Timeline

Florida Supreme Court

March 25, 1974

Rehearing denied May 30, 1974. City of Daytona Beach v. Tona-Rama, 294 So. 2d 73.

City of Daytona Beach v. Tona-Rama

Ordinance 2016-23

October 25, 2016

Regular meeting. Present: Chairman Sara Comander, Vice-Chairman Cecilia Jones, W. N. (Bill) Chapman, Bill Imfeld, Cindy Meadows. No absence recorded.

The signed ordinance is dated October 26, 2016. Sara Comander, Chair.

Minutes, October 25, 2016
Ordinance 2016-23

Ordinance 2017-10

March 28, 2017

Regular meeting, courthouse. Present: Chairwoman Cecilia Jones, Vice-Chairman W. N. (Bill) Chapman, Melanie Nipper, Sara Comander, Tony Anderson. No absence recorded.

The minutes describe this as amending Ordinance 2016-23. The ordinance's own enacting clause says Chapter 23 is created. Signed by Cecilia Jones, Chair.

The ordinance recognized customary use of dry sand on county beaches, with a 15-foot buffer seaward of the dune toe or a permanent habitable structure. The First DCA describes Walton County Code section 23-2 (March 28, 2017) as recognizing customary use of the dry sand on all county beaches, with a 15-foot buffer seaward of the dune toe or of a permanent habitable structure.

Uses listed for that 2017 ordinance in this record: traversing, sitting, umbrellas 7 feet or less in diameter, sunbathing, picnicking, fishing, swimming or surfing, beach equipment, and sand creations. This is the 2017 ordinance. It is not the current public rule. See the beach rules page for what this record states as the separate regimes. At oral argument in 2026 the county could not say whether the ordinance was revived.

Minutes, March 28, 2017
Ordinance 2017-10

Section 163.035

July 1, 2018

Section 163.035 took effect (CS/HB 631, chapter 2018-94). A local government could not adopt or keep a customary-use ordinance for beach above the mean high-water line unless a court had already affirmed that use. The statute required notice, a hearing, and a lawsuit. The government had the burden, with no presumption. Ordinances in effect on or before January 1, 2016 were exempt, so Walton's 2017 ordinance was not grandfathered.

Section 163.035 as it stood in 2024
HB 631 enrolled text

Customary-use lawsuit

December 11, 2018

Walton County sued under section 163.035. Case style used in the settlement: In re: Affirming Existence of Recreational Customary Use on 1,194 Private Properties, Case No. 2018-CA-000547. Minutes say 2018-CA-547. The October 15, 2020 amended complaint sought declarations on 1,194 privately owned Gulf parcels. The settlement says about 8 of roughly 26 miles is county-owned or state-owned. The First DCA later confirmed the county filed in December 2018 under section 163.035.

This record does not link a complaint file. The case style below is the settlement framework. The 2026 opinion says the county filed in December 2018. It does not give the day.

Settlement framework PDF
February 18, 2026 opinion

Special meeting

May 11, 2023

Present only: Danny Glidewell (District 2, Chairman), Boots McCormick, Donna Johns, Tony Anderson. No fifth commissioner is named. No district is stated here for Boots McCormick, Donna Johns, or Tony Anderson. Both motions were 4-0. Those four voted Aye. No Nay.

The May 11 minutes are in the May 23, 2023 agenda packet. Those minutes were approved on the May 23 consent agenda.

May 11, 2023 minutes, inside the May 23 agenda packet
May 23, 2023 minutes

Special meeting, Freeport

May 15, 2023

Present only: Danny Glidewell (District 2, Chairman), Boots McCormick (Vice-Chairman), Donna Johns, Tony Anderson. No fifth commissioner is named. No district is stated here for Boots McCormick or Tony Anderson. No Nay and no named abstention.

The June 13, 2023 regular meeting approved the corrected May 15 minutes 4-0 on consent (Boots McCormick moved, Tony Anderson seconded; items 12 and 13 were pulled). Same mover, second, and 4-0. The June 13 regular minutes call Donna Johns District Four, in a deletion heading. No other 2023 district label in the records opened for this site is assigned to Boots McCormick or Tony Anderson.

Minutes, May 15, 2023

Customary-use executive session

May 23, 2023

Same four present: Danny Glidewell, Boots McCormick, Donna Johns, and Tony Anderson. The minutes say: "No action was taken by the board."

Minutes, May 23, 2023

Settlement execution

May 31, 2023

Same four present: Danny Glidewell, Boots McCormick, Donna Johns, and Tony Anderson. Each vote was 4-0. Those four voted Aye. No Nay.

