
Vinod Khosla Wants Californians To Keep Out of Martins Beach - the_arun
http://www.npr.org/2014/01/27/264901370/california-fights-billionaire-s-keep-out-sign-for-beach-access
======
cromwellian
I think Vinod's kinda being a douche here. All of the positive street cred he
is getting for his promotion of green energy is being lost to this fight. I
mean, is it worth having the private beach? Why not keep it open to the
public, upgrade the access, and actually reap some positive PR from this?

This is the kind of stuff protesters hate about rich techies. Apparently, this
beach was historically used for a long time to teach surfing by local surf
schools. A guy swoops in, who probably will rarely use this beach/vacation
home, buys up the land, and closes off access. Attempts to "hack" the legal
system through a loophole to achieve an exception to the state wide public
beach system.

If he had been appreciative of the history of the beach and local surfers, he
could have actually got some benefit out of it, maybe built some local
facilities people would pay to use, add some exhibits on Khosla investments,
etc. It would have generated positive press and positive externalities instead
of negative press and negative externalities.

I like Vinod, but this just comes off as being a rich jerk.

~~~
JPKab
I know, I know I sound like a dick here, but I think this is one of those
cases where his being born and raised in India is a contributing factor.
Indian culture is vastly different than ours, including a very high "power
distance" measurement compared to typical Western nations.

In India, if you're rich (or even middle class), you have servants and you do
what you want. In his view, this is his, and he doesn't have to share it with
the lesser people.

Sure, many people born in America would do this too, but they would possibly
feel a bit more guilty about it.

~~~
pm90
Actuallly, he's kind of a dick anyways. He once gave an interview with the BBC
about IIT's where he said that the IIT's were so difficult that he "cruised
through the CMU master's program". Later, it was revealed that at the time he
attended, the IIT's had a 5 year bachelor's program; something that he
conveniently forgot to mention.

~~~
jonny_eh
What's IIT and CMU? SVP?

~~~
saryant
Indian Institute of Technology and Carnegie Mellon.

------
caseyf7
This is a very interesting and complicated case.

The judge's ruling skirts the fundamental conflict between the rights of
private property owners and the rights of Californians to access the
shoreline. Instead, Judge Buchwald rooted his decision in the land's history
during the mid-19th century. Since there was no public easement attached to
the property at the time the United States acquired California from Mexico,
the judge reasoned, the question of whether the California Constitution now
guarantees access to the beach is immaterial.

The original owner of the property was Jose Maria Alviso, who received a
provisional land grant from the Mexican government in the late 1830s. He later
transferred the property to his brother, Jose Antonio Alviso, whose rights to
the property were upheld under the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which
settled the Mexican-American War. The U.S. government challenged Alviso's land
patent, but the Supreme Court confirmed Alviso's ownership in 1859.

All that complicated history led Buchwald to a basic conclusion: The nation's
high court exempted this property from the full reach of California law.

[http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-
news/ci_24380282/vinod-k...](http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-
news/ci_24380282/vinod-khosla-wins-key-martins-beach-battle)

~~~
aliston
If you read on, the situation is actually even more complicated than just this
part of the explanation. Yes, the state Constitution guarantees access, but
what can the state really do if someone rightfully owns property blocking
access that doesn't contain an easement?

It sounds to me like the typical course of action is that the costal
commission won't issue permits for any modifications without strings attached
(i.e. an easement). So, Khosla may be able to hang on to his land with no
easement, but he won't be able to do anything with it, close the road, or
build on it without negotiating with the CC. There is a second lawsuit pending
regarding the closure of the road that may make more headway on this basis.

~~~
michaelt

      what can the state really do if someone rightfully 
      owns property blocking access that doesn't contain an 
      easement?
    

Claiming property for public use, such as the construction of roads, is the
purpose of eminent domain [1].

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eminent_domain)

~~~
msandford
And this isn't even the bullshitty "a larger tax base is a valid use of
eminent domain" argument either, where the state takes something for cheap,
then sells it for cheap to a developer who then builds a giant resort. This is
the ACTUAL, PROPER use of such an authorization in the law.

------
gdg92989
As a bay area tech worker I'm hurt twice by this. First I'm robbed of access
to a beautiful beach and second my standing in the community is tarnished
further. With leaders like Perkins and Khosla I can hardly blame bay area
natives for thinking we're all entitled and out of touch. The worst part is we
have to take the brunt of the rage while we get on the bus to make more money
for these people.

