Residents clash over ‘customary use’ proposal for Perdido Key beaches during Escambia County public forum

Dozens of speakers at an Escambia County public forum urged opposing outcomes on whether the county should pursue a ‘customary use’ approach to public access on Perdido Key beaches.

Supporters, including Melissa Pino of Save Our Beaches, asked the board to put a compromise proposal on a future agenda and to direct staff to collect sworn affidavits documenting long-standing public access. "We have been talking with scores of people who are excited to provide official testimonies in sworn affidavits about their historic beach access on Perdido Key," Pino said, asking the county to help assemble that evidence.

Condo owners and association leaders pushed back. Joseph Klein Peter, president of the Indigo Condominium Association, said condo deeds extend to the mean high waterline and called customary use a threat to private property: "Taking away property, taking half or more of our property … is a lot like cutting the baby in half," he said, urging a fact-driven approach and caution about legal exposure. Vic Hartman told commissioners that a county ordinance adopting customary use would "immediately" prompt litigation and that the county must meet stringent legal tests on ancient, continuous, reasonable, and undisputed public use.

Other speakers struck intermediate positions. Stan Capule, a former Perdido Key Association president, said customary use could allow broader resident access while urging the county to expand patrols and beach-cleanup efforts. Connie Walker, current PKA president, highlighted rescue-tube placements and state park fee-waiver dates that benefit public access.

Why it matters: Perdido Key beaches are a major economic and cultural asset for Escambia County. Supporters framed customary use as protecting public access for the county’s roughly 330,000 residents; opponents warned of property-rights conflict and the likelihood that any local ordinance would trigger costly lawsuits that the county could lose.

No ordinance or vote on customary use occurred during the forum; attendees asked the board for more staff work and potential future agenda placement. Earlier in the meeting, unrelated consent items including approval of prior meeting minutes and a finance consent package were approved by the board, both announced as passing 4–0.

What’s next: Several speakers requested that staff begin collecting sworn testimonials and documentary evidence; the board did not take formal action on customary use at this meeting. The public forum closed and the board recessed to reconvene at the posted time.