This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

PETITION: Save Pensacola Beach and Navarre Beach

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down  Message [Page 3 of 4]

Guest


Guest
RealLindaL wrote:
Frenger, Freddie Jr. wrote:Ya'll oughta change the title of this thread to "Rich White Peoples' Problems". Jesus, give it a rest!

Welcome to the forum.   If you don't like this thread, which is a continuation of a years-long discussion, on and off, about an issue that's very important to some of us (obviously not to others), please feel free not to read it.  

Your myopic self-interest is astonishing, apparently you're channeling Ebenezer Scrooge. That's fine, just don't pretend you give a shit about anyone but YOU.

Your myopic self-interest is astonishing, apparently you're channeling Ebenezer Scrooge. That's fine, just don't pretend you give a shit about anyone but YOU.


We get it. Things maybe did not work out for you so that you think anybody who owns on the Beach is rich, and selfish. You made your own choices. You actually thought that joining the military was not being selfish, and that you gave a chit about everybody. Millions of innocent civilians killed and trillions thrown down the rabbit hole, and you were a knowing participant in that continuing American tragedy. Nope, somebody actually making options for themselves by working and being successful financially or with their contributions to their community versus your choice......sorry charlie......you F'd up. quit the whine.

View user profile

Since I moved here in '79, I've always had a close attachment to PB and NB...started going to NB in '77...moved here and lived on PB for a few months (winter lease), but it is too expensive for a lot of people. I have had so many friends through the years who lived on the beach. I went to work for a prominent local realtor and worked at the beach 1 day a week, but that was before I got my license (1980) and before I had my first child in late 1982, and then my second in 1984. My husband worked out there for many years in construction; we spent lots of time on the beach with our kids. Yes...Seaoat, I do believe it's unfair to Escambia residents who have paid property taxes at a much higher rate than beach residents, only to have to fight for a spot to picnic on the weekends. Tried to go to Quietwater Sunday at 10 am and there were not even any parking spaces available...I guess everyone was having brunch at the Boardwalk. So, PB is one big money making machine, for some. The beach residents had no say so when Portofino was built...have no say so when the next hotel or high rise goes up...much less the residents of Escambia Co.

It goes without saying that imposing property taxes on beach residents should not be done without fee simple ownership; that should have happened long ago. Please keep in mind that I'm not a 2-year-old who won't eat her broccoli; I really do have some expertise and insight here...and I surely didn't start this thread to be ridiculed...by you or anyone else. You don't seem to be able to state your case without being condescending. (understatement).

View user profile
I do not have patience to be polite. The attacks against fee simple and the attacks against leaseholders as being rich people is boneheaded stupid. Harvard professors held that Black people were genetically inferior. It does not mean they were stupid, just their arguments were boneheaded stupid.

On the flip side I had people lecture me about how stupid I was that Santa Rosa was going to be successful in their tax case. I was the only one who stood up a board meeting and said, folks we are going to pay taxes, and the amounts the lawyers are asking to advance the case for leaseholders was obscene because equitable title was well accepted by all courts throughout the United States, and why was I correct, because I shared office space with the fire chief who got hanger owners who had thirty years leases to pay property tax. It was simple old news. It was not anything complex, yet I was ridiculed because the lawyers knew more, and we were going to win. Hell, on Navarre it was a bunch of realtors who had sold people their leaseholds telling them that the lawyers will win and we should pay for their fees. Stupid. Then about six years of being attacked when I said that the leaseholds would be taxed and that there was going to be a significant value drop on the beach which would be long term and maybe as long as five to ten years.......oh the vile hatred directed toward me was priceless. Some still on the forum were part of the mob. So if it is arrogance, to see something as being simple and correct, I plead guilty. In the end it was greed and avarice which brought the downfall. I was guilty of the same. I just had enough knowledge to know that an investment on the beach might not be a good place with the extent of damage after Ivan. We made a quarter of a million dollar profit in only a few years, but my greed had exceeded my love of the beach, and now we simply go back to what we love......a beach chair, a book, and a quiet spot on the east end of Navarre with many lessons learned. Greed and avarice are destructive. So I lost patience on beach discussions years ago.

View user profile
Floridatexan wrote:Yes...Seaoat, I do believe it's unfair to Escambia residents who have paid property taxes at a much higher rate than beach residents, only to have to fight for a spot to picnic on the weekends.  Tried to go to Quietwater Sunday at 10 am and there were not even any parking spaces available...I guess everyone was having brunch at the Boardwalk.  So, PB is one big money making machine, for some.