~~~
ballard
Have you seen what happens when holiday food drive barrels are brought front-
and-center to techie venues? Basically empty. Go to any Midwestern state
whether an office or a supermarket, and these same barrels are most often
overflowing. The generosity and consideration of the less fortunate should
shame and humble more people than it does.

~~~
throwaway092834
I can't speak for other techies but I will _never_ buy canned food for food
drives. It's one of the least efficient ways to donate.

Instead I write a check which helps far, far more. Here's an article on the
subject:
[http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2011/12/food...](http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2011/12/food_drives_charities_need_your_money_not_your_random_old_food_.html)

An overflowing food barrel represents very little in value, compared to the
large cash donations made by wealthy techies. Cash donations are buying entire
warehouses of food that you just aren't seeing.

~~~
throwaway46163
My girlfriend volunteers full-time for the local food pantry. It was formerly
an independent nonprofit, but a few years ago it was taken over by United Way.

Since then, any and all cash donations, given on site at the pantry itself,
are funnelled to United Way. The pantry never sees a single cent of the money
and United Way does not provide any food (UW employs two people and sends a
truck periodically that delivers food from an unaffiliated food bank). No one
who works there has any idea where the money goes or what happens to it. The
employees there are not allowed to explain this to donors. The donors, of
course, have no idea either.

The pantry is only allowed to keep tangible foodstuffs that are donated
directly to them, which they can then give to people who need it. The pantry
often runs out of certain types of food. When they do, there's nothing they
can do but hope someone will donate more of that specific item, meanwhile
watching as the cash donations that could be used to buy it get sent away.

I realize this sounds implausible and I can't cite any sources for it[1]. Just
be careful about the assumptions you make regarding where the money goes. Food
is food and people can eat it. Money can get funnelled or turned into other
things, and unless you're there to watch it happen, you don't know what's
going on.

[1]: Howevever, if you haven't already, read the Wikipedia page on United Way
sometime and see if you can figure out what it is that they actually do, other
than collect money, build bureaucracy and get involved in major scandals.

~~~
frouaix
You could check
[http://www.charitynavigator.org/](http://www.charitynavigator.org/) to see
what ratio of the money goes to programs vs. admin costs and funding costs.
The navigator has many entries for United Way as it seems each region has its
own organisation.

------
CurtMonash
Vinod is a very, very hardball negotiator.

Having taken money from him myself, I advise that nobody else ever do so.

~~~
CurtMonash
It looks like some explanation is in order. :)

1\. I founded a company called Evernet in the 1980s, funded by Kleiner Perkins
and others. Vinod negotiated against at least one founder, me, hard. Then KP
made sad but traditional VC errors along the lines of changing the company's
strategy from a good idea to a bad one, bringing in the wrong operating
management and all that.

2\. So I tracked news and anecdotes. Vinod prided himself on being a tough
negotiator on behalf of his portfolio companies. But various other stories of
negotiating hard against entrepreneurs were out there.

I should clarify that in the 1980s, even more than recently, there was a
general screw-the-founder philosophy among VCs. I once asked a popular and
likeable VC what some rules of thumb were for equity splits. After some back
and forth, the VC said "You don't get it, Curt -- it's whatever we can get
away with." But Vinod seemed like a particularly tough exemplar of the trend.

3\. I advise 20-30+ tech companies at a time. Most are VC-backed startups.
Khosla is the 2nd-worst target of negative VC anecdotes I hear, details of
which must however remain confidential.

~~~
almosnow
Nice, thanks!

Just for gossip, what's the worst one?

~~~
CurtMonash
I haven't figured out a reasonable way to make it non-confidential yet. :(

------
girvo
I truly don't understand how this can be an okay state of affairs... Beaches,
at least here in Australia (and at least where I live in south east
Queensland) are public. Even though yeah there are millionaires that own
beautiful properties on the beaches here on the Gold Coast, we all get to use
them, and access them via paths that the city council own.

Can someone explain how blocking off access to a beach works here? Is it
because the access paths are privately owned?

~~~
vl
Judging by the article, beach is only accessible through private road, dude
bought the property containing the road and closed the road. Perfectly within
his rights. And this rhetoric about "billionaire putting a strain on a state
agency" is laughable.

~~~
cylinder
Actually you're completely wrong.

If your property blocks access to another's property, you have to give up a
slice of your land to provide access for the other property's owner. You can't
simply buy up all the land around a property and then close off access. This
is called an easement.

In this case the other property is the beach, which is owned by the
government, no different than any other property. Khosla has no right to deny
access to this property just because his home abuts it. The only issue here is
an obscure treaty, apparently, but that will sort itself out.

~~~
vl
Good point, some things are not completely clear though - there is still
access by water, and since they own all coastland, by definition they have
access through their own property.

------
refurb
I'm going to guess that if this goes to court, it will be decided in favor of
the public.

If California has a law stating beaches are public land, it doesn't really
make much sense if someone else is allow to prevent you from accessing it.

It's sort of like saying you have "freedom of speech", but then banning all
forms of communication.

