Latest news with #beachaccess
Daily Mail
3 days ago
- Health
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Care home SLAMS Martha's Vineyard millionaire for 'stopping seniors from enjoying the beach'
A care home on Martha's Vineyard has slammed a millionaire homeowner for allegedly gatekeeping a beach from its elderly and disabled residents. Melinda Loberg, a longtime resident of the famed Massachusetts island, filed a lawsuit against Havenside - a non-profit corporation affiliated with the Island's Episcopal Churches and the Diocese of Boston - on May 12. Havenside is a senior living facility that sits just behind Loberg's $5 million waterfront home - but a fierce legal war was launched after elderly residents were allegedly crossing into the homeowner's land to get to Vineyard Haven Harbor. The care home, however, argues that they have always had a right to use the 13-foot corridor on the north side of her land to gain access to the beach. Now, Lucinda Kirk, the property manager of Havenside Corporation, told that Loberg's lawsuit is just 'a land grab against island seniors.' The majority of Havenside's residents are disabled and elderly - and they deserve to 'enjoy the many health benefits of salt air and serenity,' she said. In the suit, Loberg claimed that when she bought the home in 1992 she was never told about the easement access that the seniors allegedly have - triggering the neighborhood dispute last month. Fighting back, Kirk told 'The lawsuit that our neighbors filed should be seen for what it is: A land grab against Island Seniors. She has lived at her $5 million idyllic home on Crocker Avenue with her husband since July 1992. Havenside has since told Loberg its residents have a right to use a small path on her property to get to the water. (her property is circled in red on the left, and the senior home is circled on the right) 'The Lobergs want to incorporate our easement into their beach-front property, apparently without any care how that will affect Havenside's 36 Residents. 'Our neighbors are attempting to outspend us in legal proceedings to grab our land with bogus legal claims.' Many of Havenside's residents don't just live in the apartments for affordable housing, but also 'have mobility disabilities and/or chronic health conditions,' the spokeswoman added. Kirk added: 'The land of Havenside has an appurtenant easement which provides beach access for our Seniors. It is the safest and easiest way for our Residents to enjoy the many health benefits of salt air and serenity. 'The issue at stake for Havenside is not about money, but preserving safe and equal access to the beach for our senior Residents.' The legal filing went on to state that any access rights were taken away before Havenside took over its property. Loberg also emphasized that she has been using the land for 30 years which voids the corporation's past claims to it. Havenside said that information is false and that it has had an easement there since 1890, the Vineyard Gazette reported. The specific area that the senior center is claiming to control is a space that the Loberg's 'cleared the existing vegetation' from, along with 'removed tires, bottles, car mats, and large chunks of macadam and then planted Parcel 2A with grass,' the documents read. Following the cleanup, the couple decided to install a 170-foot fence along the area in question - cutting off access for more than two decades, the lawsuit stated. Havenside said they planned to gain access to the beach by cutting the grass between the fence and garden beds to construct an entry gate, the filing continued. After informing Loberg of its plans, the corporation sent a tenant by the name of Frank Rapoza over to the property, 'carrying tools,' so he could 'install' the fence, per the lawsuit. Tensions quickly rose when Loberg saw him standing in her driveway ready to get to work, so much so that she threatened to call the police if he attempted to install the gate. With that, Rapoza fled the property, but soon after Loberg received a phone call from him 'threatening to return and install the gate,' the lawsuit detailed. 'In response to this phone call, Plaintiff installed a "No Trespass" sign on the Property line near the Havenside Property,' it added. A manager with Havenside then reached out to Loberg and stated that Rapoza 'was not an agent of Havenside or its Board. Any representation otherwise has never been authorized.' Loberg, a former Tisbury select board member, chose to sit down with Havenside on July 14, 2024 to talk about the issue, but 'representatives were not inclined to discuss alternative solutions and instead insisted upon the existence of the purported access easement,' her lawsuit read. Later that month, the corporation offered to 'remove' the easement in exchange for 'a cash payment,' but Loberg denied the 'extortive offer.' By October of