5 ms·

Tell me that the homeowners who put up the misleading signs get fined, preferably heavily, knowing how wealthy those homeowners likely are.

beat 13y ago
Probably not. It's INTENDED to be an exclusive neighborhood. The city government is probably rigged to maximum effectiveness at protecting the interests of the wealthy and exclusive. So doing things that impede the rabble is probably rewarded, not punished.
- IvyMike 13y ago
  "Keep your ugly, fucking, gold-bricking ass out of my beach community, Lebowski!"
  - baseh 13y ago
    While we are on movie quotes, on similar lines from Supertroopers: College Boy 2: No, man, I'm just saying... I'm sayin', if-if you own beachfront property, right, do you own, like, the sand and the water? College Boy 3: Nobody owns the water. God owns - it's God's water.
  - RDeckard 13y ago
    Haha, golden, classic line! Came here to post it, came into my head seconds after reading the article :)
- sharkweek 13y ago
  100% Correct -- the reality here is that the city council is likely to respond to the wealthy tax payers. The last thing the city wants is a mass exodus of the wealthy on the hunt for more private beach property.
  - sageikosa 13y ago
    > more private beach property Which would be where exactly?
    - khuey 13y ago
      Not anywhere in the state of California, that's for sure.
- corin_ 13y ago
  > It's INTENDED to be an exclusive neighborhood. Since when? And I mean that in a "can you elaborate on how that happened", not a sarcastic way. My only knowledge of the history of Malibu comes from Rob Lowe's autobiography - he moved there as a young teenager / pre-teen (11-13 I think) with a slightly hippy mother who was looking for cleaner air than Ohio had to offer. Anyway, he describes 70s/80s Malibu as very different from what it is today, much more laid back, much less rich-people-focused (although even back then he had, as an example, Martin Sheen + family as neighbors), worth noting that when Lowe moved his family were probably somewhere between working and middle class, and they fitted in fine. It seems easy to understand why Malibu could become so expensive and lived in by only super-rich and celebrities - that's basic economics of supply and demand - but at what point, and why, did it get to a point where you say "it's INTENDED to be an exclusive neighborhood"?
  - joonix 13y ago
    It's just a natural progression. I'm sure if you go just a bit further up the coast and away from "the money" of Los Angeles you will find laid back coastal communities.
raverbashing 13y ago
So, it's like Copyright trolls, but for property
aliston 13y ago
The section mentioned in the misleading sign isn't even the right section. 602(n) appears to deal with motor vehicles?... 602(n) "Driving any vehicle, as defined in Section 670 of the Vehicle Code, upon real property belonging to, or lawfully occupied by, another and known not to be open to the general public, without the consent of the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession."
- untog 13y ago
  Seems pretty simple. Search local laws for "not open to the general public", copy, paste, boom.
TylerE 13y ago
Isn't there a free speech issue here? Can't they put up signs proclaiming whatever they want on their own property?. Yes, I am aware that there are some specific public-safety oriented exceptions, like impersonating police, but I don't see that here. Scumbag? Yes, but it absolutely should not be illegal.
- aidenn0 13y ago
  Fraud is typically not protected by free speech rights. For example, if you put up a fraudulent "No Parking" sign on your property so that people wouldn't park on the curb next to your house, that would be illegal even if it were on your property.
- bernardom 13y ago
  Isn't this very close to impersonating police? Impersonating the government? Google says yes, in certain cases: "http://blog.lawinfo.com/2011/03/23/impersonating-a-government-employee-a-quick-way-to-end-up-in-federal-prison/" http://blog.lawinfo.com/2011/03/23/impersonating-a-governmen...
  - TylerE 13y ago
    That's talking about impersonating a government _employee_.
- mbreese 13y ago
  I don't know... Some of those signs look like they are government signs, and that could be a public safety issue.
- Groxx 13y ago
  Public beaches and their required-to-be-public access points presumably aren't private property, and I'd bet that those 'no parking' signs are on public property as well, given that the parking spaces themselves are apparently public.
  - TylerE 13y ago

beat 13y ago

Probably not. It's INTENDED to be an exclusive neighborhood. The city government is probably rigged to maximum effectiveness at protecting the interests of the wealthy and exclusive. So doing things that impede the rabble is probably rewarded, not punished.

