Editorials

2008 TPA Better Newspaper Contest

First Place D2

The Facts (Clute)

Disputes in way of erosion solution

It was a typical spring day last I week when we sent a photographer out to Surfside Beach to take a photo of a house that soon will be little more than a pile of fractured lumber and broken wallboard. The house on Beach Drive was one of those declared in violation of the Texas Open Beaches Act by the Texas General Land Office.

Its owners had accepted a fair buy-out of their property, which because of erosion now sat on the public beach.

What struck us, about the resulting photo was the major hole in the argument of beachfront property owners who say they are fighting removal of their homes in the name of protecting private property rights.

On that quiet afternoon, with no storms swirling in the Gulf of Mexico or foul weather to stir up the seas, there was no property for people to own. It was under the lapping waves of surf. The tides had taken what once was private land and claimed it, which under state law, clearly makes it public beach property.

That law was upheld recently by a U.S. district court judge in California, who threw out a lawsuit filed by a Galveston property owner challenging the constitutionality of the Texas Open Beaches Act. It was an important ruling, affirming the rights of all Texans to utilize one of the state's greatest resources, although it likely is not the end of the argument. An appeal is almost certain, with the U.S. Supreme Court possibly having to provide the final word.

The Texas beach law allows the land office to petition the courts for removal of any structure deemed be on the public beach. California resident Carol Severence, who owns three rental properties now on the public beach because of erosion, challenged Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson's enforcement of that law.

The terms of that enforcement, announced by Patterson last year, provide reimbursement of up to $50,000 in state money for an affected property owner to relocate their structure from the beach. Fourteen property owners have accepted the state's deal and houses continue to be moved, the land office states.

For other property owners, however, that money is not enough. Several Surfside property owners are party to a lawsuit filed in Brazoria County asking the court to allow them to repair their homes. They also believe they should be compensated for the value of both their structures and the land they have sat on for decades, pointing to the U.S. Constitution's clause prohibiting the government from taking private property without fair compensation.

We sympathize with those who have lost their land to the Gulf, just as we would for anyone whose property was taken by a hurricane, tornado or any other natural calamity. In those instances, we expect the government to step forward and help those people rebuild their houses and their lives. We expect the government to do the same for beachfront property owners.

What is reasonable is the point of contention. How do you determine a fair price for property that, in practical terms, no longer exists?

It is our hope that the district court's decision convinces more beachfront property owners to take advantage of the compensation programs being offered by the state or the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which funded the buyout of the Beach Drive home scheduled for demolition.

We also expect the state and federal agencies to get serious about combating erosion. Funding and ideas on how to push back the encroaching sea have come and gone in Surfside over the last several years with nothing to show for it. Without action, more property owners will find themselves in the same position as those who now are losing their homes.

There is no short-term solution to the erosion problem on Surfside Beach and elsewhere along the Texas Coast. In the long-term, however, it is in the best interests of both the state and the affected property owners to settle the current disputes so both sides can work on preventing anyone from finding themselves in a similar situation in the future.

This editorial was written by Michael Morris, assistant managing editor of The Facts.