that year, Havenside filed a Wetlands Protection Act Notice of Intent (NOI) with the local Conservation Commission 'seeking approval to make improvements on Plaintiff's Property within the alleged Access Easement,' the lawsuit said. In that filing, 'Havenside falsely claimed to be the owner of the Property, failing to accurately fill out Section 3 requiring them to list the Property Owner if different from the applicant,' it went on. In February, the Loberg's said they 'discovered a group from Havenside, including Mr. Rapoza, trespassing on Plaintiff's Property and in the process of cutting Plaintiff's Fence in order to install a gate.' Loberg then called the police who asked the group to vacate, but 'declined' to forcibly remove them, noting that it was a 'civil matter.' The lawsuit also included an image of Rapoza, an alleged 'manager of Havenside,' and unknown person 'destroying a section of Plaintiff's Fence and installing the gate.' A police report was also filed in relation to the incident. 'Mr. Rapoza subsequently returned and finished installing the Gate,' the lawsuit said, adding that Havenside has since added signage to the entrance of Loberg's property stating that residents are allowed to use that as an access point to the beach. Loberg 'feels harassed and threatened by the conduct of Havenside's tenants and does not feel safe on her Property as a result of their conduct,' the filing concluded. She has demanded that 'Havenside, its guests, tenants and invitees' are not allowed to access her property and that it does not benefit from any easement over the Plaintiff's Property for the purpose of accessing Vineyard Haven Harbor.' An initial hearing was held on May 20 and the next is set for June 16, according to documents. Kirk said Havenside is working on obtaining a pro bono lawyer to fight for residents to gain access to the waterfront.
Daily Mail
28-05-2025
- General
- Daily Mail
Merciless Martha's Vineyard homeowner wages war against elderly locals who 'cross into her $5M land to get to beach'
A homeowner on Martha's Vineyard has sparked a legal war against her elderly neighbors, who she says are trespassing on her land to gain access to the beach. Melinda Loberg, a longtime resident of the famed Massachusetts island, filed a lawsuit against Havenside, a non-profit that provides housing for seniors, on May 12. Loberg, who works as a secretary for a local elderly support group, claimed Havenside's senior living tenants were illegally crossing her ritzy waterfront land to get to Vineyard Haven Harbor. She has lived at her $5 million idyllic home on Crocker Avenue with her husband since July 1992, and now, more than three decades later, Havenside has told Loberg its residents have a right to use a small path on her property to get to the water. The independent living facility first informed Loberg of its easement to the property in June 2024 after sending her a letter detailing that they would be allowing its residents to use the 13-foot corridor on the north side of her land to gain access to the beach, according to the lawsuit obtained by The 16-page lawsuit, which goes over a detailed history of the beachfront property, claimed that when she and her husband Michael first purchased the home on the luxurious island, the deed did not at all reference any access easements. It went on to state that any access rights were taken away before Havenside took over its property. Loberg also emphasized that she has been using the land for 30 years which voids the corporation's past claims to it. In response, Havenside said that information is false and that it has had an easement there since 1890, the Vineyard Gazette reported. The specific area that the senior center is claiming to control is a space that the Loberg's 'cleared the existing vegetation' from, along with 'removed tires, bottles, car mats, and large chunks of macadam and then planted Parcel 2A with grass,' the documents read. Following the cleanup, the couple decided to install a 170-foot fence along the area in question - cutting off access for more than two decades, the lawsuit stated. Havenside said they planned to gain access to the beach by cutting the grass between the fence and garden beds to construct an entry gate, the filing continued. After informing Loberg of its plans, the corporation sent a tenant by the name of Frank Rapoza over to the property, 'carrying tools,' so he could 'install' the fence, per the lawsuit. Tensions quickly rose when Loberg saw him standing in her driveway ready to get to work, so much so that she threatened to call the police if he attempted to install the gate. With that, Rapoza fled the property, but soon after Loberg received a phone call from him 'threatening to return and install the gate,' the lawsuit detailed. 