3 ms·
Why not? She's not trying to crush him. Her goal is to provide access to the beach--which these solutions would. It would obviously be great if he just went al
by mattkrause 9y ago
Why not?
She's not trying to crush him. Her goal is to provide access to the beach--which these solutions would. It would obviously be great if he just went along with the legal requirements, but moving the road or getting a non-profit to operate a gate is better than a protracted court battle, and it wouldn't hurt if everyone ended up happy at the end.
- toomuchtodo 9y agoBut it would hurt if everyone ended up happy in the end; it would reinforce the bad behavior of billionaires who believe they're above the law.
- toast0 9y agoResolving the dispute in a way that everyone is happy with may reinforce bad behavior in that you can get away with closing the path for N years; but at the end of the day, if there is equivalent access to the beach with the old path and a new path that the landowner is happier with, the public still has the same access going forward as they did before, and it likely would have been allowed if he had gone through permits. So it also shows that in the end, even billionaires need to follow the law; and that its probably a better use of their time to work with the commission to find a good solution, instead of to fight the law.
- honestoHeminway 9y agoThey are, by making the law..