A dispute is heating up over a Holmes Beach property owner’s attempt to restrict beach access.
Travis Resmondo, owner of both a residence and vacant beachfront lots at 99, 100 and 101 78th St., emailed Mayor Judy Titsworth April 13 to address public outcry about his claim that the beach access path at the terminus of 78th Street is his property.
Resmondo did not provide an explanation for posting signage and roping off the access but wrote that a survey he contracted in March had determined the path was not public access.
The claim is contentious — a 1986 warranty deed passing the vacant property from John Holmes Jr. and Hugh Holmes, Titsworth’s father, to Robert Waters, describes the inclusion of a 10-foot-wide “non-exclusive walkway easement.”
That easement description cannot be found in later deeds, including those from 2014 and 2021.
The Florida Department of Environmental Protection also recognizes the path as public beach access, according to the DEP’s online coastal access guide.
Nevertheless, Resmondo asked for recognition from the city that the property is private.
The city complied the week beginning April 18 by adding a “No Beach Access” sign alongside the path, where there already were posted “Private Property” signs.
Titsworth wrote in an April 21 email to concerned resident Andy Laszlo that she directed the city to add the signage — at least until the dispute is settled.
“If and when we receive direction as to the outcome of this dispute, the city will either remove the sign or make it permanent,” Titsworth wrote.
She added that it was unclear how city law enforcement would address people walking the path if a complaint was made.
“We hope this will not be necessary,” Titsworth wrote. “At this point, we are taking a wait-and-see approach as the homeowner at this point has not asked the police department to become involved.”
However, the issue continued to escalate following the addition of the city sign.
More restrictions were placed on the path as of April 22, blocking the walkway with ropes and bollards, plants and an additional sign reading “Private Property – Keep Out.”
Laszlo told The Islander April 22 that he didn’t want to disclose legal strategy but “it is safe to assume” Resmondo’s claim would be challenged in court.
He said the beach access was one of the reasons he purchased his nearby home and closing the path impacted everyone along the roadway.
“It’s extremely disappointing and disheartening that we would have a neighbor behave this way,” Laszlo said. “All of the impacted residents are in dialogue already. As you might imagine, everyone’s flabbergasted that this action took place.”
In an April 20 email to Titsworth, Laszlo asked her to remove the city’s sign and refuse to take police action against alleged trespassers until a resolution is reached.
“Generations of families that have lived, and continue to live, on 78th Street have enjoyed the public right of way to the beach,” Lazslo wrote. “I have zero doubt that we will prevail in maintaining this access.”
City attorney Erica Augello did not respond to The Islander’s phone calls April 21 and April 22.
Resmondo did not respond to an April 23 email from The Islander.
Unfortunately both sides believe the facts support their position. Sadly the courts seem to be where this dispute will be ultimately resolved.