'In response to this phone call, Plaintiff installed a "No Trespass" sign on the Property line near the Havenside Property,' it added. A manager with Havenside then reached out to Loberg and stated that Rapoza 'was not an agent of Havenside or its Board. Any representation otherwise has never been authorized.' Loberg, a former Tisbury select board member, chose to sit down with Havenside on July 14, 2024 to talk about the issue, but 'representatives were not inclined to discuss alternative solutions and instead insisted upon the existence of the purported access easement,' her lawsuit read. Later that month, the corporation offered to 'remove' the easement in exchange for 'a cash payment,' but Loberg denied the 'extortive offer.' By October of that year, Havenside filed a Wetlands Protection Act Notice of Intent (NOI) with the local Conservation Commission 'seeking approval to make improvements on Plaintiff's Property within the alleged Access Easement,' the lawsuit said. In that filing, 'Havenside falsely claimed to be the owner of the Property, failing to accurately fill out Section 3 requiring them to list the Property Owner if different from the applicant,' it went on. In February, the Loberg's said they 'discovered a group from Havenside, including Mr. Rapoza, trespassing on Plaintiff's Property and in the process of cutting Plaintiff's Fence in order to install a gate.' Loberg then called the police who asked the group to vacate, but 'declined' to forcibly remove them, noting that it was a 'civil matter.' The lawsuit also included an image of Rapoza, an alleged 'manager of Havenside,' and unknown person 'destroying a section of Plaintiff's Fence and installing the gate.' A police report was also filed in relation to the incident. 'Mr. Rapoza subsequently returned and finished installing the Gate,' the lawsuit said, adding that Havenside has since added signage to the entrance of Loberg's property stating that residents are allowed to use that as an access point to the beach. Loberg 'feels harassed and threatened by the conduct of Havenside's tenants and does not feel safe on her Property as a result of their conduct,' the filing concluded. She has demanded that 'Havenside, its guests, tenants and invitees' are not allowed to access her property and that it does not benefit from any easement over the Plaintiff's Property for the purpose of accessing Vineyard Haven Harbor.' An initial hearing was held on May 20 and the next is set for June 16, according to documents. Lucinda Kirk, the property manager of Havenside, told the Vineyard Gazette Loberg's claims in the lawsuit are 'bogus' and were made as a way for her to get rid of the non-profit by bringing on legal fees. 'The issue for Havenside is to provide equal access for our residents,' Kirk told the outlet. 'We have residents with limited mobility and chronic health conditions who need safe and easy access to the beach. Serenity and saltwater are important for our senior's health.' Kirk said Havenside is working on obtaining a pro bono lawyer to fight for residents to gain access to the waterfront.
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Gov. Ron DeSantis to decide on customary use bill
WALTON COUNTY, Fla. (WMBB) – The customary use bill that passed both the Florida House and Senate a month ago is still not law. Sen. Jay Trumbull, who sponsored the bill, said it went to Gov. Ron DeSantis last week. He expects the governor will sign it into law within the next two weeks. The bill would repeal a 2018 law allowing private beaches in Walton County. Trumbull said he introduced the repeal bill to restore total beach access to the public. Bill to restore customary use moving through state senate after roadblock Most assume that, once it becomes law, it will bring private beaches to an end. But that may not be the case. 'What happens day one after the governor signs this bill, the simple answer is, legally, nothing changes on the Walton County beaches,' Interim County Attorney Clay Atkinson said. Atkinson explained that if the bill becomes law, it would not supersede any of the legal judgments or any of the agreements the county negotiated with individual land owners from 2018 to 2024. But the law would still hold significance for Walton County. It establishes that the county's beaches are badly eroded and need renourishment. If the county extends the sandy beaches, it would create more area that would be accessible to the public south of the Erosion Control Line. 'If there is not a beach to use because it goes away in the storm, there's necessarily gonna be no public use rights. But the more public beach there is, especially with ECL, all those land seaward create more public use rights,' Atkinson added. Walton County has $60 million in tourist development council beach renourishment money and another $60 million in federal matching funds. County officials are currently planning to begin renourishment, but have not set a date. As for the customary use bill, DeSantis can either sign it, veto it, or ignore it, in which case it becomes law without his signature within 30 days. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
