Want to go to billionaire Sun kingpin's beach? Hope you're a strong swimmer

Surf’s up, but not on this beach. A judge has ruled that Vinod Khosla, the billionaire venture capitalist co-founder of Sun, is allowed to block beach-goers from walking or driving across his property to access the 200-acre stretch of coastal sand in front of it. Martin's Beach road access closure Martin's Beach Road closure …

[thomas k.]

nice business oportunity

Seems like some money could be made by offering a water-taxi service from a publicly accessible location over to this stretch of beach. Or maybe just do it for free to piss the guy off.

[Mister_C]

Re: nice business oportunity

and if it turns out to be a popular venture...

We're gonna need to get a bigger boat

[Steve Evans]

Re: nice business oportunity

Yup, perfect opportunity for the loudest water taxi service you can think of, running every 15 minutes.

I believe Sir Christopher Cockerell came up with just the machine for this...

Or maybe Top Gear's spin on it might be even better...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beoTcF2CsvE

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: nice business oportunity

"the loudest water taxi service you can think of"

They should pay the extra and go by chopper, over his house.

[Michael Wojcik]

Re: nice business oportunity

The US television program TV Nation - a Michael Moore production from the 1990s - once did something similar with beach access in Greenwich, Connecticut. The Snobbsville burghers had declared the beach private and cut off land access, so the TVN crew gathered a bunch of the unwashed, put 'em on a boat, and "stormed" the beach (after which said unwashed were, presumably, washed).

Good fun. And yes, if I lived anywhere near Santa Cruz, I'd be boating over to Martin's Beach too.

(Here in Michigan, the state still permits private lakeshore beaches, and it's unlikely that the Legislature, which is firmly in the hands of the moneyed classes, will be changing that anytime soon.)

[Fihart]

further evidence....

......that anything the rich find inconvenient is made a crime.

[Anomalous Cowshed]

Money v people

In today's world, the things that matter are money, fun, entertainment, 'respect', status, being in the newspapers, money, and...money. People, relatives, friends especially, community, live and let live, these things are no longer very relevant.

I pay 38 million dollars for a huge property near the beach. People have been using one of the paths for years before I came here to access their public amenity, the beach. I don't want this. I find a way to prevent them. I'm happy. They're not happy? Screw them. I have millions. I'm OK. They should work hard and make millions and do the same as I did, the lazy @!$?.

[Steve Renouf]

What a dick!

Title says it all.

We have a millionaire here who gives OUT OF HIS OWN POCKET vouchers to all the local pensioners for them to get extra food every Christmas.

This guy, by comparison is a complete arse - it doesn't even cost him anything to allow access.

[Loyal Commenter]

Re: What a dick!

It stands to reason that the majority of people with a lot of money have a lot of money because they are miserly arseholes. One of the major issues with capitalism is that being nice to people doesn't reward you in the same way as selfishness. Although there are exceptions, as in your example, this guy is sadly the norm.

[tony2heads]

@Loyal Commenter

I have seen it many times personally and anecdotes back it up; rich people are far more likely to be miserly that those with middle or lower income.

Has there been any research on this - or would the rich not be willing to join in?

[Jim 59]

Re: What a dick!

No, the rich aren't automatically bad. An entrepreneur might start a business, through hard work and at risk to himself, and end up providing livelihoods for hundreds of families, as well as his own.

Dunno about this guy without more details. Sounds like a jerk right enough

[asdf]

Re: What a dick!

> An entrepreneur might start a business, through hard work and at risk to himself, and end up providing livelihoods for hundreds of families, as well as his own.

Or he might be a trust fund baby who makes a living off the interest or far worse like that Max factor heir who drugged and raped and filmed women for years before he ran to Mexico and used his money to buy safety for awhile.

[squigbobble]

Re: What a dick!

This guy is either a shining star of social justice or has a messiah complex, something that it not unknown among business leaders.

[SirDigalot]

sounds like

a sneaky way to almost get a private beach or at least a very exclusive one.

I agree with water taxi or something preferably shipping thousands of people in.

I am thinking it is not a massively used beach though...

beach party lots of people lots of noise.... oh dear the police cannot get to it to shut it down..

ship some hobos in there also for good measure

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: sounds like

"beach party lots of people lots of noise.... oh dear the police cannot get to it to shut it down.."

