Laserfiche WebLink
conveying the swamp and overflowed lands by sections and <br />townships, but did not stipulate the land below navigable waters. <br />As a result of all these conveyances dating back to the 1800's, <br />title search became very difficult and in 1963 the State of <br />Florida created the Marketable Record Title Act, which stipulated <br />that a title search only had to go back 30 years. The intent was <br />to simplify real property title searches in Florida, and not to <br />facilitate wholesale inadvertent alienation of title to lands <br />held in the State's name. Submerged lands, river, stream, and <br />lake beds, as well as some land along coastal areas, were <br />considered sovereign until the Marketable Record Title Act was <br />tested in the Florida Supreme Court in 1976. However, certain <br />decisions and interpretations of the Act have in fact resulted in <br />the losses of title to tens of thousands of acres of lands by the <br />State of Florida. Historically, the State has owned land beneath <br />navigable waters, but the State never had a recorded deed to <br />those sovereign lands. This year the State Legislature had <br />before it some bills to correct the Marketable Record Title Act, <br />but there was not a lot of publicity on the issue, and Attorney <br />Barkett believed that the entire Florida Legislature has been <br />misinformed on this matter. He urged the Board to adopt the <br />proposed resolution which calls for the special study commission, <br />the Governor, Cabinet and Legislature to do everything possible <br />to prevent the Marketable Record Title Act from being used <br />repeatedly to divest the State of its sovereign lands. <br />Tom Hill of the Florida Farm Bureau Federated reported that <br />landowners are worried about what this could do if the State <br />intends to claim lands the people don't think are sovereign. He <br />felt there was much confusion about what the State would do and <br />what would happen to property owners' rights and that this could <br />be a bad law, but Chairman Lyons interjected that he felt we have <br />a bad law now. <br />Mr. Hill did not believe that the MRTA is a bad law, and <br />cited a case where the State is trying to claim 45,000 acres of <br />88 6-T r� -� ,- <br />BOOK F�Gr <br />S E P 18 1985 <br />