My View: Turn ownership of beach back to rightful owners

In the 1980s, the town of Longboat Key reversed its original position, became a Daddy Warbucks and adopted the stewardship and costs of maintaining the town’s previously “private” beach.

Part of the quid pro quo involved the taking from the rightful owners title to that strip of land between the newly established “bulkhead line” and the waters of the Gulf. This actually converted the land on the west side of Gulf of Mexico Drive from “Gulf frontage” to “Gulf view.” But few of the property owners seemed to mind.

That gesture probably will cost more than $100 million of tax dollars up to today — and the future seems even more costly, as the frequency for renourishment seems to increase and the costs of new anti-erosion structures begin to compound.

To this property owner who moved from the beach when this policy became effective and is now content to manage his own seawalls on Sarasota Bay, it is now time to reverse this decision and give the beach back to its previous owners.

As it also becomes accepted policy to continue to construct hard structures and perform renourishments with tax dollars, it becomes crystal clear that something needs changing. 

How would it be, for instance, if the city of Sarasota were to take upon itself to assume the responsibility for the structural failure of Dolphin Towers? Ridiculous, right? But is it any different for the town of Longboat Key to install Longard tubes for the Privateer or quasi-Makepeace groins for the Islander? Where will it stop?

Please accept my suggestion to refer to the book, “These Shifting Sands,” by Cornelia Dean. She is the science editor at the New York Times and also lives part time in Chappaquiddick, Mass., thus has first-hand knowledge of beaches.

Her book speaks volumes about the frustration of dealing with the vagaries of beaches. She talks about the natural disasters that have occurred and goes into great detail on the physical impact on the sands and on the ecology. Her final chapter begins with a quotation from Montaigne’s essays: “Let us give Nature a chance; she knows her business better than we do.”

Indeed, our town commissioners would be better served by harkening to this book than by bending to the desires of the many beach advocates and beach activists who have led our town into this futile and costly venture. 

As demonstrated by the fabled King Canute, no one is able to stop the tides.

The beach is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Most of the newer properties on the Key, especially those built after 1975 when the town adopted stringent flood standards, are not at all affected by the threat of flooding. Most of these newer properties have been planned with much higher first-floor elevations, with deeper setbacks, with walkover structures over landscaped dunes and thus with limited direct beach access. 

Also, because these properties cost significantly more than the few older properties, they proportionally contribute a significantly larger percentage of the taxation revenue. It does not make sense. This egalitarian policy that the town has adopted is inherently unfair. Why should properties that have been carefully built, with proper setbacks and environmental consideration, be burdened with the perpetual responsibility of maintaining properties where these precautions have been ignored? 

The simple truth is that it would be more cost effective if each property owner bought his own “white sand” and spread it on his beach. Each could pay for his own beach enhancement and not be further impacted by having more coarse sand spread across his beautiful beaches.

Other steps the town could take:

• End this seemingly mandated order to pursue beach renourishment.
It is embarrassing to see all of our present commissioners dutifully lining up behind the carefully choreographed mantra of “if the width of fine white sand diminishes, our island ceases to prosper.” That is patently ridiculous! By what authority do they make this pronouncement?

• Consider other worthwhile beneficiaries for the funds from tourist taxes. These include beautification of Gulf of Mexico Drive, advertising the other amenities available here, upgrading the facilities available to visitors, et cetera. This would also satisfy the commercial element and the chamber of commerce.

• Act as a catalyst in permitting properties abutting the beach to protect and/or enhance their own beach ambience. 

This would turn back the clock to 1992. Most of us chose Longboat Key because of the way it was then! These owners might find it easier and more financially amenable to do this on their own. Then each owner can create his own backyard beach of fine white, silver or even gold sand. 

This would be no different from the way they now treat their front yards. And then the owners would not have to come as mendicants, begging some town commission for salvation.

• Plan for an orderly and equitable means of distributing the largess of sand to which we are entitled from the frequent dredging of the adjacent passes. With a small cost for pumping, borne by the recipient, this could go to the most worthwhile and impacted property; or to a public beach for all the Longboat Key residents.

Thank goodness the people who create bridges and skyscrapers have a better record of success than do those who build structures of sand.

Bradford Saivetz, P.E., R.L.A., is a member of the Longboat Key Planning and Zoning Board and a longtime Longboat Key resident.