26-05-2025
- Yahoo
Parking fee hikes in effect for non-residents at Gloucester beaches
To visit Gloucester public beaches from Memorial Day through Labor Day, non-residents are now paying $10 more for a daily parking pass, according to the City of Gloucester's website. The current rate is $45 for non-residents on weekends and holidays; $40 for the week. This change stems from a decision made by Gloucester City Council members back in January. It applies to Good Harbor and Wingaersheek beaches, as well as Stage Fort Park that each provide 500 parking spaces for non-residents. 'I was thinking like $20, maybe… but I mean parking like we're going to a Red Sox game in Boston in the middle of summer,' said Boden Belanger of Londonderry New Hampshire. Then, there were beachgoers who came from ever farther away, like the Moran family of Westfield. 'I think it's a lot of money to spend the day at the beach,' said Kim, who drove roughly 2.5 hours with her husband and daughter to visit Good Harbor Beach. The Moran family also encountered some difficulty navigating the city's online reservation system that was implemented a few years ago. According to the city, the reservations are non-refundable and can only be paid for with a credit or debit card. Signs can be seen posted near the beach to remind people of the changes. Gloucester's Permits 'We showed up to come in here, and they told us we had to leave and reserve online,' said Brendan Moran. 'We left and came back two minutes later.' While there may be some confusion and aggravation for some, others have seen improvements in traffic around their neighborhoods now that the reservation system is in place. 'It spreads out the traffic much, much better for us as residents,' explained Bob Maresca, who has a home in Gloucester. 'Before we couldn't get out of our house, out of our driveway.' To learn more about the changes to parking for non-residents and residents, as well as frequently asked questions, click here. Beach Information | Gloucester, MA - Official Website Download the FREE Boston 25 News app for breaking news alerts. Follow Boston 25 News on Facebook and Twitter. | Watch Boston 25 News NOW
Yahoo
17-05-2025
- Yahoo
Exclusive enclave near NYC sparks fury over ‘extortionate' new beach pass prices for summer
No, Deal! Nothing like a beach day that drains your wallet — before you even hit the sand. The Borough of Deal, a desirable Jersey Shore destination known for golden beaches and coastal charm, has tourists and locals alike fuming over the sky-high cost of a seasonal beach pass. The new price of $200, which kicks in for the summer of 2025, has been dubbed 'extortionate' by beachgoers — who say the towel tariff is way out of line. To put it in perspective, nearby Asbury Park and Belmar charge just $70 and $80 for their seasonal passes, respectively — a downright bargain compared to Deal's steep fee. Bayhead, another popular spot, charges $60 for a half-season badge and $110 for the full summer. Last year, Deal, an exclusive oceanfront enclave ranked among the country's most affluent communities, didn't even offer seasonal passes — instead charging beachgoers a relatively modest $10 to visit Monday through Thursday and $12 on weekends. This year, those daily rates are up too, rising to $12 on weekdays and $15 on weekends. Meanwhile, kids 11 and under can still splash around for free. But some say the new pass price feels like a slap in the face, especially since most beaches across the U.S. don't cost a dime to enjoy. While New Jersey and other Northeast states has normalized charging for beach access — ostensibly to help fund lifeguards, maintenance, and crowd control — this particular price-hike has sparked an unusual amount of outrage online. One irate Redditor didn't mince words, as reported by The Daily Mail, writing, 'NJ residents shouldn't have to buy tags. No one really should have to. Without beachgoers, they have no economy.' Another chimed in, agreeing that locals are being taken for a ride: 'If you are paying taxes in New Jersey, you should not have to pay to use the beaches.' The timing couldn't be worse, as Memorial Day — the official start of beach season — is just around the corner on May 26. As Deal's newly priced passes go on sale, many are left wondering whether the iconic summer escape is becoming a luxury they just can't afford. While some defend the fees as necessary to keep beaches safe and well-maintained, many apparently can't help but feel squeezed by the rising costs. And as Deal's beaches fill up with those willing to pay the premium, plenty of Jersey Shore fans may be heading to cheaper sands this summer — or voicing their frustration online.