IvyMike 13y ago
"Keep your ugly, fucking, gold-bricking ass out of my beach community, Lebowski!"
- baseh 13y ago
  While we are on movie quotes, on similar lines from Supertroopers: College Boy 2: No, man, I'm just saying... I'm sayin', if-if you own beachfront property, right, do you own, like, the sand and the water? College Boy 3: Nobody owns the water. God owns - it's God's water.
- RDeckard 13y ago
  Haha, golden, classic line! Came here to post it, came into my head seconds after reading the article :)
sharkweek 13y ago
100% Correct -- the reality here is that the city council is likely to respond to the wealthy tax payers. The last thing the city wants is a mass exodus of the wealthy on the hunt for more private beach property.
- sageikosa 13y ago
  > more private beach property Which would be where exactly?
  - khuey 13y ago
    Not anywhere in the state of California, that's for sure.
corin_ 13y ago
> It's INTENDED to be an exclusive neighborhood. Since when? And I mean that in a "can you elaborate on how that happened", not a sarcastic way. My only knowledge of the history of Malibu comes from Rob Lowe's autobiography - he moved there as a young teenager / pre-teen (11-13 I think) with a slightly hippy mother who was looking for cleaner air than Ohio had to offer. Anyway, he describes 70s/80s Malibu as very different from what it is today, much more laid back, much less rich-people-focused (although even back then he had, as an example, Martin Sheen + family as neighbors), worth noting that when Lowe moved his family were probably somewhere between working and middle class, and they fitted in fine. It seems easy to understand why Malibu could become so expensive and lived in by only super-rich and celebrities - that's basic economics of supply and demand - but at what point, and why, did it get to a point where you say "it's INTENDED to be an exclusive neighborhood"?
- joonix 13y ago
  It's just a natural progression. I'm sure if you go just a bit further up the coast and away from "the money" of Los Angeles you will find laid back coastal communities.

raverbashing 13y ago

So, it's like Copyright trolls, but for property

aliston 13y ago

The section mentioned in the misleading sign isn't even the right section. 602(n) appears to deal with motor vehicles?... 602(n) "Driving any vehicle, as defined in Section 670 of the Vehicle Code, upon real property belonging to, or lawfully occupied by, another and known not to be open to the general public, without the consent of the owner, the owner’s agent, or the person in lawful possession."

untog 13y ago
Seems pretty simple. Search local laws for "not open to the general public", copy, paste, boom.

TylerE 13y ago

Isn't there a free speech issue here? Can't they put up signs proclaiming whatever they want on their own property?. Yes, I am aware that there are some specific public-safety oriented exceptions, like impersonating police, but I don't see that here. Scumbag? Yes, but it absolutely should not be illegal.

aidenn0 13y ago
Fraud is typically not protected by free speech rights. For example, if you put up a fraudulent "No Parking" sign on your property so that people wouldn't park on the curb next to your house, that would be illegal even if it were on your property.
bernardom 13y ago
Isn't this very close to impersonating police? Impersonating the government? Google says yes, in certain cases: "http://blog.lawinfo.com/2011/03/23/impersonating-a-government-employee-a-quick-way-to-end-up-in-federal-prison/" http://blog.lawinfo.com/2011/03/23/impersonating-a-governmen...
- TylerE 13y ago
  That's talking about impersonating a government _employee_.
mbreese 13y ago
I don't know... Some of those signs look like they are government signs, and that could be a public safety issue.
Groxx 13y ago
Public beaches and their required-to-be-public access points presumably aren't private property, and I'd bet that those 'no parking' signs are on public property as well, given that the parking spaces themselves are apparently public.
- TylerE 13y ago