“Don’t let them steal our beach.”

Thumbs up to one of our own! Very well written viewpoint. I think Earl needs some air out of his balloon every once and awhile. I hope he responds to Linda, because his editorial piece was filled with misinformation and completely falls short of someone who should know better. He is now in his early eighties and eventually you are going to see a decline and sadly that day may have come.

knothead wrote:To RealLinda: Very well written piece in response to Earl's opinion.

A caveat in this discussion surrounding fee simple ownership ia putting the cart before the horse in a very real sense.  Could we please wait until the Supremes weigh in as a ruling could come any moment now? The PB leaseholders have NEVER had their day in court (until now) and I still have a shred of hope that judicial prudence will prevail . . . .

Knot, thanks for your kind words.  I hear your caveat, but it's that exact same "shred of hope" that leaseholders have held onto since taxation began that has prevented all but a very few from pushing for title a long time ago.  Why is that a bad thing?  Because, IMHO -- and it most definitely is only my opinion -- it's as clear as the handwriting on the wall that the courts are going to rule in favor of the county, because that's the current judicial mindset as evidenced by every single ruling that  has come down on every single case (and as you know there have  been several) on both Navarre and Pensacola Beaches since the outset -- and this in a pair of Republican counties full of people who supposedly hate taxes.  This is aside from the multitude of cases nationwide that Seaoat likes to refer to; I can't speak to those as I'm not familiar with them (see, Sea:  I'm not an expert after all - LOL).

So my position has been all along that, since the preponderance of the evidence is that we're going to end up paying ad valorem taxes, we at least ought to have title.  Had we pushed for that in the very beginning instead of burying our collective head in the sand, we would've had a much stronger position because at least it would've put an end to the costly and time-consuming litigation, and we could say, "Give us the option of title and there will likely be an immediate huge flow of taxes to the county coffers -- with no need for escrow."  Now, with virtually all the courts so far ruling against us, Knot, we have no clout at all.  None.

I tried so hard with the old PBRLA (including in the regular column I wrote on their now-defunct website), and on the PNJ forums, and even in a much earlier Viewpoint (YEARS ago) to campaign for what I called "Tax Me; Title Me," but most folks were afraid to back my position because they feared it would signal a capitulation.  Just not the case.

Look, if anyone is afraid that anything I said then or say now in favor of title may sway the courts, including the Supremes, they shouldn't worry about that for even one second.  Our own attorneys have opined that, even had we been given the option of title years back, it would not have had one bit to do with the outcome in the tax cases that were in process at the time.   You can choose to believe that or not, but I do.

As far as the Supremes' ruling coming "any moment now," it could also be next year, or never.  Yes, they may still decide not to rule at all - they have that prerogative.  Meanwhile -- and  here's the big problem -- the longer that these fear-mongering people like J. Earle and all the others writing letters to the editor (have you been reading those lately??) have their say with no one setting the record straight and damping down the hysteria -- the longer that goes on, the more chance there will be a HUGE groundswell of opposition to title when the pedal hits the metal in a couple of years on this legislation.

SOMEBODY HAD TO SAY SOMETHING.  And as Seaoat should appreciate, because he values his privacy and anonymity as much as I do, it took a lot of deep thought before I "outed" myself today.  This is the first time since the PNJ forums were born after Ivan that Linda L. has  been identified, and believe you me I don't like it.

I only wish some others had the guts to back me up when this crapola about stealing or walling off the beach gets printed.  Where's the PBA?  Where's any other leaseholder??  Keep ignoring all this hysteria and it will come back to bite us all in the end-- big time.

2seaoat wrote:Thumbs up to one of our own!  Very well written viewpoint.   I think Earl needs some air out of his balloon every once and awhile.   I hope he responds to Linda, because his editorial piece was filled with misinformation and completely falls short of someone who should know better.  He is now in his early eighties and eventually you are going to see a decline and sadly that day may have come.

Seaoat, you may be right, and it is sad indeed.  Thanks for your support in any case, but I seriously doubt we'll hear a response from Bowden -- at least, not one that concedes anything at all on this subject.   I hope I'm wrong, but I think if anything he would come back more adamant than ever.  These "don't steal our beach" people are SCARED TO DEATH.
 
