In 2017, two Florida courts ruled against the City of Treasure Island after it thought it could allow vehicular traffic on its beaches that is barred by statue. Now after a complaint, the City of Clearwater and its police department are having to weigh how that Florida case law applies to a section of beach in front of Shephard’s Beach Resort on Clearwater Beach.
Under Florida Statute 161.58, vehicular traffic is prohibited on beaches “except that which is necessary for cleanup, repair, or public safety.” A violation of the law is a misdemeanor, and the law makes no distinction between public agencies, private citizens or business. This law applies equally to all, yet it has been violated repeatedly by public agencies on the beaches of Pinellas County.
Over the last decade, the Tampa Bay Guardian (TBG) has published these four articles showing that the City of Treasure Island, Pinellas County and the University of South Florida (USF) all violated this very law. Now it appears that the City of Clearwater has joined the club in that they have assisted a local business in violating the law. And permitted it to continue violating the law.
On January 27th, a Largo resident submitted what he called a “complaint” via email to the Clearwater Police Department after first speaking to them on the phone. The complaint alleged “a potential violation of Florida Statute 161.58” and provided this video evidence of what may be the kind of “vehicular traffic” that this law prohibits.
“Over the last 30 years, I have observed that the public’s access to that portion of the beach has become more and more restricted,” the complainant, who wishes to remain anonymous, told the Guardian. “It has become more restricted mainly because Shephard’s staff and designees started claiming that the land and submerged land immediately adjoining is their private property. I knew that wasn’t true, and that got me to dig deeper.”
The complainant provided Clearwater PD with this “Boundary Line Agreement” from 2016 between Shephard’s and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) involving this piece of beach. The complainant also provided this 2015 letter from Shephard’s Beach Resort General Manager Paul Andrews in which he stated that the “public has complete access to the beach [in question] via land or by watercraft.” Andrews was commenting on the “City of Clearwater’s 50 foot easement,” presumably on this section of beach.
In this decision from 2017 against the City of Treasure Island, the 2nd DCA (District Court of Appeals) wrote:
Because the legislature did not include “as permitted by the department [FDEP]” as an exception to section 161.58’s prohibitions on vehicular traffic on the beaches and dunes, we must conclude that the statute contains no such exception. See Hayes v. State, 750 So.2d 1, 4 (Fla. 1999) (“We are not at liberty to add words to statutes that were not placed there by the [l]egislature.”).
The 3-0 decision suggests that the key issues will be whether the driving on the beach documented by the complainant is considered to be the “vehicular traffic” prohibited under the statute, and if not: whether the city has taken the necessary steps to allow such driving, and whether FDEP has issued the necessary permit only possible after the necessary ordinance is in effect.
“Until the complainant started writing these emails recently, I hadn’t heard a word about this matter,” Clearwater Mayor Bruce Rector told TBG. “In the past week or so, I have had to educate myself on the matter. As I understand it, if what the complainant is alleging did happen, then it’s a violation of state law.”
“The Clearwater Police Department has been working with Shephard’s to have them not engage in the complained of activity until we can reach a final legal conclusion,” Rector continued. “That section of beach is not a public beach from a municipal standpoint. Clearwater Beach from Opal Sands up to Somerset Street is public park/public beach.”
Rector stated that the city monitors that section “like a hawk” for vehicular traffic for reasons of public safety, but that the section from Opal Sands to the bridge along Clearwater Pass is not monitored unless someone complains.
Paul Andrews, the general manager at Shephard’s Beach Resort, did not respond by our publication deadline after we twice emailed him questions. One of the questions was “on what legal basis does Shephard’s think it is has the authority to do” what it has been doing. That activity includes their employees falsely telling people that the beach and submerged land in front of Shephard’s is private property.
“Privatization of public property in this manner is unacceptable,” the complainant told the Guardian. “Because Clearwater Police have backed Shephard’s claim of private ownership of the beach, it becomes privatization through the use of police badges. And to be clear: this is unlawful privatization through the tort of conversion.”
If public land over time slowly become private, in part by powerful moneyed interests employing minions to bark at people and falsely tell them that public land is private land, what will be the long-term outcome for Florida’s beaches? Will it be that “because I say so” becomes the single answer to any person’s challenge efforts by government to keep citizens off of our beaches?
As always….the Guardian reports and the readers decide. Please like our Facebook page to find out when we publish new articles.