May 31, 2023 minutes, inside the June 13 agenda packet

Executive session

June 13, 2023

Present: Danny Glidewell, Boots McCormick, Tony Anderson. Absent: Donna Johns. Counsel said no additional action was necessary and to continue settlements and dismissals as previously directed. Adjourned 3-0.

June 13, 2023 executive session, inside the June 22 packet

Framework text

Settlement terms

Only for owners who signed. The Courthouse News PDF is the framework text. It is not proof of who executed it. This page does not list signers. Exhibit A is the participating-parcel list. This record does not have a verified executed copy of who signed.

The public may use the area 20 feet landward of the wet/dry sand line. That area is called the Transitory Zone. It cannot extend landward of an existing erosion control line between Topsail Hill Preserve State Park and the Okaloosa County line. The settlement says the 20-foot uses apply whether that strip is landward or seaward of mean high water. This record does not say where an erosion control line is recorded.

Allowed uses only

• Walking, running, and jogging.
• Access to the wet sand and water for swimming, surfing, surf fishing, and skimboarding.
• Sunbathing uses, meaning standing, sitting, or laying on the sand, a towel, or a privately owned chair that is not tied to a vendor. Only between 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Central.

Those sitting uses yield if the owner is actively using the area. The cap of one person per five feet of Gulf frontage applies to the sitting uses, not to walking. Owners, renters, and guests keep full use of their own parcel, including the zone. The public cannot enter a participating parcel to reach the zone. Settlement rights supersede any customary use that could exist on those parcels. Customary use on a settling parcel is "now and forevermore moot."

The settlement text also says the county will keep chairs and umbrellas off the sand seaward of the Transitory Zone, and that owner rights in the zone are superior.

Dismissal mechanics

With-prejudice dismissal in the agreement is for parties who enter it. There is a separate with-prejudice path for parcels between Topsail and the Okaloosa line that may have an erosion control line, if counterclaims are mutually dismissed. Other intervenors were on a without-prejudice dismissal that became with prejudice only if the county filed no new customary-use suit by May 31, 2024. The agreement does not, by itself, dismiss all 1,194 parcels with prejudice.

Settlement framework PDF

Circuit court

February 2024

The circuit court entered a final judgment under section 163.035. It affirmed a limited customary-use right on the dry sand of the parcels still in the case. This page does not state that judgment as still in effect. See February 18, 2026.

The county filed nine summary-judgment motions, split by beach area. The circuit court granted them. By the time of that stage, the 2026 opinion says every claim brought by represented intervening parties had been either dismissed or settled. The February 2024 judgment covered the remaining parcels.

A Florida Senate staff analysis, not the opinion, dates a "Final Summary Judgment on Remaining Parcels" at February 14, 2024, and says about 95 unrepresented properties remained. The count and the February 14 date are the staff analysis, not the opinion. This record does not have that judgment PDF, and it does not link a file that has not been opened.

Senate staff analysis of SB 1622 (a staff analysis, not a court holding)

Chapter 2025-178

June 24, 2025

The Governor approved CS/SB 1622, chapter 2025-178. It took effect when it became law. The chapter was recorded June 25, 2025. Section 1 repeals section 163.035. The act does not mention, vacate, or preserve the 2023 settlement or the dismissals. It has no savings clause for judgments entered under section 163.035.

Section 2 of the same chapter is a separate provision. It is described on the beach nourishment note. The act does not name Walton County. This record does not treat Walton County as covered by section 2.

SB 1622
Chapter 2025-178
Senate staff analysis of SB 1622 (a staff analysis, not a court holding)

First District Court of Appeal

February 18, 2026

T. Michael Glenn Trust, Bruce Healy, and Lake Partners, LLC v. Walton County. Case numbers 1D2024-0682, 1D2024-0720, and 1D2024-0748. Judges Roberts, Ray, and Kelsey. Per curiam.

The case was filed as a direct appeal and was treated as certiorari. The parties conceded, and the court agreed, that the final judgment is a nullity and has no more legal effect. The court cited State ex rel. Arnold v. Revels, 109 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1959): jurisdiction that depends on a repealed statute falls even in pending cases when there is no savings clause. The petitioners' worries (that the sheriff might not enforce trespass, and that the recorded judgment clouds title) were called abstract and hypothetical. They did not show the substantial and immediate harm certiorari requires. The petition was dismissed. The court did not quash the judgment on the merits.

The county said at oral argument that its posture was "square one," and that it could not say whether the 2017 ordinance was revived. That comment is the county's comment. It is not the holding.

The opinion says it is not final until any timely motion under the appellate rules. This record has not checked the docket for a rehearing or for further review.

Opinion, February 18, 2026