Yes, we still have that ever-present, baseless fear rampant on the mainland (and the persistent false belief that we own our improvements in the first place).   I really do wish some others would step up to the plate when these untruths are put before the public, rather than letting them pass unchallenged and thus lodge themselves firmly in people's minds.

Only wish you could see the full folder of emails I've sent to just about every local media outlet and personality in the area, battling all the misconceptions and misinformation, over and over and over for years, including very recently -- but so far I've been pretty much the lone voice in the wilderness, and only rarely have I seen any success.    The  best thing I could get out of Bob Solarski the other week was to say we don't TECHNICALLY (he emphasized) own our homes.  And a long talk with Joe Douglass re the report he was to present after that Solarski intro helped a little bit, too -- but the next reporter will likely still get it all wrong - it's like the proverbial finger in the dike.  

(Speaking of which, IF anyone who needs straightening out comments on the Viewpoint on pnj.com , I sure hope one of you will step up to the plate, because I'm still a Facebook holdout and thus shut out from responding or posting there.)

Anyway, thanks again, Seaoat, for this and all your other moral support over the years, even if we don't see 100% eye-to-eye, such as on whether or not property taxes should've ever been levied on the leaseholds in the first place.  You say yes; I say no.

And, unlike you, I don't entirely blame it on the realtors for misleading folks.  Our real estate agent, when we bought here, told us we would own our house, just not the land.  I honestly believe he thought that was fact.  Should he  have known better?  Yes, but I found a few years ago that even our own county budget director, Amy Lovoy, labored under the same false impression -- and I venture to say MOST county residents still believe the same thing.

OK, I'll shut up now.

What a sad story.......zzzzzzzzzzzzz.................

What a sad story.......zzzzzzzzzzzzz.................


This is the mentality the folks on the beach will face. Hallmark wants Pensacola to revert back to 1950, in every regard. He resents the downtown crowd, and has no love loss for folks who live on the beach. He thinks that everybody has a silver spoon who is in the downtown crowd or on the beach, and he blames everything on those folks as to why Pensacola has poverty and no jobs. He makes some valid points but he paints with a very broad brush, and if folks on the beach suffered a little bit he would relish the thought. Fee simple becomes very difficult when these folks transfer their resentment to the issue without fully understanding what is fair or how ripping off folks is not right regardless of their socioeconomic level or geographic location.

Mr Ichi wrote:What a sad story.......zzzzzzzzzzzzz.................

No one made you read it.

Hope you enjoyed your nap.  

(Someone please remind me to be oh, so courteous and respectful next time this person wishes to express a strong opinion and/or provide information on anything at all.)

Someone please remind me to be oh, so courteous and respectful next time this person wishes to express a strong opinion and/or provide information on anything at all.)


Hallmark actually is quite courteous and he was not attacking you as much as his deep seated resentment as to what Pensacola has become. He does not think economic development should be squandered on tourism, but that leadership should be trying to get solid industrial jobs, and that investments should be made in the neighborhoods. All good goals, but he usually finds a scapegoat to justify today's reality, and it usually is Mr. Studer, or anybody from the beach........so do not take it personal, he just thinks that folks on PB get preferential treatment and the system is rigged to their advantage......and into this ignorance, the fee simple discussion will enter.

That's hallmark... I've rarely if ever seen him rude... pretty sure he was just ribbing and didn't mean any offense.

And I thought Hallmark and I had an understanding, a long while back on the forums; thought we got along pretty well.  

But regardless of his usual courtesy -- if that's what you folks say he normally displays these days --  this wasn't it.  And if he experiences wealth envy (which is what Seaoat makes it sound like, despite the effort to soften his initial response), I say it's a sad waste of time to give in to that petty emotion in a broad brush manner, when many of us regular ol' middle class folks on the island made it here ALL ON OUR OWN via hard work and planning.   There are more of us like that out here than Hallmark would ever care to acknowledge, I'm sure.

But it's easier to just dismiss someone with a "zzzzzz" or whatever instead of engaging in meaningful dialogue on the issues on a person-to-person basis.   Doesn't seem all that courteous to me, sorry.  Call me picky.

