brief] is a proactive step to express…the County’s position, not our position in the lawsuit, because we don’t have no [sic] position. We’re not a part [of the lawsuit], but this is an opportunity to tell the court what our position is, and I believe that’s a valuable tool (of the toolbox) of our legal staff going forward.”
Commissioner Dan Curry bit back on Glidewell’s assertion and referenced an email sent from County Attorney Adkinson that told her “Walton County has never had any lawful claim to any beach property in Dune Allen…title dispute, and it is a civil matter between private parties.”
Last Friday, sitting Commissioner Donna Johns filed to run for another term. She’ll face two candidates in August’s Republican primary, which will serve as the general election since there are no Democrats on the ballot. Despite her recent filing, it wasn’t Johns but another candidate from the office who spoke significantly to the issue at hand. Former Santa Rosa County Commissioner James Calkins, one of those two other candidates, told the commissioners, “Over the past several years, we’ve seen ongoing legal battles and changes in state law that have created confusion and conflict over our beaches. What hasn’t changed is how important beach access is to the people of Walton County, our families, [and] our local economy, and the character of this community. This is one of those moments where the county has an opportunity to take a clear position.”
Several residents agreed with Calkins but argued different points. Sarah Day told the commission that the founder of Dune Allen, E.C. Allen, had intended for the beach in question to be for the public’s use in perpetuity. John Dillard, another resident of the county, told the BCC that they needed to stand with the many, instead of the few. “Tourism is 76 percent of our economy…That’s 45,000 jobs created by tourism. There’s 6200 businesses here in Walton County. There’s 96,000 residents. There’s 5 million visitors, guests, and families that arrive here every year…I have to believe that each and every one of you up here [at the dais] cares about the public, not the private rights of .01 percent of the elite seeking to expand their titles [land/property] beyond what their deed actually says.”
Not everyone agreed, though. Resident Bob Brooke said entering the lawsuit, even with an amicus brief, was a waste of taxpayer money to pay lawyers. “It’s a fight over who owns private entities,” he said.
Walton County Commission Chair Brad Drake urged the rest of the commission against filing an amicus brief in the court case.
He told the rest of the commission that there were behind-the-scenes negotiations going on to determine a resolution on customary use of the beach, and they should just be patient until they were concluded. “There are some things that are happening that are moving us toward the goal. And I don’t want to speak too much, but I am fearful that if we take this legislative action today, it very well could cripple or hinder some of the efforts that are being made to actually win in a way that would allow the public to have what we want them to have – and that is beach access.”
Drake ultimately decided against naming names, and finished by saying ,“I feel like I am saying too much now, ‘genie’s out of the bottle again,’ but I’m asking you for a little bit of trust in that this thing is done and done in the right way, because it’s been attempted several times, and the result has not produced anything.”
Commissioner Glidewell revised his motion for an amicus brief and made his motion to request a resolution instead.
In an impassioned response, Commissioner Anderson told the chambers, “I’m not afraid to make a motion that I’m in favor of customary use…It’s time for us to say we’re for or against customary use. I am for it, period. To which Commissioner Drake said, “Commissioner Anderson, all five of us are publicly for customary use.”
“This thing of ‘quiet titles’ and things like that,” Anderson continued, “ What in the hell has somebody decided? And I know what it was, it’s legal, but somebody decided to have a ‘quiet title’ to take the public speech away. It is ridiculous, and I’ve been fighting for 10 years…and I and Mr. Dillard, Ms. Day right there, shoulder to shoulder. Mr. Calkins was there, and I am tired of this pussy-footin’ [sic] around. It’s time for us to make a decision, and the decision is: Are we in favor of the Allen family or not?”
The proposed resolution will be brought back by legal counsel at the next BCC meeting.
Pro Communi Bono
St. Francis De Sales, Ora Pro Nobis!
Register or login with Mid Bay News and never get another pop up on our site!