If said beach party was annoying the owner, which was presumably your point, then I'm faaaairly sure that *he* could grant permission for the law to access the area...

[John G Imrie]

“We are very aware of the community concern about the situation, and it is unfortunate that we were forced into the legal process, but unfortunately my client is a giant *rich* dick."

A pour giant dick. is call a prisoner, or in some states of America, dead.

[Cheesenough]

Miserable Git

I hope he has to drive 30 miles to the next town to buy his milk.

[YetAnotherLocksmith]

Re: Miserable Git

The problem with a boycott is that they just don't work anymore. Not against the rich.

Even if you organised a really good one, he could have a courier or the postal service bring in food, even if you somehow got the national supermarkets offering home delivery to stop feeding him. Beyond that, he could simply hire a goon to do it.

Being mega rich insulates from the requirement of needing people. Indeed, that's half the point. But even kids have all they need these days, the Internet ensures that no-one lacks for 'human' contact and you can have all the pizza delivered to your basement you want...

[Tom 35]

Re: Miserable Git

No his unpaid intern will get to do that as a learning experience.

[Randall Shimizu]

Hopefully this appealed to a higher court. This sets a very bad precedent for the California beach access.

[Charles 9]

They can't. The treaty was ratified by Congress after the Mexican-American War and thus, under the Constitution, has the force of Federal law. Under the 14th Amendment, unless the law specifically exempts it (this one doesn't), federal law trumps state law.

It would require one of two things: agreement between it and Mexico to allow for an exception to the treaty or an overriding federal concern (such as breaching another federal Act or treaty) overruling it.

[Keith Langmead]

Does seem a crappy way of going about things but I guess it depends on whether he now goes into discussions with people about granting access. Much easier to start from a position of "I don't have to be here, I'm legally entitled to just deny access, now let's haggle." than one where the others may or may not have rights.

[John Brown (no body)]

That was my first thoughts too. Knowing the litigious nature of many people in the USA, he may simply be asserting his rights before re-opening access. Maybe it's come to his attention that some people are claiming they have a "right" to access the beach via his land so he needs to demonstrate that his right is legal and trumps others rights in this matter.

Or it could just be that he's being a dick.

[Irongut]

Stop being a dick!

see title

[squigbobble]

Try some other law

How about the county/state makes a compulsory purchase of the access road? Make use of the law that helps stop poor people getting the way of rich people's plans. Nothing could possibly go wrong...

[Tom 13]

Re: Try some other law

Doesn't work that way. One of the idiosyncrasies of the US Constitution is that all Treaties get incorporated into law as part of the Constitution. Since the Treaty with Mexico was signed and approved by the Senate, it's requirement to respect the land grants from Mexico trumps the eminent domain clause of the US Constitution and therefore any State/Commonwealt constitutions as well. And there's not much point in fighting it to SCOTUS because SCOTUS will probably rule 7-2/8-1/9-0 for the Treaty enforcement on it if they do take it.

[Phil O'Sophical]

Sounds like both Khosla and the "Friends of Martin's Beach" had the money to pay good lawyers, and the Judge didn't really have any choice but to uphold the law as written. Just because it hinges on a 150-year-old treaty, or that one of the parties is a billionaire, doesn't make the law any less valid.

A lot of the complainers here seem to be working on the basis that just because Khosla's rich, he shouldn't be able to benefit from the law. Hardly seems fair, and it's not like that stretch of Highway 1 is short of beaches.

[Michael Wojcik]

A lot of the complainers here seem to be working on the basis that just because Khosla's rich, he shouldn't be able to benefit from the law.

That's a fascinating interpretation. My reading is that the "complainers" are complaining because Khosla's a dick, not because he's rich or legally in the right.

[TheOtherHobbes]

Someone should find some of the natives who lived there before Mexico or California existed, and see if they made any access treaties - or if the treaties are valid and can't be challenged by pre-existing rights.

[Yet Another Anonymous coward]

Doesn't work - those treaties are by the fed, they are allowed to ignore treaties with natives

(Actually the fed can ignore treaties with anyone who doesn't have nukes)

[Anonymous Coward]

So this guy is "like" Larry's "best friend" right...what else would you expect.

[Stretch]

ignore the twat. go to the beach anyway. You've all got guns anyway, have a shoot out about it.

