Deer Lake State Park [update - not closing]

[TreeFrog]

I agree with everything you said and wouldn't rule out liquidating the parks if the relief was not realized through the immediate closings and cutting.

With the enormity of the state's budget, it's hard to imagine that closing one tiny little state park will have ANY useful impact whatsoever. Let's don't use the small government argument as a proxy for opening up that property to development.

 

[AAbsolute]

With the enormity of the state's budget, it's hard to imagine that closing one tiny little state park will have ANY useful impact whatsoever. Let's don't use the small government argument as a proxy for opening up that property to development.

Would it be o.k. with you if we sell one of the parks and use the proceeds to put in an annuity with perpetuity with specific purpose of maintaining all the parks on the Sowal coast forever?

I'm sure we the people can craft tight and specific language whereby the funds would be untouchable and provide self support forever. No more tax money for these ever again.

 

[TreeFrog]

Would it be o.k. with you if we sell one of the parks and use the proceeds to put in an annuity with perpetuity with specific purpose of maintaining all the parks on the Sowal coast forever?

I'm sure we the people can craft tight and specific language whereby the funds would be untouchable and provide self support forever. No more tax money for these ever again.

Interesting idea, but the park that's sold is likely to be gone forever, unless we can insure that it sells to Nature Conservancy, or someone similar, who would turn right around and donate it back to the state. All seems a bit of a stretch, doesn't it?

Besides, I'm happy to see my tax money support state parks.

 

[AAbsolute]

Interesting idea, but the park that's sold is likely to be gone forever, unless we can insure that it sells to Nature Conservancy, or someone similar, who would turn right around and donate it back to the state. All seems a bit of a stretch, doesn't it?

Besides, I'm happy to see my tax money support state parks.

Let's get a quieted Deed for Camp Helen and sell Camp Helen for about $35,000,000 by way of auction to whomever wants it most. The $35,000,000 can be put into a permanent and untouchable fund. 90% of the earned interest will be used as the only budget for the rest of the coastal parks in Sowal. The other 10% of the earned interest will be reinvested in the fund to ensure that the budget can increase in perpetuity. All current taxes raised in allocation to the budgets of same would be permanently stopped forever.

 

[TreeFrog]

Interesting idea, but the park that's sold is likely to be gone forever, unless we can insure that it sells to Nature Conservancy, or someone similar, who would turn right around and donate it back to the state. All seems a bit of a stretch, doesn't it?

Besides, I'm happy to see my tax money support state parks.

Like I said the first time...

 

[BeachSiO2]

Sorry we didn't get the proverbial honeymoon before our first quarrel. I disagree with quite a bit of your assertions.

Neither EBSCO or The Village at Inlet Beach AKA Rosemary Beach Land Company are adjacent landowners. Jason's (EBSCO) got a piece close, but not close enough to effectively oppose.

Next, either of the aforementioned are corporate peers of JOE who may very well acquire JOE in the next year if the table is set properly. That said, those gorilla's are as cozy as SWGB with a pretty boy from the Keys. If so, there's no man nor beast for 600 miles whose gonna effectively oppose in a Court of Equity or Common.

The lakefront property owners in favor of developing a permanantly navigable pass for passenger boats outnumber the lakefront property owners who don't by 50 to 1. The businesses that would benefit feel the same way. The pass is already being used by passenger vessels intermitantly now.

It's time for those who don't have an eminent cause to have their vote counted properly 1/50th. Are you advocating raising taxes across the State to combat the will of the majority and a bunch of corporate gorilla's if they choose to exercise their collective might?

Maybe I need to focus myself and hopefully our portion of the discussion to why I chose to jump in. The reason was simple, I do not believe that St. Joe participating on the WALTON COUNTY CDLAB will have any effect on the permanent opening and maintenance of a coastal dune lake located in another county. Moreover, I do not believe that there is any possibility that any other CDL located within Walton County's political borders is subject to permanent opening. Finally, if there is a movement in Bay County to permanently open and maintain the outfall at Lake Powell there will be a number of people that will fight it due to the downdrift impacts. In the state of Florida it is estimated that 85% of all beach erosion is caused by the opening and maintenance of existing inlets. There are a number of coastal engineers that will be able to clearly demonstrate the impacts that would occur due to this action.

