An article in the News Herald this morning reported on a case before the Florida Supreme Court addressing the Walton County beach renourishment efforts. As the article reads, property owners are suing to prevent this and it may cause renourishment efforts to be their responsibility when they want to do it and how much effort/money they want to put into it.
The argument is that it may be the “unconstitutional taking of private property from beach-front homeowners.” Am I reading this wrong? Beach renourishment, in my opinion is a great thing for the property owners. As a property owner on the beach, why would I not want this? If I had 100 feet of beach in between my home and the water, and now I had 50 feet, I would want back that extra 50 feet.
I know the beach restoration project in Walton County has had problems in the past, with concerns of the sea turtle nests.
As reported, if the renourishment is found unconstitutional, the property owners would have the responsibility to cover the restoration costs.Print Story