Questions linger over restoration assesment plan

I am an owner of Destin beachfront condominium property and the president of the Regency Towers Condominium Owners’ Association. Our board and association would like to respond to the comments of Mr. Terry Trojan and his group, the Citizens for Healthy Beaches, who have been quoted in your newspaper in connection with their campaign soliciting the signatures of beachfront property owners on a petition asking the City Council to levy a special tax assessment to pay for beach restoration in western Destin.

While my association and I are sympathetic to the plight of those property owners in the immediate vicinity of the east jetty of East Pass, and while we share their concern regarding the severely eroded beaches in that area, we feel it is only fair that Citizens for Healthy Beaches make full disclosure regarding the special assessment petition, so that those being asked to sign it are fully informed.

Following are several critical issues that are not addressed in Mr. Trojan’s letter:

Who gets sand, and who should pay?

To start with, the proposed project area is the entire 3.2-mile stretch of beach between the east jetty of East Pass and the western boundary of Henderson Beach State Park. However, our Board has been informed that state law (the Beach and Shore Preservation Act, at Section 161.088, Fla. Statute) restricts beach restoration and nourishment projects to areas which are designated as critically eroded shoreline or which benefit an adjacent critically eroded shoreline.

As the city of Destin itself has recognized, most of the proposed project shoreline (that is, the entire area east of Holiday Isle) is not designated as critically eroded. Citizens for Healthy Beaches is asking for a special assessment against all beachfront owners in the proposed project area, including those in the non-critically eroded areas, who may not be within the project area as finally approved by FDEP, and who will therefore get no benefit from the project.

All property owners being asked to vote for the assessment should know this.

What beachfront property will be lost?

The application for the Joint Coastal Permit filed at the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) has asked to defer establishment of the “erosion control line” — the artificial line in the sand which will become the new south property line for beachfront owners.

The location of that line will be highly controversial, as shown most recently by the litigation over the beach restoration project in Walton County and eastern Okaloosa County completed in 2007. (The Save Our Beaches case, which may require the city and the county to pay for property taken for beach restoration, is now pending in the Florida Supreme Court).

In all fairness, the proposed new property line should be announced now, so that affected beachfront property owners can make an informed decision about the impact of the project on their beachfront property and property rights.

Who must give new public access?

Our board is also informed that Florida law (Section 161.101(12), Fla. Statute) requires every beach restoration or nourishment project to “provide for adequate public access.” In the city of Destin, there are no public beach accesses in the vast majority of the proposed project area.

Specifically, there are none between the Calhoun access at Restaurant Row near Silver Shells at the eastern end of the project and the O’Steen access near the western end of Holiday Isle.

The project’s Joint Coastal Permit application at FDEP states that the county will request the use of a private access on Holiday Isle. Those promoting the project should either confirm that no other public accesses will be sought or should disclose where any additional public accesses will be located, and if so, whether they will be taken by eminent domain.

Why are private property rights being denied?

Perhaps most disturbing is the fact that the project’s Joint Coastal Permit application at FDEP states that the project “is unaware of any property owners that actively enforce no trespass.”

In fact, beachfront property owners throughout the entire project area display numerous warning signs (Private Property/ Private Beach/ No

Trespassing/Owners and Guests Only) both on the beach side and on the street side of their properties. Most have fences, gates, and restricted code or card access, and some have guardhouses as well.

In short, most beachfront owners in the proposed project area actively promote and protect their beaches as private property. It is unfair and inaccurate for anyone to suggest otherwise.

Given this threat to private property rights, it is all the more alarming that the city’s new mission statement includes an announcement that the city wants to establish “additional access to restored beaches with shuttles to and from parking areas.” (“Destin sets future course,” thedestinlog.com, April 29, 2008).

Many of us who bought private beachfront property are extremely concerned over this apparent attack on our property rights. We oppose the city’s taking of our property to support more over-development on the north side of Highway 98, and we will vigorously oppose the shuttling of people onto private beaches from remote parking areas.

In short, we join with the many longtime Destin residents who are tired of the unrestrained development which has produced severe overcrowding on our roads and residential streets, and which threatens to transform Destin into a thicket of high-rises from beach to bay. In this case, quality of life and private property rights are aligned.

The Citizens for Healthy Beaches tax assessment drive is not well founded, and all Destin beachfront property owners deserve answers to the above questions.

Donald J. Michael is the owner of Destin beachfront condominium property and president of the Regency Towers Condominium Owners’ Association.