• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Martins beach issue may go to the Supreme Court

Eldritch said:
No, dude, there was no easement on the parcel when he bought it. That is the thing. Government mismanaged this deal and now want to put the property owner on the hook for their mistake.
Click to expand...
I disagree. It is a well known and established fact of real estate law concerning a number of different easements. This case is similar to the one I mentioned in Point Dume. These are easements by prescription, that have openly been used for years. It is possible in some places, like California, to actually take full ownership of the easement just through use. Most people never file the paperwork to do so, but that doesn't mean it can't be done.
 
Eldritch said:
Well, I mean, they could fucking use eminent domain to take the shit back if they really wanted to, but they would have to pay him for the cost of the land for the path and the loss of value to his property for bisecting his parcel. They are just don't want to pay. This is total abuse by Government.



No, dude, there was no easement on the parcel when he bought it. That is the thing. Government mismanaged this deal and now want to put the property owner on the hook for their mistake.
Click to expand...

So what am I missing here. The gate was in place when he bought it and you would have to be a complete moron to think the coastal commission would not care about you limiting beach access. Was there just a handshake agreement with the previous owner? If no formal agreement was in place then yeah the gov probably dropped the ball. I think it would be fair to have the gate stay open but release the owner from any liability and make the state pick up the tab for clean up.

edit: from surfline

http://www.surfline.com/surf-news/b...ivate-martins-beach-access-battle-cou_151969/

A brief history: Silicon Valley Billionaire Vinod Khosla bought the 89-acre coastal property for $32.5 million in 2008. He’d been told prior to purchasing by the Coastal Commission that he needed to allow public access to the beach — its previous owners had allowed access for 70 years — but locked the gate in 2010. Surfrider sued in 2013, and won, but the gate remained locked. It was opened briefly in 2014 after a San Mateo County judge ruled that he must let the public pass. And then mostly locked again as the case ping-pinged around in court.
Click to expand...

yeah fuck this guy. Njoy your loss asshole.
 
Last edited:
Note to self, if it wasn't accessible to the public before I bought it, then never allow the public to access it. Chances are the government will steal it from me later and not even through eminent domain.
 
Eldritch said:
Well, I mean, they could fucking use eminent domain to take the shit back if they really wanted to, but they would have to pay him for the cost of the land for the path and the loss of value to his property for bisecting his parcel. They are just don't want to pay. This is total abuse by Government.



No, dude, there was no easement on the parcel when he bought it. That is the thing. Government mismanaged this deal and now want to put the property owner on the hook for their mistake.
Click to expand...

historical use by the public forms the easement, whether it was documented or not, perscriptive easement, adverse posession or something like that. the real pain in his ass is the 2 years access was still allowed before the gate was closed. dude is hosed IMO
 
While I really believe in private property rights, I really hope this guy loses. Not just because I think the public interest should carry the day in this case, but because he is a Class A+ douche by all accounts.
 
Eldritch said:
They should rule on his side. If the man owns the property, he owns it, it rightfully should be under his dominion. The right of Landowners to control their private property is a sacred institution. If States want to protect their Beaches, Forests, and Lakeside, they need to take those Property Lines off the market and not sell them to people. It is shitty Government to try and collect the yummy money from people who can afford to buy the land, but still require it be treated like a Public Asset. You must choose which you want.
Click to expand...
It's a lot more complicated than that.

You can't buy/own the shoreline. He tried an end-run around the law and lost.

Tough shit. He knew what he was getting into and thought his money could buy what he wasn't supposed to be able to own. He was wrong.
 
We have a proscriptive easement on our property. It kinda sucks/kinda didn't matter until the fuckwit built on it and caused a landslide. But even so, that easement isn't going away any time soon, and we knew that going in. PG&E has easements, too - there is NO other way for them to reach their stuff. Similarly, in this case, there was hugely longstanding easement to reach the beach - there is no other way to get there. He knew this going in; it's in the deed. He bought it, he accepted those terms of the contract by buying the house.

You can argue that easements are wrong, but, there is a reason that reasonable rights of way are allowed on private property, and this chap is simply spitting his dummy after the fact.

This isn't like he owned the property, and THEN the evil California gub'mint forced him to open a right of way - more the other way around.
 
Mike95060 said:
So what am I missing here. The gate was in place when he bought it and you would have to be a complete moron to think the coastal commission would not care about you limiting beach access. Was there just a handshake agreement with the previous owner? If no formal agreement was in place then yeah the gov probably dropped the ball. I think it would be fair to have the gate stay open but release the owner from any liability and make the state pick up the tab for clean up.

edit: from surfline

http://www.surfline.com/surf-news/b...ivate-martins-beach-access-battle-cou_151969/

yeah fuck this guy. Njoy your loss asshole.
Click to expand...

Probably just a handshake, because the parcel is like 70 years old or some shit. People used to do business like that back then. Requiring Public Access without written determination of responsibility and the associated liability is bullshit. It is abuse.

Climber said:
It's a lot more complicated than that.

You can't buy/own the shoreline. He tried an end-run around the law and lost.

Tough shit. He knew what he was getting into and thought his money could buy what he wasn't supposed to be able to own. He was wrong.
Click to expand...

Sure, so I guess he can't stop people from landing a boat on that beach, but if the County wants him to buy liability insurance and pay for maintenance on a public path across his private land to the beach, that should have been documented in advance of the Sale, which the County did have to oversee before the deed was transferred.

If they want to document that shit after the fact, they should be forced to eminent domain the path.
 
Eldritch said:
Sure, so I guess he can't stop people from landing a boat on that beach, but if the County wants him to buy liability insurance and pay for maintenance on a public path across his private land to the beach, that should have been documented in advance of the Sale, which the County did have to oversee before the deed was transferred.

If they want to document that shit after the fact, they should be forced to eminent domain the path.
Click to expand...
Lots of questions on that, but in his case he deserves any shafting that comes to him, I have absolutely zero sympathy in his case, he thought he could do WTF he felt like.

Bottom line is that he knew what he was getting into, he just thought that he was special. Fuck him.
 
As a general rule, any time a billionaire ends up in court, I usually am against them. This case doesn't break that trend. The beach is public land, he doesn't get to prevent people from accessing public land just because he wants to be a dick. If he had done any research on the land at all he should have known that a portion was used for public access to the beach and asked about it before buying the property.

Edit:
He’d been told prior to purchasing by the Coastal Commission that he needed to allow public access to the beach
Click to expand...

So he had been told but either didn't pay attention or though he could money his way out of it. Either way, it's his fuckup, if he doesn't like it he can sell the land.
 
Last edited:
Can't he just offer a different path to the beach?

If he HAS TO open the roadway back up, can he be sued for ADA reasons? Or if they allow him to have a foot path from the far end of the property along the edge, does it also have to be ADA compliant?
 
KooLaid said:
Can't he just offer a different path to the beach?

If he HAS TO open the roadway back up, can he be sued for ADA reasons? Or if they allow him to have a foot path from the far end of the property along the edge, does it also have to be ADA compliant?
Click to expand...

hopefully :twofinger
 
KooLaid said:
Can't he just offer a different path to the beach?

If he HAS TO open the roadway back up, can he be sued for ADA reasons? Or if they allow him to have a foot path from the far end of the property along the edge, does it also have to be ADA compliant?
Click to expand...
I don't think that's the point.

He wants the whole beach to himself, he bought that property with the intent to have the entire beach entirely to himself..after all, he's a billionaire and therefore is entitled to have what he wants.
 
Climber said:
I don't think that's the point.

He wants the whole beach to himself, he bought that property with the intent to have the entire beach entirely to himself..after all, he's a billionaire and therefore is entitled to have what he wants.
Click to expand...

See, now I think they should not require him to maintain the path, that is some bullshit, but I would advocate for the County to build a Row Boat/Jetski rental lot nearby with markers offshore showing them where to safely land on his beach. :teeth
 
Climber said:
I don't think that's the point.

He wants the whole beach to himself, he bought that property with the intent to have the entire beach entirely to himself..after all, he's a billionaire and therefore is entitled to have what he wants.
Click to expand...

....and smuggling is a lucrative business. :thumbup
 
KooLaid said:
Can't he just offer a different path to the beach?

If he HAS TO open the roadway back up, can he be sued for ADA reasons? Or if they allow him to have a foot path from the far end of the property along the edge, does it also have to be ADA compliant?
Click to expand...

He doesn’t have to open the roadway

He has to provide public access

There is nothing new here. He just has money and is trying to pay his way though legislation

There is really nothing to discuss here. This won’t see the Supreme Court, they won’t hear it. He won’t win as there is sufficient case law about public easements and established easements and estoppel.
 
I am waiting for President to start tweeting about it.
 
Map8 said:
Haven't there been similar cases in Malibu where extremely wealthy people tried for years to restrict public access to public beaches only to lose in court every time?
Click to expand...

Yep. They lost.
 
Mike95060 said:
How bout the other way around? Don't fucking buy it if you want it to yourself and can't share? It's not like the buyer was told after the fact that he would need to provide an easement. Fucking cry babies.

PG&E dug up my back yard for the better part of a year and can pop into it any time they want. I knew that before I bought the property. Oh well I knew and agreed to it.
Click to expand...

Pretty much this. It's just like all the NIMBY's in Santa Monica, that are trying to get the airport shut down. They bought houses, next to an airport, at a discount because of said airport, and now they are complaining about airplane noise? What the fuck did they expect?
 
Rich assholes in their ivory towers need some comeuppance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top