[JayBizzle]

this feels like the American way... I'm all for it

[Anonymous Coward]

Property rights?

The court has established that he has the rights, so stop complaining. Unless you don't like property rights, bloody commies... :-)

The People are free to appeal to a higher court; maybe they'll win.

[Anonymous Coward]

OONTZ OONTZ OONTZ OONTZ! RAVE TIME!

Sounds like the ideal location!

[Stevie]

Bah!

What do you expect from a man who single handedly almost started a war between China and the UK in order to sell newspapers and cable TV airtime?

Luckily for us we had the redoubtable James Bond to thwart his plans and ding up his expensive stealth boat and stuff.

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Bah!

"a man who single handedly almost started a war between China and the UK in order to sell newspapers and cable TV airtime?"

Seems like he would have been better off trying to sell servers and network equipment, but hey, what do I know...

[Mike Moyle]

Well, if it's no longer a public road...

Martin's Beach Road should be officially signed over to the property owner as a private driveway (if it isn't already) and removed from the city highway department upkeep roster. Eventually -- even is SoCal, and with only limited traffic use -- it'll need repairs, which the property owner appears to be well-equipped to pay for, himself. (Up here in the Northeast U.S., the expense of plowing a driveway that long in the winter and repairing the frost-heaves the following spring would be considerable, and we would all stand around to point and laugh!)

[Charles 9]

Re: Well, if it's no longer a public road...

Given the state of the road in the picture, it's likely just a dirt path, plus we're talking SoCal: not exactly known for snow. If he has a proper off-road vehicle, he could drive up and down it with little regard for maintenance. Indeed, he may WISH to let the road fall into disrepair as a disincentive for other people or the state (or in this case, the US as it's a FEDERAL treaty blocking it) to try to obtain it through other means.

For further inquiry: Is the state beach enveloped by the private property in such a way that one MUST go through that property to reach it? Or could the state develop some other means to reach the beach, perhaps through an adjacent landowner who is more accommodating?

[Death Boffin]

Re: Well, if it's no longer a public road...

Yharrg! Santa Cruz is NORTHERN California! And I always see posts lamenting the geographical ignorance on the left side of the pond. Please figure out where on the Left Coast you are talking about.

[MissingSecurity]

I bet ...

...posts on the reg will change his mind about it. SPREAD TO THE WEB MY FELLOW REG READERS. WE WILL RIGHT THE WRONGS OF THOSE WHO LOOK DOWN ON US FROM ISOLATED BEACH FRONT PROPERTY...

(In all serious though... Major dick.)

[Fiddler on the roof]

Hopefully some people will organise a humungous beach party every Friday and Saturday night just to piss him off. Or he will get eaten by a shark on his now private bit of beach (in the water before you start).

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure dick is the word

Over here we call people like this a "Clarkson".

(except he failed, OK maybe Clarkson is lower down the social scale than dick)

[Anonymous Coward]

Re: Not sure dick is the word

But didn't Clarkson get more people signing the petition for him to be prime minister than our current leader got in votes?

(well it seems that way...)

[Abot13]

Re: Not sure dick is the word

that just means Clarckson is a more likeable dick, which is a given because he is not a politician

[Frankee Llonnygog]

Just wait till the masked avenger hears about this!

The millionaire's sightless eyes seemed to stare at the arras whose surface had been slashed - with a Z! Zorro, the flashing blade, defender of the weak, had righted another injustice.

[Anonymous Coward]

Time for some eminent domain!

His property is blocking access to a public beach? Condemn the road and a trailhead through eminent domain (beach is a public good and recreation area) bisect his property and tell him to go screw himself. That respects his property rights and its in the constitution, so I supersedes his land grant. His lawyer may delay that, but its a pretty clear-cut case of private land preventing reasonable access to a public space, so Mr. Khosla is ultimately screwed.

Unless of course he's bought off the county commissioners through political donations or other means, so that they don't want to proceed with the condemnation procedure.

[MachDiamond]

Re: Time for some eminent domain!

Eminent Domain might not be necessary. The title deeds to property usually define easement and building set back requirements for utility and throughway access. This was put into place to prevent just such actions. Since this is a public beach, I would imagine that there would be regular inspections, garbage collection, police patrols and cleaning of the privies. Putting up a gate and fence not only prevents access to the pubic, but also the relevant local authorities. If somebody called for emergency services after visiting the beach via boat and the ambulance couldn't get to them, would they be able to sue this twat? Hmmm, I wonder if I should row over, call the paramedics for a heart attack and then sue when they can't get to me. Might be worth a few quid.