Y'all have yourselves a nice Sunday evening.       __LL

RealLindaL wrote:I only wish some others had the guts to back me up when this crapola about stealing or walling off the beach gets printed.  Where's the PBA?  Where's any other leaseholder??  Keep ignoring all this hysteria and it will come back to bite us all in the end-- big time.

Well, I take it back about the PBA (Pensacola Beach Advocates).  Jim Cox, who's president of that group, had obviously previously submitted a Letter to the Editor on the same subject, because it was published this morning, and very well stated in a lot fewer words than my Viewpoint:

http://www.pnj.com/article/20130826/OPINION/308260002/Letters-August-26

I do find it interesting that Jim, who previously lived on Sabine Drive, in June purchased a home in Gulf Breeze and has homesteaded it, so obviously he either sold his beach leasehold or will be renting it out.  Maybe he won't be president for long.  ;-)  (Doesn't matter to me; I'm not a member of the PBA, especially as for years, just like the predecessor group PBRLA, they were loathe to speak up for title even though our attorneys said that doing so would not affect the outcome of our lawsuits in the courts one whit.)

RealLindaL wrote:

RealLindaL wrote:I only wish some others had the guts to back me up when this crapola about stealing or walling off the beach gets printed.  Where's the PBA?  Where's any other leaseholder??  Keep ignoring all this hysteria and it will come back to bite us all in the end-- big time.

Well, I take it back about the PBA (Pensacola Beach Advocates).  Jim Cox, who's president of that group, had obviously previously submitted a Letter to the Editor on the same subject, because it was published this morning, and very well stated in a lot fewer words than my Viewpoint:

http://www.pnj.com/article/20130826/OPINION/308260002/Letters-August-26

I do find it interesting that Jim, who previously lived on Sabine Drive, in June purchased a home in Gulf Breeze and has homesteaded it, so obviously he either sold his beach leasehold or will be renting it out.  Maybe he won't be president for long.  ;-)  (Doesn't matter to me; I'm not a member of the PBA, especially as for years, just like the predecessor group PBRLA, they were loathe to speak up for title even though our attorneys said that doing so would not affect the outcome of our lawsuits in the courts one whit.)

******************************************************

Jim and Lila have both devoted a lot of their time advocating for your concept including walking the halls at the BOCC.

Yes, they're finally doing that now (actually for a couple of years), including advocating for the "in perpertuity" protection clause.  They wouldn't give this issue the time of day a few years ago.  

I like Jim just fine.

RealLindaL wrote:Yes, they're finally doing that now (actually for a couple of years), including advocating for the "in perpertuity" protection clause.  They wouldn't give this issue the time of day a few years ago.  

I like Jim just fine.

*******************************************************

I'm really not trying to beat a dead horse here but an adjunct thought came to me: If it comes to pass as you desire and envision, the result will guarantee what residents on the mainland have feared . . . . . . . it will guarantee the beach will become more of an 'elitist' community, i.e., the ability to pay the exorbitant windstorm/homeowners/flood insurances, pay lease fees, pay property taxes, pay for the right to come to your house and maintain that property in an inhospitable environment! All these combined require substantial income to sustain, hence, my prediction is it will hasten the exit of ordinary citizens and the demographic will change (over time) to the well heeled who can afford it. With the fee simple ownership consummated as you desire the residents will, more than ever, be protective of anyone who trespasses and justifiably so.

Just a thought . . .

all fee simple will do is give certainty to potential buyers as to what they are buying. Part of the housing depression that the beach has experienced has been caused directly by the uncertainty. A leasehold is a diminishing asset. Eventually it will zero out as to value. Fee simple will allow potential buyers not to have uncertainty. An uncertain buyer does no buy.

Whether the leaseholds remain, or it is fee simple the folks owning on the beach are going to be the higher income folks and not like 50 years ago when a place on the beach could be handled by the average middle class family as a priority. The costs to maintain a place on the beach are enormous, and as Citizens tries to close down and transfer folks to other insurance companies......the writing is on the wall where insurance costs are going.

The Public owns the beach....fee simple or lease.....they still own the beach.

2seaoat wrote:all fee simple will do is give certainty to potential buyers as to what they are buying.  Part of the housing depression that the beach has experienced has been caused directly by the uncertainty.  A leasehold is a diminishing asset.  Eventually it will zero out as to value.  Fee simple will allow potential buyers not to have uncertainty.   An uncertain buyer does no buy.  

