GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)
-   Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)
-   -   Californians -is this true ? (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=1140623)

klinton 05-14-2014 12:17 AM
Californians -is this true ?
 
http://rt.com/usa/158752-billionaire...-beach-closed/

AdultKing 05-14-2014 12:27 AM
Quote:
Attorneys and environmentalists have spent years outraged that Khosla shut off public access to Martin’s Beach, a beloved cove near Half Moon Bay, Calif., after he bought the land around it in 2008.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhue...ach-testimony/

AsianDivaGirlsWebDude 05-14-2014 12:51 AM
The nerve of some billionaires... :disgust :upsidedow



http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/...61_634x476.jpg

http://static3.businessinsider.com/i...tins-beach.jpg

Quote:
In 2008, Sun Microsystems co-founder and wealthy VC Vinod Khosla bought a beachfront property in California's Half Moon Bay for $37.5 million.

He promptly installed a locked gate and security guards on the only road that allowed access to the beach, barring the public from a popular hang-out spot for surfers, fishermen and picnickers, Romney reports.

Cliffs on either side block off this spot, known as Martin's Beach, so the road on what became Khosla's property was the only way in, unless you swim there.

He shouldn't be able to do that. Owners of beachfront property are required by California law to allow the public to get to the beach.

Naturally, lawsuits ensued and for one of them Khosla just came out the winner when a San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Gerald Buchwald ruled in his favor.

The judge ruled that because the land was part of a land grant in the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (upheld in 1859 by the U.S. Supreme Court), the land is exempt from the beach access state law.

The judge's logic? The land grant came before the California state constitution.

The people suing Khosla are going to appeal, but if this ruling stands, there could be all sorts of other wealthy landowners in California wondering if they can use the same rule to block the public from other beaches, too.

Mark Massara, an attorney for the nonprofit Surfrider Foundation, which has a separate lawsuit pending against Khosla, has asked the California Attorney General?s office to step in. He told the LA Times:

?It gets really absurd,? he said. ?Why not exempt all modern law? from applying to coastal rancho properties.

Massara used a different argument for Surfrider's lawsuit. He says Khosla needed to get a permit from the Coastal Commission to install that locked gate. As part of the suit, Khosla tried to get the judge simply to declare that he didn't have to allow the public to access Martin's Beach, but the judge refused to rule on that until Khosla got the permit. According Massara, Khosla still hasn't applied for a permit.

?If Khosla doesn?t agree with the Coastal Commission?s rules then he is free to sue the Coastal Commission. But if you don?t apply for a permit at all, then you?re just a violator,? Massara said.
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...32_634x418.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...00_634x393.jpg

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/...80_634x404.jpg

http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townn...review-300.jpg



Support the Surfrider Foundation: http://www.surfrider.org/campaigns/entry/open-martins-beach

:stoned

ADG

TCLGirls 05-14-2014 01:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by klinton (Post 20086148)
In general all ocean beaches, in almost every state in the USA, must have public access. There are no legal 100% private ocean beaches. The theory is based upon the "Public Trust Doctrine". You can read California's Public Truist Doctrine here: http://www.slc.ca.gov/About_The_CSLC...t_Doctrine.pdf

However, in practice, there have been many property owners who tried to make their backyard or front yard (which happens to be a beach) private by closing off pathways, putting up fences/gates/no trespassing signs, or just simply making the path way from the road to the beach very obscure and hard to find. This happens a lot around Malibu and Santa Barbara. And it doesn't seem like law enforcement is quick to reprimand those home owners.

klinton 05-14-2014 02:38 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TCLGirls (Post 20086176)
In general all ocean beaches, in almost every state in the USA, must have public access. There are no legal 100% private ocean beaches. The theory is based upon the "Public Trust Doctrine". You can read California's Public Truist Doctrine here: http://www.slc.ca.gov/About_The_CSLC...t_Doctrine.pdf
so it is the same like in rest of the world...

too bad that law enforcement IN THIS CASE doesnt work so well, like on some minor cases...

2MuchMark 05-14-2014 03:04 AM
Wow what a miserable life this guy must lead. Seriously. I feel sorry for him.

VikingMan 05-14-2014 05:49 AM
that aids patient looking old fuck probably never even sets foot in the ocean. Cunt

PornDiscounts-V 05-14-2014 06:07 AM
Sail a boat filled with loud brats to play in the sand in front of his house

L-Pink 05-14-2014 07:22 AM
If I owned the land I'd restrict access to everyone but women wanting to sun bathe nude.

.

