Silicon Valley billionaire Vinod Khosla has a brand new critic in his years-long effort to limit public access to a beach on the San Mateo County coast: the richest man on this planet.
On Saturday, Elon Musk criticized Khosla, co-founder of Sun Microsystems, for his actions at Martins Beach, a picturesque sandy beach seven miles south of Half Moon Bay.
“Wow, so crazy that @vkhosla put up this sign on a public beach,” Musk posted on “X,” the social media site formerly referred to as Twitter, which he bought and renamed in 2022.
Musk's post showed a picture of what seemed to be an AI-generated sign on a beach that read, “No rabble-rousing. Property of Vinod Khosla.”
In two separate posts just a few minutes later, Musk added: “Vinod says we should send tens of thousands of unvetted migrants to small towns across America, but he didn't even want to let the public walk on his beach… I'm having a party on Vinod's beach! I'm thinking BBQ for the culinary highlight.”
Wow, so crazy that @vkhosla Place this sign on a public beach pic.twitter.com/ln46n07kvw
– Elon Musk (@elonmusk) 21 September 2024
The Bay Area News Group reported Friday that a San Mateo District Court judge handed Khosla a serious legal defeat Thursday, denying his motions to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the California Coastal Commission and State Lands Commission, which sued him in 2020 to force more public access to the beach. Superior Court Judge Raymond Swope ruled Thursday that the case will move forward, with a hearing scheduled for April.
Responding to Musk's social media attack on Saturday, Khosla criticized him for his recent support of Donald Trump for president. Khosla hosted a fundraiser for President Joe Biden at his Portola Valley home earlier this 12 months before he decided not to hunt re-election.
“I'm with your new mentor @realDonaldTrump when it comes to tweeting fictitious photos, or at least none that I've ever seen,” Khosla wrote. “There was NEVER a dispute over access to the beach (which is public), only access over private property.”
He called Coastal Commission employees “communists” and urged Musk to “educate yourself before tweeting nonsense.”
Keeping up along with your recent mentor @realDonaldTrump tweeting fictitious photos, or not less than none that I actually have ever seen. There was NEVER a dispute over access to the beach (which is public), only access over private property. Every court ruling and appeal by the buddies… https://t.co/5PVE8uxDpH
— Vinod Khosla (@vkhosla) 21 September 2024
Their standoff evolved right into a back-and-forth over immigration, and when Khosla asked if Musk believed the 2020 election was stolen, as Trump falsely claims, Musk replied:
“You don’t even let people use your damn beach, you asshole!”
To which Khosla replied: “Insults and irrelevant fabricated images are the best you can do instead of answering the question: Did Trump's lobbying stop a strong illegal immigration bill that had strong bipartisan support?”
Khosla has said little publicly in regards to the Martins Beach case, but the problem has drawn national attention for greater than a decade. Khosla has called it a case of personal property rights, while politicians, surfers and environmentalists have said the problem could set a precedent for whether California beaches may be closed off by wealthy landowners.
Khosla, 69, is price $7.3 billion, in line with Forbes. Musk, 53, CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, is price $257 billion, in line with Forbes.
The beach fight began greater than 15 years ago. In 2008, Khosla spent $32.5 million to purchase 88 acres of coastal land along Highway 1 that surrounds Martins Beach, a property that had been utilized by families for generations. Two years later, he locked the gates, hired guards and put up “No Trespassing” signs.
Surfers and environmental groups protested, declaring that the beach, which is public along the waterline under coastal law, is flanked by steep cliffs on either side and might subsequently only be accessed by road.
The Coastal Commission told Khosla he needed to use for a permit to shut the gate. The Surfrider Foundation, a nonprofit, sued him over it. After losing the case within the lower courts, he appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the state's landmark coastal law, passed by voters in 1972, was “Orwellian” and unconstitutional.
In 2018, the Supreme Court rejected the case, leaving in place lower court rulings that Khosla couldn’t close the gate on the half-mile road without permission from the Coastal Commission since the Coastal Code requires permits when landowners change public access to beaches.
Today, Khosla leaves the gate open at different times so people can drive a half-mile to a car parking zone near the beach and pay $10 to park. Five years ago, he won one other case when a small nonprofit group, Friends of Martins Beach, sued him, claiming the general public had a historic right to the road since it had been utilized by generations of families.
But then the Coastal Commission and State Lands Commission sued him in 2020 over the identical issue, this time presenting letters, photographs and other evidence from greater than 200 families dating to the Nineteen Twenties showing they used the road and beach, often without paying.
If Khosla loses the most recent case, it’ll be virtually not possible for him to get a permit from the Coastal Commission to shut the gate. The commission would likely declare the parking fee illegal, and the state could high quality him tens of tens of millions of dollars. If Khosla wins, he could have a stronger argument for closing the gate — namely, that there was never any legal public access to the beach.
Instead of answering the query, the most effective you may do is use name-calling and irrelevant made-up images: Did Trump's lobbying stop an illegal immigration bill that had strong bipartisan support? https://t.co/ZGKaIteH62
— Vinod Khosla (@vkhosla) 21 September 2024
Originally published:
image credit : www.mercurynews.com