Published: Sunday, Nov. 29, 2009

Updated: Sunday, Nov. 29, 2009

U.S. Supreme Court tackles Florida beach case

WASHINGTON — Florida’s beaches — from the blindingly white shores of the Panhandle to the bikini dotted sands of South Beach — are the state’s signature attraction.

And now they’re the focus of the U.S. Supreme Court, which Tuesday will take up a case that could affect coastal property rights, beach access and efforts to shore up storm-eroded shoreline across the United States.

At issue is whether the Florida Supreme Court — by siding with state efforts to restore miles of beach in the Panhandle — took away homeowners’ property rights.

For decades, Florida has battled erosion of its Gulf and Atlantic beaches by depositing fresh sand along the coast. But a group of Walton County homeowners took exception, arguing that a proposed renourishment project would leave a strip of sand between their property and the Gulf of Mexico: a swath of publicly-owned sand, they warned in court records, that could lead to an array of vendors peddling kayaks, “inflatable boat rides, personal watercraft and parasails.’’

The Florida Supreme Court — in a 5-2 decision authored by former Justice Kenneth Bell, himself a Panhandle native — upheld the state project, finding Florida has a “constitutional duty to protect Florida’s beaches.”

Now the six homeowners are asking the high court to find that the state’s high court negated their rights, arguing that they were not compensated for losing property that once extended to the water — and now ends at a public beach. And they argue that homes that once fetched top dollar for beach front, are now simply, beach view.

“This beach renourishment project was not needed or wanted by the homeowners,’’ said Tallahassee attorney Kent Safriet, who represents the Walton County homeowners and argues that the county was looking to carve out a public beach in an area where development is crowding out open space. “The intent is a land grab by local government to create a public beach where a private beach previously existed.”

Florida counters that beach restoration provides private owners with benefits like erosion and storm surge protection — and taxpayers pick up the tab.

“Over the years, about 198 miles of Florida’s 825 miles of beaches have been restored ... providing enormous protection and benefits to the public as well as to thousands of beach front property owners,” Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum argues for the state.

“None of these property owners have claimed entitlement to money or title to the state-owned portions of restored beaches — until now.’’

The case has attracted the interest of builders’ groups and property rights activists nationwide, who argue that the property owners had a beach stretching 200 feet to the water; now there’s 75 feet of public beach between the property line and the water.

“The homeowners paid considerable sums for oceanfront properties with private beaches, yet they have received nothing for the loss of what they paid for,” attorney Peter Ferrara wrote for the American Civil Rights Union, a conservative legal organization.