As for EBSCO, they own the first beachfront property located west of the Bay/ Walton County line. It is undeveloped and totals 4.5 acres. It will definitely be within the erosional zone and they contract with a coastal engineer that will be able to clearly testify to the likely erosional impact if it comes to it. Like I said before Rosemary is a little further so it's a toss up.

 

[AAbsolute]

Maybe I need to focus myself and hopefully our portion of the discussion to why I chose to jump in. The reason was simple, I do not believe that St. Joe participating on the WALTON COUNTY CDLAB will have any effect on the permanent opening and maintenance of a coastal dune lake located in another county. Moreover, I do not believe that there is any possibility that any other CDL located within Walton County's political borders is subject to permanent opening. Finally, if there is a movement in Bay County to permanently open and maintain the outfall at Lake Powell there will be a number of people that will fight it due to the downdrift impacts. In the state of Florida it is estimated that 85% of all beach erosion is caused by the opening and maintenance of existing inlets. There are a number of coastal engineers that will be able to clearly demonstrate the impacts that would occur due to this action.

As for EBSCO, they own the first beachfront property located west of the Bay/ Walton County line. It is undeveloped and totals 4.5 acres. It will definitely be within the erosional zone and they contract with a coastal engineer that will be able to clearly testify to the likely erosional impact if it comes to it. Like I said before Rosemary is a little further so it's a toss up.

The Coastal Dune Lake you are talking about is Lake Powell. Does the health and maintenance of Lake Powell fall under the jurisdiction of the Walton County Coastal Dune Lake Advisory Board?

 

[AAbsolute]

Next Question

Next question. The Village of Inlet Beach AKA Rosemary Beach was founded and developed by Leucadia International. Later, Leucadia bought the land all around the CDL, Draper Lake. That developer was granted the intense density of the Draper Lake community by arguing that it owned not just the land above the current shoreline of Draper Lake, but also the submereged lands extending from the shore under the Coastal Dune Lake. They were able to successfully assert their claim of ownership and obtain residential unit allocation's over the protest of the citizens in attendance.

Again, sorry to be contrary to fairytale beliefs, but heavy handed developers will continue to push the limits of your beliefs through the system.

 

[BeachSiO2]

The Coastal Dune Lake you are talking about is Lake Powell. Does the health and maintenance of Lake Powell fall under the jurisdiction of the Walton County Coastal Dune Lake Advisory Board?

A portion of the lake is Walton County. However, the health and maintenance of the lake is overseen through a management plan developed through a seperate group called the Lake Powell Community Alliance. Walton County may be a participant but the Alliance was the driving force and there is a seperate management plan. I believe the management plan was approved in Bay County, not Walton County but am not positive.

The management plan included criteria as to opening the outfall and led to the issuance of a standing permit with FDEP as to how the outfall is managed. As someone discussed earlier, these permits are based on a trigger elevation due to health and safety risks due to high lake levels, not desire to egress and ingress the lake, submerged boat docks, etc.

Moreover, the permitted outfall location is located within the political boundaries of Bay County, and Walton County has no management authority of the outfall location in our neighboring county. In this case, I believe Camp Helen is the outfall opening location and timing of openings is coordinated by the state parks.

 

[BeachSiO2]

Next question. The Village of Inlet Beach AKA Rosemary Beach was founded and developed by Leucadia International. Later, Leucadia bought the land all around the CDL, Draper Lake. That developer was granted the intense density of the Draper Lake community by arguing that it owned not just the land above the current shoreline of Draper Lake, but also the submereged lands extending from the shore under the Coastal Dune Lake. They were able to successfully assert their claim of ownership and obtain residential unit allocation's over the protest of the citizens in attendance.

Again, sorry to be contrary to fairytale beliefs, but heavy handed developers will continue to push the limits of your beliefs through the system.

I understand your concerns with heavy handed developers but there are still certain issues that would have to be resolved prior to any construction seaward of the coastal construction control line. In these cases of permanent lake openings for the size needed for boat traffic, it would be impossible to document a health and safety need since an emergency permit is available if the lake needs to be opened temporarily. Moreover, they would have to address impacts caused by downdrift erosion, shorebird nesting habitat, sea turtle nesting habitat, and the easily documented concerns of a number of individual property owners that would go crazy in Old Florida Beach as they would be the downdrift owners that would be immediately affected by erosion.

I understand through some of your other posts and threads in the past your issues with developers; however, in this limited case, I continue to stand by my assertion that a permanent lake outfall with structures would not be permitted at any lake in Walton County where St. Joe has property.