3 ms·
What a terrible shock that must have been for him, to realize this fact only after having purchased the property.
by aYsY4dDQ2NrcNzA 7y ago
What a terrible shock that must have been for him, to realize this fact only after having purchased the property.
- tempsy 7y agoFeels like an edge case to me. Not exactly something someone who buys a private property would think would be possible e.g. to have to pay for upkeep for public property. Seems like the gov’t should figure out some sort of reimbursement program in situations like this.
- ng12 7y agoI'm sure a surveyor would have informed him of California law.
- tempsy 7y agoit's not really my point. the law is deficient in the sense that it doesn't cover this edge case. so why not address the edge case? IMO Khosla should present some numbers on how much it would reasonably cost to maintain whatever land he owns that would be used by the public to get to the beach and the gov't should agree to reimburse some reasonable expense on a quarterly basis.
- aYsY4dDQ2NrcNzA 7y agoThat would make sense if the government had installed the beach after Khosla's purchase.
- s0rce 7y agoYou are responsible for making yourself aware of any public easements or responsibilities within the property before you purchase it.
- mindslight 7y agoThis isn't an edge case, but rather the standard experience of living somewhere that gets snow and has sidewalks. But really Khosla isn't being told that he has to maintain improvements to the right of way, but rather to simply stop obstructing it.
- FireBeyond 7y agoAmazing that his lawyers are more versed with the concept of land deeds dating back to pre-California Mexico, than they are of easements. And the government has never demanded he maintain, at his own expense (mind you, he spent months paying $10k/day fines over this). Just that the access is there.