Isn't This Dude Making Us Owners Look Bad?

Come on, blocking public access to a beach???

This dude is hated by everyone in the county…He is kicking all the homeowners, too…The cottages on leased land have till 2021 to vacate…Meanwhile you can a beach house for the price of a trailer…

Since he is indeed the owner, I guess he has his propert rights. If other citizens or government want, they can buy the property and donate for public use.

What he did is perfectly legal. Even if government want to use eminent domain to buy, the owner is entitled to fair compensation. It is unconstitutional to confiscate private property.

There are so many other public beaches, why do they want to target this guy? Is it a political attack since Vinod is a registered Republican even though he supports Democratic senators and Obama?

I will have to hunt down the specifics again, but I believe he owns the really only public access road to the beach. If I remember correctly, if one wanted to not technically trespass onto this dude’s land, you literally would have to come ashore to the beach from the water side.

I’ve been to popular beaches in half moon bay, there are public roads.

I think the so called “public beach” might be a small beach people rarely use. In any case, a private property owner has no obligation to give up his property for free. From the long legal battle, you can guess that the owner has the right.

Media is trying to infringe on private property rights. I support property rights. Those pesky neighbors can’t change the fact and constitution even if they live in a liberal state.

Do not believe the media, never blindly believe the media.

All true, but doesn’t this billionaire have better things to do? Isn’t he concerned about his legacy once he is long gone? I mean, way, way more rich people like Buffet and Gates are GIVING AWAY all their monies…

Generosity should be appreciated, but it should not be a liability. When people are forced to make donations or forfeit their rights, it’s a legacy of mob crime.

We have no rights to force a billionaire to give his property to us. Even a billionaire has his own constitutional right.

We are all commuting crime by believing media blindly and embarrass the billionaire who is doing nothing wrong.

Being less wealthy is not an excuse to violate the law and become a bully.

I am not in disagreement, hence, the best avenue is eminent domain. That is the right of the city/county to buy it from him for the betterment of the public good. One man should not have the right to deny the enjoyment of a public beach for many people.


We need to see how many people are using the beach. If 3 people visit the beach each week, the taxpayers need to decide whether it’s worth the taxpayer fund to buy the property for the few neighbors who have houses sitting on leased land.

I did not follow the story. However, it would not surprise me if the major reason is the neighbor who have houses on other people’s land. Maybe we taxpayers can buy the land and lease to the neighbors for free forever.

Isn’t this logic circular? If the guy is blocking public access of course very few people go there.

I think we can just eminent domain a path cut across his property. It won’t be that expensive and we can all collectively give him a fat middle finger.

1 Like

Ok, I might have to back off…some (if true)


We are all criminals by believing the media blindly. That’s how SF has progressed to its current state. Ironically, even the victims of rent control, including landlords, are zealous in attacking property owners such as Vinod.

I did not even read anything about it. I have seen too many of these activist tricks and lies, and seen too many media distortions and spin. It smells bad. If there is any fault on the property owner, Vinod would have given away his property many years ago. Vinod has actually won the case free and clear. The so called “public beach” is actually private property. What an irony! What a lovely media reporting!!

When they have no basis, when they lose in the court, they would use media to attack. All those stories about Ellis eviction are the same. Landlord has the legal right, activists would form a mafia with media to attack landlord politically, harass them personally. We need Trump to save California, put those illegal activists and distorted media reporters in jail.

Democracy will make everyone part of a mob mafia. Hopefully they will keep the Constitution to avoid a total disaster.

Vinod will have no interest in rent control abolition. He’s already badly attacked by asserting his own property rights. Rent control will be solved by the people, the mob.

Well, but we can argue that some treaty made back in the 1800s really has no bearing today. For all intensive purposes in today’s world that beach is a public beach. Or, it should be made so. Same argument about the right to bear arms (IMHO). Sure, you have every right to a firearm in theory to protect yourself, but do you really need a cache of fully automatic assault rifles and a million rounds of ammo in order to do that or hunt? Questionable.


Judges have ruled that Vinod is right.

I would not want my tax payment is used to buy a beach property. There are already plenty of beaches I can go.

California’s democrat politicians are running out of targets now. Watch out, I hope you will not become the liberals new target of assault.

Fine, eminent domain. End of story, right?

Come on, we landlords have been under fire for how long now. I ain’t worried. Unlike this dude, I understand the limitations and the finality of my life. I prefer to do usually the right thing. The right thing here is to grant public access to the beach. Move on…old man

1 Like

Well, no hope on rent control.

I still hope the Constituion will survive.

How can it not, it is so vague and general…:slight_smile:

I hope the same thing. Under trump I have doubts.

1 Like

The latest appointment to the Cabinet is a concern. Come on, where have all the glaciers???

Come on, Dude, let it go…