Big money maker for the entire area, given that, according to studies by the Haas Business Center (or whatever it's called now) at UWF, Pensacola Beach tourism generates over $280 million a year in positive economic impact to the county.  It's been calculated that, without that impact, Escambia County property owners (and now beach leaseholders) would each likely be paying over $1,000 more per year in ad valorem taxes.   (Not, you understand, that I personally consider free and easy enjoyment of the beach as measurable in dollars.)

And of course we all know that bed taxes go directly to the county.

But yes, that same rapidly increasing tourism, along with substantial area population growth -- especially in Santa Rosa County -- has made the weekend (and even weekday, in summer) Pensacola Beach experience not nearly as pleasant or easy for locals, whether mainlanders, Breezers, or even beach residents themselves.  (I doubt there were many of us PB residents brunching at Quietwater the weekend you attempted an island visit; most of us have learned not to venture out at all on in-season weekends any more except to walk to the beaches -- all of which are far more crowded now, even down in the neighborhoods, every day of the week and then some on weekends, especially in mid-summer and during Spring Break.)

I've been excoriated for suggesting that it's time for Visit Pensacola and others to stop spending millions of dollars attracting more and more out-of-state tourists, when we simply can't handle the volume of visitors we have now, and the county locals are being shut out.  That earns me accusations of wanting to close the gates of the island and not let anyone in except PB residents, which is total and complete B.S.   I LOVE seeing people enjoying the surf and sand, but the reality is we have a very narrow barrier island with limited infrastructure, and the pressures created by increased tourism (partly from ads, partly from huge TV exposure during the 2010 oil 'spill,' partly from word of mouth new visitor attraction) along with that significant area population growth, still ongoing, all combine to make the worsening traffic and parking problems virtually inevitable.

FT, I truly understand your feeling that it's not fair that you be shut out on a weekend, but I don't think any of what's going on has a thing to do with who's been paying property taxes or not, do you? (Not sure what you meant by "at a much higher rate.")  In any case, we PB residents are just as appalled as you at what's going on, but I don't think we -- nor the fact of our not having paid property taxes until just a few years back (even though we've entirely supported the SRIA with our lease fees) are anywhere near the main cause of the gridlock, do you?  Maybe I misunderstood.

As for "when the next hotel or high rise goes up," we do have the protections of the county's PB master plan and zoning regulations, and there are specified limitations on the number of "beds" that can be built for in the strictly designated commercial high rise core areas.  Allowing for the two remaining Portofino towers planned for construction soon, the one remaining large open parcel in the 'downtown' core that has never been rebuilt since Ivan's destruction, and perhaps some remaining allowable redevelopment along Pensacola Beach Boulevard, PB is basically built out as to commercial construction.  

And here's the thing:  Because the pending title bill protects all existing public-use lands in perpetuity, there can never be an expansion into those areas for new private use.   (Remember, for instance, when there was talk of a golf course on the east end of the beach?  Ain't gonna happen now, if it ever was, presuming the title bill passes.)

In any event the bottom line is I'm really glad you see the rightness in offering title to taxpaying leaseholders, and just hope we've set your mind a little more at ease -- if it needed "setting" --about how that might negatively affect your (or anyone's) enjoyment of the beach, or about its development.  Truly, it shouldn't make one iota's difference.  Unfortunately, plenty of other pressures will continue to do so, for all of us, but at least we do have zoning.  And yes, that can change someday, but it could change today as well, with or without fee simple ownership, and that's the plain truth.

I sure hope you don't think I've been talking down to you or insulting you at all, FT.  That's certainly not been my intention. And I, for one, do bow to your much longer residence in the area.   If you'll forgive me, though -- and I'm NOT talking about you -- I'm sure you know there's a substantial amount of ignorance among the non-island population in the area, no matter  how long they've been here, about how things work out here, real estate wise.  I fault the media for a lot of it, as they've continually promulgated incorrect info about leaseholds, no matter how many times we try to set them straight.  There's been some improvement lately, but more education is still needed, especially as the title issue continues to heat up.

View user profile
2seaoat wrote:Then about six years of being attacked when I said that the leaseholds would be taxed and that there was going to be a significant value drop on the beach which would be long term and maybe as long as five to ten years.......