AsianDivaGirlsWebDude 05-14-2014 08:00 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by VikingMan (Post 20086313)

that aids patient looking old fuck probably never even sets foot in the ocean. Cunt
Vinod Khosla doesn't live at the Martins Beach location, he just owns the property, and he doesn't want anyone else to have access to the beach from his property (which is the only way to access the beach access, other than by ocean)...Khosla hosted a $35,000 a plate fundraising dinner for President Obama at his Portola Valley mansion awhile back, and I've seen photos of his massive Palo Alto mansion, listed as his primary residence (among numerous property holdings):

http://c2.vgtstatic.com/thumbll/4/3/...slas-house.jpg

So far Khosla has racked up over $20 million in fines for blocking beach access - chump change for him, and it appears that he feels entitled to selfishly deprive Californian's of their coastline for years to come. :disgust

:stoned

ADG

Rochard 05-14-2014 08:48 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianDivaGirlsWebDude (Post 20086419)
Vinod Khosla doesn't live at the Martins Beach location, he just owns the property, and he doesn't want anyone else to have access to the beach from his property (which is the only way to access the beach access, other than by ocean)...
But there is the catch right there... The only public access is through his property... Which means people have to trespass to get to the beach. On top of this, it makes him legally liable if something happens. I don't really care if it's a path, a trail, or even a dirt road, if it's on his property he can do whatever he wants with it. He's not closing the beach, just making difficult to get to.

Let's rent a boat and go down and party on the beach... (I'm not kidding really!)

F-U-Jimmy 05-14-2014 08:55 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by L-Pink (Post 20086373)
If I owned the land I'd restrict access to everyone but women wanting to sun bathe nude.

.
Im with you on that :thumbsup

AsianDivaGirlsWebDude 05-14-2014 11:21 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20086485)

But there is the catch right there... The only public access is through his property... Which means people have to trespass to get to the beach. On top of this, it makes him legally liable if something happens. I don't really care if it's a path, a trail, or even a dirt road, if it's on his property he can do whatever he wants with it. He's not closing the beach, just making difficult to get to.
Simply owning property does not confer the right to do whatever you want with it. There are zoning laws, public access laws, health and safety laws, etc. :2 cents:

There was public access for to Martins Beach for several generations prior to Khosla purchasing the land. He then proceeded to close access to the public. This change in public access should have required a permit.

Quote:
The representative of the holding companies was made aware of the existing public access associated with the property prior to purchase of the property, and was also informed that closing or deterring access would be an activity that required a development permit from the County and Coastal Commission. (We learned this through discovery on our lawsuit...see video)



But, as powerful people are sometimes wont to do, the law was ignored and access was closed without benefit of a permit. Doubtlessly he reckoned that the only way that he would have to answer to these actions and forced to address this closure was through an enforcement action or a lawsuit brought against him.

Mr. Khosla was approached early on by Surfrider Foundation in hopes that the closure could be discussed and an amicable resolution to restore access could be reached, but alas Mr. Khosla was not responsive to this approach. Instead, he relied on his lawyers to respond, and the response more or less said that the court would need to decide. So Surfrider took him to task and sued for violation of the Coastal Act.
I expect the Surfrider Foundation to ultimately prevail. :)

:stoned

ADG

crockett 05-14-2014 12:05 PM
I hope the little surfer kids that live near by egg his house relentlessly.

As far as public access to water.. If you want a real challenge try to get access to the many lakes and rivers within Texas. Never in my life have I visited a state where people can't stop chanting about freedom, yet have next to no public access land that you don't have to pay a fee to access..

Texas is just miles and miles of fenced off land with no trespassing signs, everywhere you go..

Creatine 05-14-2014 01:06 PM
California is a shit hole anyways.

klinton 05-14-2014 02:04 PM
sad things:2 cents::(

_Richard_ 05-14-2014 02:06 PM
heard the chinese have increased land purchases by 500% in the past 6 months?

beach access is the least of their problems

xNetworx 05-14-2014 02:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Creatine (Post 20086871)
California is a shit hole anyways.
Where do you live?

Rochard 05-14-2014 02:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AsianDivaGirlsWebDude (Post 20086745)
Simply owning property does not confer the right to do whatever you want with it. There are zoning laws, public access laws, health and safety laws, etc. :2 cents:

There was public access for to Martins Beach for several generations prior to Khosla purchasing the land. He then proceeded to close access to the public. This change in public access should have required a permit.



I expect the Surfrider Foundation to ultimately prevail. :)

:stoned

ADG
I disagree. If he owns the property where the trail is, he can do whatever he wants with it. He is not denying anyone access to the beach, just denying them the use of his property to access it.

TCLGirls 05-14-2014 03:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard (Post 20086984)
I disagree. If he owns the property where the trail is, he can do whatever he wants with it. He is not denying anyone access to the beach, just denying them the use of his property to access it.
Even if a person owns a certain portion of land, if there is an easement on the land, the landowner can't summarily restrict access.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/easement


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:09 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123