3 ms·

It would be right for California to purchase the property via eminent domain. There is an existing mechanism, and I don't see why California doesn't do this ra

It would be right for California to purchase the property via eminent domain. There is an existing mechanism, and I don't see why California doesn't do this rather than demanding a private citizen open his private property at a loss. This is like that bookstore in NYC, only Khosla is a Big Bad Billionaire so I see very different attitudes of "Oh, he can afford it." I'm not saying Khosla should keep the beach, but right is right; if California wants a public beach, she should re-purchase and pay for it.

ceejayoz 7y ago
He didn't purchase the beach. It was already California's beach.
- xyzzyz 7y ago
  This is 100% false. The California court has explicitly ruled that the beach was never owned by the state. https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2193&context=elq https://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?art...
jjeaff 7y ago
Sure, if that was the law. But I don't think California law requires ca to purchase the land via eminent domain. The law is especially for this case where an easement is a defacto requirement when dealing with beach access. The legal process of emminent domain would be far too cumbersome for the many hundreds of miles of California beach line.