The value drop on both Navarre and Pensacola Beaches didn't happen immediately after Ivan; in fact, for a couple of years after Ivan values soared outrageously, due in part to lack of available rental housing, and in part to the nationwide real estate bubble.  The eventual drop had little if anything to do with ad valorem taxation and everything to do with the bubble's bursting, and the resultant ensuing years of recession.  (Certainly on Navarre Beach it had nothing to do with any concern about the 99-year leases' eventually running out, and thus any decreasing value, since all those leases are virtually automatically renewable anyway.)

The proof in this pudding is that, even though the court rulings have since all come down as final in favor of ad valorem taxation (except, last year, as to the land on a number of PB leaseholds), and despite the lack of certainty regarding passage of a title bill, people still want to live and/or invest on the island and the values, though not as high as during the bubble, are now substantially higher than right before Ivan.

And that's the simple reality.

View user profile
Mr. Kerrigan's article is hilarious. So the library board decides that they want to buy some land and lease the land to the public and tells them they do not have to pay taxes. I mean it is so stupid that it is not worth the time to even do anything but laugh. Show me the intergovernmental agreements where a taxing body knowingly entered into an agreement not to tax a parcel of land in their jurisdiction, and where such action was constitutional under the florida and United States Constitution. It is hard to believe that educated people can be this boneheaded stupid.

View user profile
2seaoat wrote:Mr. Kerrigan's article is hilarious.  So the library board decides that they want to buy some land and lease the land to the public and tells them they do not have to pay taxes.   I mean it is so stupid that it is not worth the time to even do anything but laugh.  Show me the intergovernmental agreements where a taxing body knowingly entered into an agreement not to tax a parcel of land in their jurisdiction, and where such action was constitutional under the florida and United States Constitution.   It is hard to believe that educated people can be this boneheaded stupid.

Thank you for your interest in my post. Your opinion has been noted.

View user profile
Deus X wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Mr. Kerrigan's article is hilarious.  So the library board decides that they want to buy some land and lease the land to the public and tells them they do not have to pay taxes.   I mean it is so stupid that it is not worth the time to even do anything but laugh.  Show me the intergovernmental agreements where a taxing body knowingly entered into an agreement not to tax a parcel of land in their jurisdiction, and where such action was constitutional under the florida and United States Constitution.   It is hard to believe that educated people can be this boneheaded stupid.

Thank you for your interest in my post. Your opinion has been noted.

In other words, this "Deus X" person  has no knowledge of or grasp of the complex issue that is taxation of and proposed fee simple title for island leaseholds.

That said, I've seen Kerrigan's opinion piece before and still have the same reaction:  not that it's particularly hilarious, but that it's one of the most disjointed,  rambling, illogical writings I've ever had the misfortune to spend - make that waste -- time reading.  Not to mention misleading, it's full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.  If  he's still practicing law, I certainly hope Kerrigan's legal briefs make a whole lot more sense, because -- if this is how his mind works and expresses itself -- I personally wouldn't ever want him representing me in any proceeding.

Plenty of far more reasoned minds have published pieces explaining why Kerrigan and others are all wet when they state that something's being taken away from them.  Nothing's being taken away that isn't already private and unavailable to the public for use, now and in the future, for all kinds of valid reasons, and in fact these folks are terribly shortsighted in not understanding that this pending federal legislation will give them FAR, FAR more protection of the existing public lands and beaches than they will EVER enjoy without it.

View user profile
La propriété, c'est le vol!

Just because something's complicated doesn't mean it's of any consequence.  

Who has fee simple title to real property on a barrier island on one of the most beautiful seashores on the planet is practically the definition of a rich white person's non-problem. Get some perspective.

View user profile
Just because something's complicated doesn't mean it's of any consequence.

Who has fee simple title to real property on a barrier island on one of the most beautiful seashores on the planet is practically the definition of a rich white person's non-problem. Get some perspective.


Not sure what you have said, but plenty of middle class Americans work, live, and visit the beach, and many stay in leaseholds for a week on family vacations. The mere fact that it is a leasehold or fee simple has no impact on those families decision to visit or live on the beach. You posted a link which was illogical. Your blaming the decision to create leaseholds or fee simple on one end of the island or the other was done before I was born. I cannot speak to what perspective you are talking about, but neither Linda or I can have perspective when we did not exist when these decisions were made, and certainly the changes proposed on fee simple is the right decision now that those leaseholds are being taxed.