~~~
yapcguy
I remember reading this story a few years ago, maybe two or three.

Why hasn't this gone to court already?

~~~
aliston
Did you read the story? -- it went to court and Khosla won. Apparently the
land rights stem from the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which predates
California statehood, therefore the CA Constitution doesn't apply.

~~~
yapcguy
Yes just skimmed it again. Maybe I missed a reference but I can't see it. I
did read the MercuryNews link posted elsewhere, interesting stuff, but my
conclusion is still the same: Vinod Khosla is being a real jerk here.

------
ballard
Malibu has similar problems, except residents put up fake signs and
blocked/obscured access. A nice lady even made an iPhone app to document this
knowledge: [https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/our-malibu-
beaches/id5656361...](https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/our-malibu-
beaches/id565636167?mt=8)

~~~
mturmon
Yes, that was Jenny Price. Here's an article she wrote about this issue in
2003. The app was released last year. This is a long-term fight.

[http://www.californiacoastaltrail.info/cms/pages/trail/price...](http://www.californiacoastaltrail.info/cms/pages/trail/price.html)

------
augustocallejas
California should have adopted public access rights like Hawaii a long time
ago. For example, from [http://seagrant.soest.hawaii.edu/public-access-
rights](http://seagrant.soest.hawaii.edu/public-access-rights):

Q: How should the public access beaches and shorelines that are blocked by
houses?

A: If private homeowners are obstructing existing public rights-of-way to the
shoreline, HRS § 115-9 provides a remedy and up to a $2000 penalty for that
kind of situation.

~~~
rosser
Because a $2000 fine is totally going to deter _a billionaire_.

~~~
rdl
Something like how California does prop 65 warnings would be awesome; 50% of
an $x000 fine for each violation reported by each person, per day. I'd be
happy to spend an hour or two every morning racking up a new violation (and
swimming), and I'm sure busloads of poor people could do the same.

------
rayiner
This sort of thing has been happening in the U.S. probably ever since there
has been a U.S. At common law, the waters of the state were held in trust by
the state for the public, and the beach between the water and high tide line
were part of this trust. People were held to have a right to access and use
this public property for purposes like fishing, bathing, cleaning clothes,
etc. This concept dates back to Roman times. There is an amusing case in 1892,
where the Supreme Court reversed a sale by the City of Chicago of the
submerged land along the shore of Lake Michigan to a railroad company, holding
that the transfer was invalid because the public trust land could not be
alienated:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_Central_Railroad_v._Il...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illinois_Central_Railroad_v._Illinois).

Because this concept is well-entrenched, rich people, have resorted to buying
up the land adjacent to the public beaches and cutting off access that way.
Some states have responded by requiring private property owners adjacent to
beaches to provide reasonable access to the public through their property.
This particular conflict isn't any different than conflicts that are happening
all over the country over beach access. Incidentally, it's quite amusing to me
to watch Silicon Valley techies' sense of "but no, really, we're different!"
idealism slowly come crashing down as they realize that there is nothing new
under the sun. "Rich guy tries to block beach access" wouldn't even elicit a
reaction from a Floridian.

------
abalone
What everyone needs to do is call up Khosla Ventures and ask to borrow Vinod's
"douche canoe" so they can paddle to the beach.

------
marquis
A phone app helps the public find access further south in Malibu.
[http://www.californiareport.org/archive/R201308091630/b](http://www.californiareport.org/archive/R201308091630/b)

~~~
hnriot
Martin's Beach is a place just south of Half Moon Bay, nowhere near Malibu.

~~~
marquis
It was an example of citizens working around landowner's private interest.

------
MRSallee
I wonder what the future is of the homes on Martins Beach.

A few years ago, I was considering buying a home near Half Moon Bay, and at
the time a few different "houses" on Martins Beach were available...for
incredibly low prices. Forget that the homes are basically one bedroom
cottages, they're on the beach!

I inquired about it and learned that the homes are on leased land, and the
leases were guaranteed only for another 12 years. No idea what happens when
they expire, and if this deal is something Khosola is interested in
continuing.

------
tzs
Note that he can only keep people out who want to cross his land to reach the
beach. If they come in by boat, and stay between the ocean and the high tide
mark, he's got nothing.

I wonder if one could make a profit with a shuttle boat service to bring
people to and from the beach for a small fee?

~~~
malandrew
I think it would be better to set up a homeless shelter there and take
supplies there to keep it operating.

~~~
rdl
Twice a day you'd need to move (and during any heavy waves); you have to stay
below high-tide. Building structures in the water itself is itself a CC permit
activity (as well as potentially involving the coast guard and army corps of
engineers).

------
gaius
Interestingly Khosla is a former partner in Kleiner Perkins who invested in...
Google. So this sort of thing runs in the family.

------
boomzilla
'The world has enough for everyone's need, but not enough for everyone's
greed.' \--Mahatma Gandhi

------
swampthing
It'd be interesting to see the government just build a road to the beach as a
workaround.

If there is the political will, the government can win regardless - they
could, if for no other reason than to deter future land-owners, make a tourist
attraction out of this beach and completely ruin it for the land-owner.

------
waterlesscloud
Someone will eventually break down the gate and just drive down the road
anyway.

It will be interesting to see if the cops prioritize showing up when they do.

------
eschaton
This assumes the title of the "original owner" of the land was valid. Somehow
I think there just may be some legitimate claims that go further back than to
someone of Spanish descent in the 1830s.

------
AnimalMuppet
What's that I smell? It smells like... opportunity!

Find a parking lot somewhere along the coast. Run a boat from there to
Martin's Beach. Charge enough that you make a bit of money, but don't be
greedy. You'll get to be on the beach every day, making money while you're at
it.

Yeah, I know, you're going to have to get a commercial license and all, but...
somebody ought to go for this.

------
potch
Sounds like a great spot to set up a hacker commune!

~~~
prawn
Drag the Google barge there.

------
__pThrow
I have to say, this puts Vinod Khosla markedly ahead of Tom Perkins.

~~~
ceejayoz
I really don't think this rises to the level of "advocating increases in taxes
on the wealthy is equivalent to the Holocaust"...

~~~
__pThrow
It's actually worse. One is just speech, the other is stealing property from
California.

------
tunnuz
Off topic: the cliff in the first picture totally looks like the place where
the Jackie Treehorn party is being held in The Big Lebowski. Is that it?

------
auvrw
"stay out of malibu, lebowski!"

------
powertower
The story is - he closed off a private road on his private land that leads to
the "public" beach.

Before him, the previous owner charged a fee to use the private road/property.

The media seems to be avoiding these points at all costs, which completely
changes the story.

------
tn13
Beaches have to be public in almost all countries. It is a very sensible thing
to do. Private Property rights are sacrosanct but if every buyer knows that he
can not have a private beach, he can refrain from buying it in first place.

------
meerab
Vinod Khosala should allow public access to the beach with slight
modification. Just charge $3000 access fee per person. If state didn't mind
previous owner charging $3, charging $3000 should not be issue.

------
hownottowrite
[http://books.google.com/books/about/To_Have_Or_To_Be.html?id...](http://books.google.com/books/about/To_Have_Or_To_Be.html?id=JvG85s966koC)

------
amalag
The problem is with the California law which should not only make the beach
public, but there must be reasonable access to that beach.

------
skylar
The first comment on the article is brilliant. Let's crowdsource helicopter
rides to the beach for an all-day surf party.

------
VladRussian2
Sounds like Khosla aren't going to invest in flying cars :)

------
keeptrying
Time to build a bridge over vinod's property!

------
mankypro
Haha, I'm going this weekend...

------
bonemachine
Wow.

Talk about showing one's true colors.

------
michaelochurch
As far as I'm concerned, this sort of move merits Paris 1793 treatment.

The new good-ol'-boy network, the cancer cells of humanity's body, have made a
statement: "We're going to take more and more every day, and we're not going
away unless you force us". Time for some hard-core chemo. It's painful, but
sometimes it's the only option for survival.

The statement is clear. So why waste time arguing? Why foolishly believe that
you can peacefully outperform them when they will fund your competitors to
spite you, use their own social contacts to ruin your reputation, and continue
to corrupt every institution (high-minded or base) from government to
education to business? Time to fuck some shit up. If there is a God, these are
times to live by his (or her, or its) law.

------
stefan_kendall
It's his property. And the state is threatening to reject his development
permits if he doesn't cave to their will.

Fuck the city government. I hope he can keep his private land private.

------
adamnemecek
Maybe he does not want to be disturbed while sunbathing on the beach so that
he can really enjoy the _Sun_.

~~~
ktsmith
I would hope (though I'm probably wrong) that people would know his history
with Sun.

------
aaron695
I'm sorry but I'm just sick of the fat fks who need to drive to a beach then
trespass across someone else land because they are so lazy any attempt at
adventure doesn't satisfy their need for instant gratification.

Why not leave the beach as it is, a secluded beach you need to kayak to, or
take a motor boat if you really must be lazy.

Things earned have value, this constant need to have a road to everything I
find so sad.