Whether the leaseholds remain, or it is fee simple the folks owning on the beach are going to be the higher income folks and not like 50 years ago when a place on the beach could be handled by the average middle class family as a priority.  The costs to maintain a place on the beach are enormous, and as Citizens tries to close down and transfer folks to other insurance companies......the writing is on the wall where insurance costs are going.

The Public owns the beach....fee simple or lease.....they still own the beach.

*****************************************************

SO, your comments about the 'certainty' aspect are off the mark . . . . . if a potential buyer is purchasing a parcel with a lease containing a renewal clause along with attendant terms it is a non factor providing the buyer understands the concept. You are absolutely correct that one would be purchasing a diminishing asset if the leasehold parcel had no renewal clause whatsoever (about 600 of those on PB). Otherwise, if any uncertainty has been created it has been by a local government, who after 60 years have found a legal mechanism to change the rules to capitalize on a very successful development of PB. It's clearly show me the money mindset but hey it's how we operate in America . . . . nothing novel or new.

And yes, the public does own the beach thank goodness and there are dedicated areas for the public to enjoy as it was designed but the residents will not be nearly as welcoming to strangers traipsing across their property to avoid a longer walk around going back to their car.

knothead wrote:I'm really not trying to beat a dead horse here but an adjunct thought came to me: If it comes to pass as you desire and envision, the result will  guarantee what residents on the mainland have feared . . . . . . . it will guarantee the beach will become more of an 'elitist' community, i.e., the ability to pay the exorbitant windstorm/homeowners/flood insurances, pay lease fees, pay property taxes, pay for the right to come to your house and maintain that property in an inhospitable environment! All these combined require substantial income to sustain, hence, my prediction is it will hasten the exit of ordinary citizens and the demographic will change (over time) to the well heeled who can afford it.  With the fee simple ownership consummated as you desire the residents will, more than ever, be protective of anyone who trespasses and justifiably so.  

Just a thought . . .    

Knot, as far as I can see, no expense in your list would be any different from the right here and now except that (1) lease fees would GO AWAY for anyone who accepted the offer of title (and remember, that will be completely optional), because the lease would no longer exist, and (2) property taxes would be owed every year,  AS THEY ARE NOW, except that they would be paid instead of put off once the lawsuits were ended, so the outrageous interest would stop accruing on those unpaid balances.  

If insurance rates were to go up exponentially from where they are now as Seaoat expects, that will happen regardless of who owns the building.

(Sorry but I have no idea what you're talking about with this:
"pay for the right to come to your house and maintain that property in an inhospitable environment" - what do you mean?  And why would that be any different from today?)

As far as protecting one's leasehold from trespassers, I would presume everyone would be doing that now, but most beach visitors don't trespass on private leaseholds, and I wouldn't envision that changing all of a sudden.  Nobody would be any more justified in preventing true trespass on his owned property than he is now on his same leasehold.  But he can't now, and could not then, prevent rightful passage along protected beach accesses and along the beach itself.  There would be no "rightfully so" involved - he would have NO right to restrict free movement on public accesses and rights of way, including the beach front itself.

Am I missing something?  I don't get your point.  Appreciate your thoughts, but maybe you could clarify?

If this makes you feel any better, Knot:  everyone who is presently purchasing leaseholds knows that paying taxes is now required (except where held in abeyance for those named plaintiffs in the suits).   And in my neighborhood near the churches, there have been several families purchase and move into houses within the past couple of years who I can guarantee you are far from elitist.

Look, Knot, just so you know, I am not going to be devastated if the Supremes unexpectedly rule in our favor and the taxes  (and title opportunity) go away.  A lot of money we don't have to spend! And I'll just try to put this title thing out of my mind.   BUT....think about these three downsides:  (1) beach leaseholders will continue to come under severe mainlander criticism for "not paying our fair share" - in fact the hatred may only grow deeper, and (2) the tax issue WILL raise its ugly ahead again  - it's only a matter of time.  (Don't forget the Supreme Court itself ruled in favor of the leaseholders back in the 1980's, and guess what??  Here we are back in court again, and only the small handful of those named leaseholders still kicking from the old suit are exempted from taxes via stare decisis on that one case.  Don't even get me started on the unfairness of that!!)  Also (3) Your property will be worth something less on the market than it likely would command if people knew they were buying more than just a leasehold, which really spooks a lot of folks.  The latter doesn't matter to me because I still hope to die here, but maybe it does to you.  I know it matters to some buyers because my own husband says he never would have agreed to this purchase had he realized he wouldn't even own the house.

Anyway, great talking with you, Knot - any time.

Separate Note:  I spent a long time writing what I hoped was a thoughtful reply to Hallmark just before lunch,  but my post disappeared in the ether when I hit Send.  I've got a note into admin, but presume it's lost.  Will try to find time to re-create later, but gotta run.  Pls. forgive any typo's above; don't have time to proof.

hallmark has super forum powers....he can zap any post he does not like before it appears.

lease fees would GO AWAY for anyone who accepted the offer of title (and remember, that will be completely optional), because the lease would no longer exist,

Do we have that in writing? I have spoken with GR personally and attended town hall meetings and that assertion was made. LL, perhaps I have become jaded but my confidence level in our local governing bodies that I am more than a little leery that the BOCC will actually follow through on that assurance. As you know, the SRIA is funded by lease fees and taxes collected here on the island . . . . they raised their budget from $7.2M in 2013 to $9.3M in 2014. If the lease fees are dispensed with what happens . . . . . abolish the SRIA? I would say probably but that process is political tinkering and every GOB with a dog in the fight will drag out that process for years. Your knowledge on this topic may help put me at ease but I just do not trust these people anymore.

"pay for the right to come to your house and maintain that property in an inhospitable environment" - what do you mean? And why would that be any different from today?

I have been terminally pissed about having to buy a pass for $50 to come to your property! At one time, lease holders could purchase their sticker at a reduced rate but people from the mainland bitched and moaned so the BOCC bowing to numerical superiority (as always) force the beach residents to pay the same as someone from Century or Walnut Hill . . . . you get the point. What if the County put up barriers and charged a fee to cross the many bridges in our area . . . . why there would be a lynching but for those beach people . . . . . no problem . . .stick it to them . . . . . they deserve it! So, I may not be rational about paying to come to your own property but I'll forever have an attitude about that.

Maintenance of a beach house is probably 50% greater than on the mainland . . . . you should understand that . . . the salt, the wind and the storms.

As far as protecting one's leasehold from trespassers, I would presume everyone would be doing that now, but most beach visitors don't trespass on private leaseholds

Again, I've been here since 1972 . . . . I can remember when it was far more informal, e.g., people would drive and park on Ariola, find a parking place and cut through properties and go to the beach for fishing or swimming whatever. Today, that is rapidly changing . . . . in my own case I will see complete strangers standing in my back yard looking very lost as they found themselves there purely by accident but I am always kind and tell them the directions to where they want to go . . . . I will always be welcoming and understanding of visitors. Do residents in town have that problem? It's just different living on this island or any island I suppose.

I won't bore you further but I want you to know I appreciate you taking the time for a thoughtful reply and I also appreciate M. Oats views as well.

2seaoat wrote:hallmark has super forum powers....he can zap any post he does not like before it appears.

TOO funny, Sea (and yeah, you too, Hallmark, with your hex sign or whatever it is).  Well, I'm going to try next to see what my old brain can remember of what I wrote earlier today, like it or not.  Ha.    BBIAF,  LL

Mr Ichi wrote:I will be honest.  Many of us native Pensacolians were vehemently opposed to people building on Pensacola Beach.  We gave it a good fight but we lost.  So be it.  It was the will of the people and the way that Democracy works.  

Now it is done, nothing can undo it.  But still Pensacola Beach is a part of Escambia Co.  it is some what disheartening to see parts of the county in almost complete ruins, F schools, Crime, Abandoned houses, etc.  At the same time I hear others wailing like Job and and wearing ashes and sack cloths over the title(?) to their land.   It gets old.   Most people on Pensacola Beach could give a Rats A.s about what happens in Century or Molino or the West side.  Why should I care about the snakes nest of laws and rules that apply to Pensacola Beach?

40 years I was looking to buy some property.  I could have bought on Pensacola Beach. After looking into the Laws and advantages and disadvantages of living on the beach, I brought a waterview lot on Shoreline Drive in Gulf Breeze.  I never built on it and 10 years ago it was one of the last vacant  waterview lots in Gulf Breeze.  I sold it and made very well on my investment.  

Seaoat has posted a very good synopsis of me.  He is spot on.  

Good Luck to everyone on the Beach. You will need it.  

Commented on this post earlier today but lost it somehow upon hitting Send, and haven't heard a word back from Admin., so here goes my best attempt at re-creating, FWIW.  When you see how long it is you'll know why I kicked myself around the block for whatever I did to lose it in the first place:

Hallmark, I do understand how awful some Pensacolians feel at the loss of the pristine beach they remember -- and no amount of economic support for the community from beach tourism (which is truly substantial) can ever make up for what is gone.  

My own childhood vacation haunt was Virginia Beach, which, though it was already somewhat developed at the time, was still mostly low rise, and very friendly and 'old fashioned.'  It was a magical place for many including myself, and my lifelong dream of living by the sea was born there.  Sadly, today it's not anywhere near the same -- high rise, horrendous traffic, and a haughty attitude toward visitors (thank goodness the latter illness has never taken hold here).  And VA Beach is also just too cold in winter for my husband's comfort, being on heart meds (but that's another story).

So, like you, I had to bid adieu to childhood memories of a beach that had changed forever.  As you indicated, Hall, "so be it."  When it was time to consider retirement locations, we instead found Pensacola Beach, and fell in love with its beauty and laid back style, including especially its miles of single family beach living, found almost nowhere else in the Panhandle, or perhaps the entire country.  Since hubby and I were both intending to work for a while longer, its convenient proximity to Pensacola was another plus.  All in all, this was a greatly anticipated 'move made in heaven' for us, and it was the result of decades of effort, struggle and sacrifice in our lives.  

Little did we know we would be reviled, mistrusted and virtually hated by some, just because we made this island our home.  

Hallmark, I can't make you like me or any other beach resident, but I think it's patently unfair for you to presume anything about what anyone does or doesn't care about unless you know them personally.  My husband and I are distressed every night listening to and reading the news about what goes on in the rest of Escambia County, and how it passes from bad to worse -- a situation not just happening here, but all around the nation as the gap between haves and have nots widens for all kinds of reasons, and parental responsibility and influence go down the tubes at the same time -- a dual whammy for our county's and country's future.  It's frightening, and we feel entirely helpless to change any of it, especially at our age.  It doesn't mean we don't give a whatever!!!

As for why you should care what happens on the beach, no one is asking you to.  But the existence of the severe county problems you are rightly concerned with does not negate the existence of other problems that are important to varying degrees in other peoples' lives, does it?  I mean look, folks are concerned about things big and small all day long -- whether it's what's  happening in Syria, or what's happening in the Sheriff's office, or what's the proper logo to symbolize the City of Pensacola, or whether a particular football coach knows what he's doing, or even whether Arlene Williams has the best BBQ.  It's just life going on.

For you to dismiss everyone else's "stuff" with a zzzzzzz or words like "wailing" (surprised you didn't use the area fave, "whining") doesn't do your own cause any good, far as I can see.  If my problems seem unimportant and petty to you, fine, so just ignore me, but please don't be disrespectful and dismissive, OK?  It's counterproductive to gaining anyone's ear for your own complaints.

And you'll note I'm not asking what you're doing to promote your own cause (whatever it really is) other than posting your disgruntlement here, because it's none of my business.

I'm very glad you did well on your Gulf Breeze lot.  Good for you.  

You wouldn't believe how many people tell me they "could've" bought on Pensacola Beach years ago.  And I can virtually guarantee  you that, had they done so at the time and still held the property today, they'd be equally as disturbed as we are by the breaking of the promise that surely you knew existed at the time you were looking -- the promise later reneged upon -- that of no property taxes on our leased land and the buildings we built, now also owned by the county.   It's a big deal to us, even if you just consider it one big sob story by a lot of rich fat cats or whatever you think of us, what with your wholesale judgment by address.