View user profile
Deus X wrote:Who has fee simple title to real property on a barrier island on one of the most beautiful seashores on the planet is practically the definition of a rich white person's non-problem. Get some perspective.

It's astounding that you keep trying to insert race in this discussion. Says a lot about you.

In any event, I ask you: Do you own your home, in Pace or wherever you live? Would you willingly trade your title for a lease? Of course you wouldn't -- IT MATTERS to most people, black, white, brown or yellow. Home ownership (and control over one's property) is a big piece of the American dream. So why don't you go think of something valid to criticize for a change, instead of just trolling for irritation's sake?

View user profile
RealLindaL wrote:  Home ownership (and control over one's property) is a big piece of the American dream.  

HORSESHIT! Home ownership is only part of the "American Dream" because of the extensive lobbying efforts of the Real Estate and Construction industries. Your standard of living will not change one whit no matter who owns the property.

This is part of the conservative Republican theology, that all rights derive from property rights. The Mises Institute has a bunch of nonsense about this, proclaiming that Human Rights are all actually Property Rights.

https://mises.org/library/human-rights-property-rights

Thanks for showing your true colors, a reactionary Republican in liberal clothing.

View user profile
Thanks for showing your true colors, a reactionary Republican in liberal clothing.

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation

Your writings remind me of the American director Mike Nichols grandfather Gustav Landauer of course he was an anarchist and his life ended in jail being stomped to death by the guards.....oh can we be as random as you....of course.

View user profile
Deus X wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:  Home ownership (and control over one's property) is a big piece of the American dream.  

HORSESHIT! Home ownership is only part of the "American Dream" because of the extensive lobbying efforts of the Real Estate and Construction industries. Your standard of living will not change one whit no matter who owns the property.

This is part of the conservative Republican theology, that all rights derive from property rights. The Mises Institute has a bunch of nonsense about this, proclaiming that Human Rights are all actually Property Rights.

https://mises.org/library/human-rights-property-rights

Thanks for showing your true colors, a reactionary Republican in liberal clothing.

Oh, OK, so you DON'T own your home. That's what I thought.

View user profile
RealLindaL wrote:
Oh, OK, so you DON'T own your home.  That's what I thought.

I've owned three homes, two of which I built. I developed two small multi-acre tracts on an East coast barrier island and made a ton of dough doing it.

I regret every bit of it and will probably rot in hell for my greed. I ruined beauty for money. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

You're living better than 99% of the humans who've ever inhabited this planet but you're worried about the title to your condo. Gimme a break, examine your own life.

View user profile
you're worried about the title to your condo. Gimme a break,

It would help if you paid attention to detail. Who on this forum owns a condo on PB?

View user profile
Ignore the liar.

View user profile
Joanimaroni wrote:Ignore the liar.
Hey, lady, remember this: "Unusual travel suggestions are dancing lessons from God".

So go fuck yourself.

View user profile
2seaoat wrote:you're worried about the title to your condo. Gimme a break,

It would help if you paid attention to detail.  Who on this forum owns a condo on PB?

Not I. But the only detail Deus attends to is when it's about himself.

View user profile
Deus X wrote:You're living better than 99% of the humans who've ever inhabited this planet.

OK, dead giveaway. This is the latest incarnation of del.caps.

View user profile
Deus X wrote:I regret every bit of it and will probably rot in hell for my greed. I ruined beauty for money. Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

Oh puh-leeze, spare us the phony remorse.

View user profile
Deus X wrote:Gimme a break, examine your own life.

Might be best that you follow your own advice, sir.

As for how I ended up living "better than 99%" of others (in your doubtless impeccable opinion), I most certainly won't bore you with the details of what it took to get here after decades of work, sacrifice and risk-taking, but rest assured it was far from a walk in the park.

I'm off to bed. Hope you and your particularly nasty disposition sleep well.

View user profile
RealLindaL wrote:As for how I ended up living "better than 99%" of others (in your doubtless impeccable opinion), I most certainly won't bore you with the details of what it took to get here after decades of work, sacrifice and risk-taking, but rest assured it was far from a walk in the park.

Why don't you answer the question: How is the quality of your life going to change one iota whether the title to your property is Fee Simple or Leasehold?

You are so self-centered, shallow and materialistic you cannot see how trivial your concerns are.

View user profile

Sponsored content


View previous topic View next topic Back to top  Message [Page 3 of 4]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum