Martins Beach: Eminent domain hearing today

In the prior video, he said this at the very end: "Courts are the way you resolve things. Not somebody's opinion. Not the press. Not hyperbole."

Yet his argument to keep that gate shut has been struck down twice in the courts, but he still refuses to comply. WTF?

He also stated in the prior video that giving away half of his wealth won't affect his lifestyle, yet he acts like keeping the gate open is burdensome because of "cost of maintenance and liability insurance". Really?

Something is way out of whack here.
 
I realize the guy is very successful so I am giving him credit for that.
I also thought he expressed himself well

But... the way he threw out his giving... and his anti trump statement contrasting himself and telling us he so beyond that... and the way he acted like he enjoyed paying taxes....

He leaves the viewer with a choice. Either he is Mother Terresa of Calcutta's prodigy or he is a very very slick salesman.





Baron said:
In the prior video, he said this at the very end: "Courts are the way you resolve things. Not somebody's opinion. Not the press. Not hyperbole."

Yet his argument to keep that gate shut has been struck down twice in the courts, but he still refuses to comply. WTF?

He also stated in the prior video that giving away half of his wealth won't affect his lifestyle, yet he acts like keeping the gate open is burdensome because of "cost of maintenance and liability insurance". Really?

Something is way out of whack here.
More...
dealmaker said:
Khosla on Martin's Beach Access Suit

More...
 
Last edited:
All attempts to demonize him being acknowledged, you do have to recognize that if you are not from California that there is a lot of lefty horsefeathers in some of the legal arguments he is up against there. "closing the gates to your property constitutes development." Oy! Cuban Common Law, I guess.

I see that Gavin Newsome is on one of the commissions that regulates or overseas some of this. Just ask yourself which outcome serves his run for governor and then you know what "the law" is.

The long run effect of this will be to close down more beach access. California commies are trying to- and will probably be successful- in establishing that prior public access (by permission rather than by continuous adverse use- for you legal types) creates a permanent public entitlement. The result will be that thousands of owners who have been or have been contemplating giving permission for public use -expecting that it can be withdrawn as needed or limited as needed at will- will just say or will just be advised to not even start down that road. Otherwise you will wake up some day and the public owns your property.

A lot of unintended consequences down the road.
 
He had all the cards in his hand to be super cool about the whole thing, but he refused to do so, which is unfortunate. Keeping that gate open would have impacted his life basically ZERO.
 
If he bought the property knowing of this public access... he should not get the financial windfall of shutting it down. What he is doing is a cynical trick that has been going on all over the state..

here is some background. I know these exact spots mentioned here as I used to be a surfer.
CA has a long tradition of the beach belonging to the people.

The original landowners may have had an argument but not the subsequent ones.. IMO.

Just like the guy who bought the golf course near my home. Its zoned for recreation and open space. He is trying to get a windfall and develop it. We don' t need more density. I bought my house know that was open space. If he makes it more dense he hurts the value of my property.

So its not just an ad hoc easement... it written into our laws that public access is to be protected.
He bought the land knowing that. He is trying to pull a fast one. He should be shut down.... hard.


---
here is some background.
CA has a long tradition of the beach belonging to the people.

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com...ccess-coastal-commission-2015feb05-story.html



TreeFrogTrader said:
All attempts to demonize him being acknowledged, you do have to recognize that if you are not from California that there is a lot of lefty horsefeathers in some of the legal arguments he is up against there. "closing the gates to your property constitutes development." Oy! Cuban Common Law, I guess.

I see that Gavin Newsome is on one of the commissions that regulates or overseas some of this. Just ask yourself which outcome serves his run for governor and then you know what "the law" is.

The long run effect of this will be to close down more beach access. California commies are trying to- and will probably be successful- in establishing that prior public access (by permission rather than by continuous adverse use- for you legal types) creates a permanent public entitlement. The result will be that thousands of owners who have been or have been contemplating giving permission for public use -expecting that it can be withdrawn as needed or limited as needed at will- will just say or will just be advised to not even start down that road. Otherwise you will wake up some day and the public owns your property.

A lot of unintended consequences down the road.
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top