[Charles 9]

Re: Time for some eminent domain!

But then the question arises. Given the age of the original deed (remember, the original grant came from Mexico), could they argue that the BEACH was originally private, too, protected by the federal treaty, and therefore trumps California's claim to a public beach under prior claims (again because of the 14th Amendment trumping California law)?

[Tom 13]

Re: The title deeds to property usually define easement and building set back requirements

You need to learn to read better. The whole point of his lawsuit is that the original deed came from Mexico, is incorporated into the US Constitution by way of treaty, and contains no such easement clauses. And since the treaty makes the Mexican deed superior to State law, no State laws passed after the deed was issued affect the rights in the deed.

[EvilTweety]

Douche meet Bag

While within his rights as the property owner, it is still a blaring example of douchebaggery.

[mIRCat]

What if there's a naked girl on the beach?

Meanwhile... somewhere in Vermont.

Obviously, you get her a coat.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's the law

He's a dickhole, but the law lets him be a dickhole. Just like with UK tax avoidance.

[Anonymous Coward]

Opportunity here

for a brief but very noisy helicopter ferry service from the other side of the road to the beach ... and it could afford a nice view of the property on the way past from 500 feet up

[Kev99]

Federal shoud trump both

Many years ago I read in the Miami Herald there was a US law from the 1800s that said all land abutting navigable waterways belonged to the federal government and was therefore public property, free and accessible to all. Too bad I can't find that article or law.

[Charles 9]

Re: Federal shoud trump both

I believe that law only applied to interior waterways (thus the term "navigable", which typically only applies to lakes and rivers; this was intended to prevent them being closed off. The open seas don't have that problem.

Besides, the Hidalgo Treaty can possibly trump that act for two reasons. (1) It's a federally-ratified treaty, which under the Constitution gives it equal standing to any Act, (2) The treaty came after the aforesaid act. Judicial precedence could point to that and say the treaty acts as an amendment to the prior law.

[Anonymous Coward]

There I was....

having Dinner Monday evening with a multimillionaire.

For pudding we had home made apple crumble - with "Sainsburys Basic" tinned custard (18p per tin).

I kid you not; he also has a fridge and cupboard full of food and drink from Lidl.

Anonymous, cos I want to be invited again. :-p

[Jamie Jones]

'Get orfff my land'

This is stereotypically view of farmers over here.

As Farmer Palmer says:

Get orff my land!

[Glad all over]

Stupid question

Looking at the area on Google maps, it looks like there are a couple of dozen properties near the beach that are also accessed by the disputed road.

So how do these property owners (and their guests and visitors) get to their properties? Does California have wayleaves and easements?

[Charles 9]

Re: Stupid question

"So how do these property owners (and their guests and visitors) get to their properties? Does California have wayleaves and easements?"

They do, but since the Hidalgo Treaty is FEDERAL, California is being trumped.

That being said, if this road is the ONLY access for these other property owners, they now have a valid beef. Their rights must be respected, too, so they can invoke the First Amendment right to petition the feds for this grievance. Probably what could happen is that these property owners could file a new lawsuit, this time in a Federal court, demanding access. This could provide the rights clash needed for the federal system to justify invoking eminent domain themselves.

Let's see what happens.

[Glad all over]

Re: Stupid question

Thanks Charles 9.

So it looks like several lawyers will be able to afford a private beach soon...

[Darren Barratt]

Undermine his claim

How about building a tunnel under his property? Start a kick starter to fund it. Play up the injustice angle. Maybe even get sponsorship off of his richer competitors.

Have to be very carefully done though, as subsidence can be a bugger under those 38 million dollar properties...

[Charles 9]

Re: Undermine his claim

Two problems.

One, most land grants also grant anything UNDER the ground, which means tunnels need rights of way from the property owner. Mining leases have the same issue: they need permission from the property owner.

Two, we're on the coast. That typically means a low water table. When you gotta keep water out, tunneling becomes that much tricker, which is why many underwater tunnels were built above ground, then towed to the site and SUNK into place.