Perdido Key property owners urge commissioners not to adopt customary‑use ordinance, citing legal risk

Tony Hobbs, who identified himself as a Perdido Key condo owner, told the commission that his unit owners collectively pay substantial property taxes while relying on private beachfront access and county enforcement to keep public use limited. “Part of the value of our property comes from the fact that we have private beaches,” Hobbs said, arguing that county signs and enforcement over decades contradict any claim of uninterrupted public use.

Joseph Klein Peter, who introduced himself as president of the Indigo Condominium Association, said constitutional protections for private property make a county‑led customary‑use effort a poor use of taxpayer resources. Klein Peter cited litigation in neighboring Walton County and said defending similar suits cost “$10,000,000” there, urging commissioners to weigh opportunity cost: “If you spend $8 or $10 or $12,000,000 in Escambia County fighting this futile cause, you lose the opportunity to spend that money on roads and schools and parks.”

Other speakers who own property on Perdido Key echoed those concerns. Alco Francesco and Angela Mills emphasized two legal points: under Florida law customary use claims require continuous, ancient, and uncontested public use; county actions such as “no trespassing” signs and directed enforcement, they said, undermine proof of continuity. Lisa Hensler and Charles Krupnick pointed to historic county plans favoring private property protections and said the Walton County litigation record showed private owners largely succeeded when they contested customary‑use claims.

The county did not take public comment as an endorsement of legal positions; commissioners did not vote on a customary‑use ordinance at this meeting. Several commissioners and staff acknowledged the competing goals of improving beach access while avoiding protracted, expensive litigation. The item remained under discussion in staff and commissioner briefings; one staff member said the legal standard applied by courts will be determinative.

The public forum also included unrelated comments urging the county to address code‑enforcement liens, improve floodplain design standards, and extend or restore greater public‑forum time for speakers. The board indicated a willingness to place an item about a homeowner lien back on a future agenda for review of documentation and costs.

The commission took no immediate action to adopt a customary‑use ordinance. Further study and legal review were discussed as next procedural steps.