The State of Florida has won out against angry private property owners who have abruptly had their beach-front property into beach-view property, dramatically decreasing the value of their homes. The state argues that the sand that it has installed on eroded shorelines belongs to Florida, not to the homeowners, and that as a result, that strip of shoreline is not public, not private, beach.
Homeowners moved quickly to contest the ruling, demanding compensation for the loss. However, possibly partially due to fear of suits from gulf-shore property owners attempting to recoup losses caused by the spill and potentially exacerbated by sand berms, the Supreme Court ruled that the state of Florida owns the sand that it added to the beaches, and therefore can decide what it wants to do with that sand and if it wants to declare that sand public property.
While 4 justices did argue that the ruling essentially allowed Florida to take property from private owners without compensation, the court eventually ruled that no property was taken and that historical regulation of beach property in particular allows for this type of change. The ruling was unanimous.
Do you think this ruling is fair? How will it impact your potential investment in beachfront property?
Thank you for reading the Bryan Ellis Real Estate Letter! Your questions and comments are welcome below.
Too bad the concept doesn’t work for cars…. I’d park my ’78 Buick Rustmaster in front of my neighbor’s Ferrari….. Arrivederci!!!!
I’m almost always for less government but when it comes to beaches, how can we be sure that homeowners will always do what is right and/or needed to best preserve those beaches? A state or federal policy does need to be in place to assure the protection of our coastline. It would be nice to think homeowners would do what’s in the best interests of all but we know better, don’t we?
Ripped off again. Eminant Domain is BS. Have personally been
a victim of the State of California.
With the exception of a small part of the coastline in Malibu where the rich and famous more or less own the beach in front of their homes, the entire coastline in southern CA is open to the public. So, Florida, welcome to the world. For some reason, it seems that people on the east coast with beachfront property want the public to maintain the beach if there is a disaster but don’t want the rest of us on the beach at any time. If you don’t want the public on the beach, then pay for the erosion issues yourself!
Will this effect FL beachfront property values? Maybe, but if all properties are in this situation, then we still have a level playing field. And there is only so much beachfront.
Materialistic Bastards. Why don’t they just help out a brother.
Why be so anal about freakin sand….?
As far as this particular-legalized snatch-n-grab gifted to the state by the court, in the minds of the Amurrkin peepuhs,land of the deceived-home of the slaves-that-it-is, how do they rationalize this; to, say, an insurance claim filed due to natural disaster of any sort; does the state foot the bill for damages to the beach front portion of “their property” and make them whole…or is that too a state function, privelege, right? And, is the state paying the premium, or any portion thereof for the beach front? Is the homeowner even required to obtain insurance to cover beach-front portion of property? At what practical point does the private beachfront property end and the public beach, begin in Florida, anyways?
Hell, its not the “Private Property” owners’ property, anyways! Dont believe me, “dont-pay-property-taxes”, and see what happens! Sheesh, wake-up-sheople…fleeced again!