You say "Good luck to everyone on the beach," and I wish that were sincere, because I certainly wish you and everyone in our area the very best.  But you have indicated that Seaoat has you well pegged, and he opined that "...if folks on the beach suffered a little bit he [Hallmark]would relish the thought."   You wanna talk about sad....

I will sign off this epistle (not a lecture; just my thoughts) and wish you and yours a good night, Hallmark.  If we can't be friends on the forum, at least I hope we can be mutually respectful going forward.       __LL

lease fees would GO AWAY for anyone who accepted the offer of title (and remember, that will be completely optional), because the lease would no longer exist,

Do we have that in writing? I have spoken with GR personally and attended town hall meetings and that assertion was made. LL, perhaps I have become jaded but my confidence level in our local governing bodies that I am more than a little leery that the BOCC will actually follow through on that assurance. As you know, the SRIA is funded by lease fees and taxes collected here on the island . . . . they raised their budget from $7.2M in 2013 to $9.3M in 2014. If the lease fees are dispensed with what happens . . . . . abolish the SRIA? I would say probably but that process is political tinkering and every GOB with a dog in the fight will drag out that process for years. Your knowledge on this topic may help put me at ease but I just do not trust these people anymore.


Knot, I totally understand your mistrust.  But we don't need that in writing, because -- think about it -- if you now own the property, you can't simultaneously lease it from some entity who is no longer the owner.  I am not certain about many things in life but that I am sure of - fee simple ownership will require, or occasion, or however you want to put it, that the lease -- and thus its stated fee, which doesn't exist independent of the lease -- be vacated by mutual agreement.

The question of what happens to the SRIA is a serious one, and I don't think anyone has the answer to that yet, though it's surely being thought about.  Taxes will be substantial but whether the county will opt thereby to fund the SRIA, or disband that body and attempt to take the duties unto itself, remains to be seen.  In fact there are many complex if's and's and but's surrounding the title issue, and that's one reason why, if you read the proposed Miller bill, while there is a deadline for Escambia's passing title to Navarre Beach to Santa Rosa County, there is not a word about a deadline, nor even a specific requirement that title be offered at all, when it comes to PBeach leaseholders.  That's because of the cold feet some county commissioners had about committing to this at all.  They were only willing to sign on if their feet weren't going to be held to the fire.  

Other commissioners have seen and will see that, even if the Supremes rule in our favor, it's not a bad idea to offer title and collect taxes from those willing to pay them.  We're being told right now that, if there's a favorable ruling for us, the bill will be withdrawn.   I'm not sure who's saying that, or why, but I think that might call for some rethinking down the road.  We shall see.

RealLindaL wrote:

Mr Ichi wrote:I will be honest.  Many of us native Pensacolians were vehemently opposed to people building on Pensacola Beach.  We gave it a good fight but we lost.  So be it.  It was the will of the people and the way that Democracy works.  

Now it is done, nothing can undo it.  But still Pensacola Beach is a part of Escambia Co.  it is some what disheartening to see parts of the county in almost complete ruins, F schools, Crime, Abandoned houses, etc.  At the same time I hear others wailing like Job and and wearing ashes and sack cloths over the title(?) to their land.   It gets old.   Most people on Pensacola Beach could give a Rats A.s about what happens in Century or Molino or the West side.  Why should I care about the snakes nest of laws and rules that apply to Pensacola Beach?

40 years I was looking to buy some property.  I could have bought on Pensacola Beach. After looking into the Laws and advantages and disadvantages of living on the beach, I brought a waterview lot on Shoreline Drive in Gulf Breeze.  I never built on it and 10 years ago it was one of the last vacant  waterview lots in Gulf Breeze.  I sold it and made very well on my investment.  

Seaoat has posted a very good synopsis of me.  He is spot on.  

Good Luck to everyone on the Beach. You will need it.  

Commented on this post earlier today but lost it somehow upon hitting Send, and haven't heard a word back from Admin., so here goes my best attempt at re-creating, FWIW.  When you see how long it is you'll know why I kicked myself around the block for whatever I did to lose it in the first place:

Hallmark, I do understand how awful some Pensacolians feel at the loss of the pristine beach they remember -- and no amount of economic support for the community from beach tourism (which is truly substantial) can ever make up for what is gone.  

