Silicon Valley billionaire Vinod Khosla is facing a new critic in his years-long effort to limit public beach access along the San Mateo County coast: the world's richest man.
On Saturday, Elon Musk attacked Khosla, the co-founder of Sun Microsystems, over Khosla's actions at Martins Beach, a picturesque stretch of sand seven miles south of Half Moon Bay.
“Wow, that’s crazy that @vkhosla would put this sign on a public beach,” Musk posted on X, the social media site formerly known as Twitter that he bought and renamed in 2022.
Musk posted a photo of a sign on a beach that appeared to be created by artificial intelligence, reading: “No public allowed. Owned by Vinod Khosla.”
In separate posts minutes later, Musk added: “Vinod says we should send tens of thousands of unauthorized immigrants to small cities across America, but he won’t even let the public walk on his beach… I’m having a party at Vinod’s Beach! As for the kitchen, I’m thinking BBQ.”
Wow, that's so crazy. @Fkosla Put this sign on a public beach. pic.twitter.com/ln46n07kvw
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 21, 2024
A San Mateo County Circuit Court judge ruled in a significant legal loss to Khosla on Thursday, denying his motions to dismiss a lawsuit from the California Coastal Commission and the State Lands Commission, which sued him in 2020 to force more public access to the beach, Bay Area News reported Friday. Superior Court Judge Raymond Swope ruled Thursday that the case will move forward, with a trial scheduled for April.
In response to Musk’s social media attack on Saturday, Khosla criticized him for his recent endorsement of Donald Trump in the presidential election. Khosla hosted a fundraiser at his Portola Valley home earlier this year for President Joe Biden before Biden decided not to run for reelection.
“I'm trying to keep up with your new guru @realDonaldTrump tweeting out imaginary or at least never seen before pictures. There was never a dispute over access to the beach (which is public), it was access through private property,” Khosla wrote.
He referred to Coastal Commission employees as “communists” and told Musk, “Get the details before you tweet nonsense.”
Keeping up with your new teacher @realdonald trump In tweeting imaginary pictures or at least I have never seen one. There was never a dispute over access to the beach (which is public), but rather access was through private property. Every court ruling and appeal from friends… https://t.co/5PVE8uxDpH
— Vinod Khosla (@vkhosla) September 21, 2024
The confrontation between them turned into a back-and-forth argument over immigration, and after Khosla asked if Musk believed the 2020 election was stolen, as Trump falsely claims, Musk responded:
“You won't even let people use your damn beach, you idiot!”
“Calling names and irrelevant pictures is the best you can do instead of answering the question: Did Trump stop it by pushing through a strong illegal immigration bill that had strong bipartisan support?” Khosla responded.
Khosla has not made any public comments on the Martinez Beach case. But the case has drawn national attention for more than a decade. Khosla has called the case a private property rights issue, while political leaders, surfers and environmental activists have said the case could set a precedent on whether California beaches can be closed by wealthy landowners.
Khosla, 69, is worth $7.3 billion, according to Forbes. Musk, 53, the CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, is worth $257 billion, according to Forbes.
The beach battle began more than 15 years ago. In 2008, Khosla spent $32.5 million to buy 88 acres of coastal land along Highway 1 surrounding Martins Beach, a property that had been used by families for generations. Two years later, he locked the gates, hired guards and posted no-trespassing signs.
Surfers and environmental groups protested. They pointed out that the beach, which is considered public along the waterline under the Coastal Code, is surrounded on both sides by steep cliffs, so a road is the only way to access it.
The Coastal Commission told Khosla he would have to apply for a permit to close the gate. The Surfrider Foundation, a nonprofit, sued him over the issue. After losing that case in the lower courts, Khosla appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, arguing that the state’s landmark 1972 coastal law was “Orwellian” and unconstitutional.
In 2018, the Supreme Court declined to take up the case. The justices upheld lower court rulings that Khosla could not close the gate across the half-mile road without a permit from the Coastal Commission because the Coastal Code requires permits if landowners alter public access to beaches.
Today, Khosla leaves the gate open at various times, allowing people to drive a half-mile to a parking lot near the beach and pay $10 to park. Five years ago, he won a different lawsuit when a small nonprofit, Friends of Martins Beach, sued him, claiming the public had a historic right of way because it had been used by generations of families.
But then the Coastal Commission and the State Lands Commission sued him in 2020 over the same issue, this time presenting letters, photos and other evidence from more than 200 families dating back to the 1920s proving they had used the road and beach, often without paying any money.
If Khosla loses the latest case, it will be nearly impossible for him to get permission from the Coastal Commission to close the gate. The commission could rule that the parking fees are illegal, and the state could impose fines of tens of millions of dollars. If Khosla wins, he may have a stronger argument for closing the gate—that public access to the beach was never legal.
Throwing out irrelevant names and images is the best you can do instead of answering the question: Did Trump stop it by pushing through a strong illegal immigration bill that had strong bipartisan support? https://t.co/ZGKaIteH62
— Vinod Khosla (@vkhosla) September 21, 2024
Originally published:
“Extreme travel lover. Bacon fanatic. Troublemaker. Introvert. Passionate music fanatic.”
More Stories
Murdoch family drama escalates in court as Fox News' fate hangs in the balance | Rupert Murdoch
The Federal Reserve is close to getting approval for a massive interest rate cut.
Amazon says no to remote work