My own childhood vacation haunt was Virginia Beach, which, though it was already somewhat developed at the time, was still mostly low rise, and very friendly and 'old fashioned.'  It was a magical place for many including myself, and my lifelong dream of living by the sea was born there.  Sadly, today it's not anywhere near the same -- high rise, horrendous traffic, and a haughty attitude toward visitors (thank goodness the latter illness has never taken hold here).  And VA Beach is also just too cold in winter for my husband's comfort, being on heart meds (but that's another story).

So, like you, I had to bid adieu to childhood memories of a beach that had changed forever.  As you indicated, Hall, "so be it."  When it was time to consider retirement locations, we instead found Pensacola Beach, and fell in love with its beauty and laid back style, including especially its miles of single family beach living, found almost nowhere else in the Panhandle, or perhaps the entire country.  Since hubby and I were both intending to work for a while longer, its convenient proximity to Pensacola was another plus.  All in all, this was a greatly anticipated 'move made in heaven' for us, and it was the result of decades of effort, struggle and sacrifice in our lives.  

Little did we know we would be reviled, mistrusted and virtually hated by some, just because we made this island our home.  

Hallmark, I can't make you like me or any other beach resident, but I think it's patently unfair for you to presume anything about what anyone does or doesn't care about unless you know them personally.  My husband and I are distressed every night listening to and reading the news about what goes on in the rest of Escambia County, and how it passes from bad to worse -- a situation not just happening here, but all around the nation as the gap between haves and have nots widens for all kinds of reasons, and parental responsibility and influence go down the tubes at the same time -- a dual whammy for our county's and country's future.  It's frightening, and we feel entirely helpless to change any of it, especially at our age.  It doesn't mean we don't give a whatever!!!

As for why you should care what happens on the beach, no one is asking you to.  But the existence of the severe county problems you are rightly concerned with does not negate the existence of other problems that are important to varying degrees in other peoples' lives, does it?  I mean look, folks are concerned about things big and small all day long -- whether it's what's  happening in Syria, or what's happening in the Sheriff's office, or what's the proper logo to symbolize the City of Pensacola, or whether a particular football coach knows what he's doing, or even whether Arlene Williams has the best BBQ.  It's just life going on.

For you to dismiss everyone else's "stuff" with a zzzzzzz or words like "wailing" (surprised you didn't use the area fave, "whining") doesn't do your own cause any good, far as I can see.  If my problems seem unimportant and petty to you, fine, so just ignore me, but please don't be disrespectful and dismissive, OK?  It's counterproductive to gaining anyone's ear for your own complaints.

And you'll note I'm not asking what you're doing to promote your own cause (whatever it really is) other than posting your disgruntlement here, because it's none of my business.

I'm very glad you did well on your Gulf Breeze lot.  Good for you.  

You wouldn't believe how many people tell me they "could've" bought on Pensacola Beach years ago.  And I can virtually guarantee  you that, had they done so at the time and still held the property today, they'd be equally as disturbed as we are by the breaking of the promise that surely you knew existed at the time you were looking -- the promise later reneged upon -- that of no property taxes on our leased land and the buildings we built, now also owned by the county.   It's a big deal to us, even if you just consider it one big sob story by a lot of rich fat cats or whatever you think of us, what with your wholesale judgment by address.

You say "Good luck to everyone on the beach," and I wish that were sincere, because I certainly wish you and everyone in our area the very best.  But you have indicated that Seaoat has you well pegged, and he opined that "...if folks on the beach suffered a little bit he [Hallmark]would relish the thought."   You wanna talk about sad....

I will sign off this epistle (not a lecture; just my thoughts) and wish you and yours a good night, Hallmark.  If we can't be friends on the forum, at least I hope we can be mutually respectful going forward.       __LL

******************************************************

Thank you for framing the complex nuances, tangible or intangible, translating those nuances in a condensed form . . . . your words were truthful and eloquent. There are a lot of people on these forums who make their case by castigating others and I have been guilty of that infraction on occasion . . . . . it's a fool's game but your comments reveal the ability to communicate without castigating . . . . . excellent and inspirational!

Thanks . . .