Celebs vs Plebs in the battle of Malibu beach (or "I didn't think that law meant me too!")

The Observer ^ | 5/19/02 | Ed Vulliamy

[LarryLied]

'They're never there and yet they still want it locked up. But it ain't your back yard, buddy'

A great wave is poised to crash ashore along the beaches where Hollywood's rich and beautiful stroll and sun themselves - an invasion not of seawater but of the common people.

The plebeian threat is to Malibu's exclusive colony of film stars, rock idols and moguls of the entertainment business. And it is led by the state of California, now seeking to implement a long-thwarted law that stipulates the sand below high tide along the entire coastline belongs to the citizens of the state and no one else.

Malibu is an endless stretch of dwellings along the coast and mountains north of Los Angeles where a galaxy of stars keep second homes and seaside retreats: Barbara Streisand, Tom Hanks, Diana Ross, Steven Spielberg, Olivia Newton-John, David Geffen, Bob Dylan, Pamela Anderson, Julie Andrews, Goldie Hawn, Courteney Cox, Dustin Hoffman... on and on.

Many of the territories surrounding their homes are adjacent to one another, flanking public beaches and marked out from Pacific Highway One by chain-link fencing. There is, therefore, no practical access from either road or public beach to some of Malibu's best surf and sand. But that is exactly what the California Coastal Commission, a powerful state environmental agency, intends to put right - unleashing a bikini-clad, Frisbee-tossing human tide on to the elite seashore.

California's coastal law draws on the 'public trust doctrine', supposedly dating back to the Byzantine Emperor Justinian whose legal code of AD530 stated that 'the shores of the sea are common to all mankind' and was adopted by the Spanish in their conquest of the western states.

Now California has drawn up plans for 10 public access routes - concentrated along a three-mile strip where there is no public beach access at all - through the Malibu stockade.

The legal basis for the paths is a forgotten right of way which owners of properties were required to offer the state as a condition for building or remodelling the coastline in the 1980s, and which soon expires. The commission proposes eventually to cut a path every 1,000 feet through to Malibu's turquoise ocean and surf.

The Americans have a saying: 'What's the definition of a conservative? A liberal with a teenage daughter.'

Now it is 'a Hollywood liberal with a plan to run a public beach access past his property'.

One of the proposed corridors through the three-mile barrier runs alongside the home of David Geffen, co-founder of the Dreamworks studio with Spielberg. Geffen is reported to have met lawyers with a view to bringing legal action to fight off the people.

The state has approved an environmental group called Access for All to manage the Geffen pathway. He 'appears to be worried about whether busloads of people from Kansas would get their star maps out and peer into his kitchen', says the group's president, Steve Hoye, now raising the $50,000 insurance necessary to open the locked alleyway gate - plus $32,000 a year to pick up rubbish and clear the beach at sunset.

Not so, says Geffen's spokesman Andy Spahn, who insists there are justifications for concern, as only recently Geffen had to shoo an intruder from his living room - and this with a 15-minute trudge through sand dunes to reach the property. Geffen is asking what are described as 'serious questions' about Hoye's finances.

'These people can afford to have a $15 million home for a second home,' retorts Hoye, 'and they're never there, and yet they still want it locked up. But it ain't your back yard, buddy; it belongs to the people.'

Some have argued that the new paths will leave celebrities open to increased crime. But Linda Locklin, director of the commission's beach access programme, says this argument 'masks their true motive: they want to be left alone. It's exclusivity, that's what it is. They're not used to the public and they've gotten very happy with that situation and that's what they would like to continue with.'

Spahn raises the question of amenities - there will be no parking or beach facilities. 'That's what they always say, "Where are these people going to park? Where will they go to the bathroom?",' shrugs Locklin. 'If we said we will condemn their houses for a parking lot and a bathroom, they wouldn't like that better.'

Malibu's history is of a constant battle between the state and the local elite. An eccentric widow, May Ringe, once owned every acre of the place but was bankrupted by an unsuccessful fight to keep California from building the Pacific Highway.

The mayor of Malibu, Jeff Jennings, has now accused the state authorities of 'politicising' the beach access row with populist rhetoric. 'People who have high profiles are very vulnerable,' Jennings pleads on behalf of his unique citizenry.

[LarryLied]

So...is this good or bad?

[mlibertarianj]

There was an earlier article, I read somewhere else, that the local DemonRat official was celebrating the fact, that the state was doing this. I mean that this, guy sounded like a true follower of Che Guevara. To be honest, I would normally would think that what the state is doing is heinous, but considering, who is being affected, like David Geffen, a big donor to X42, maybe he can learn the Golden Rule, do unto others... Paybacks a bite in the @SS, EH DAVE!

[LarryLied]

It looks like a taking to me. The state should buy the land if it wants it. But, like you, perhaps an exception could be made considering those who support tyrannical laws are the ones affected.

So a RAT is going head to head with the KING RATS on this. Wonderful.

Read on FR a while back that Geffen is a despicable charatcer. Uzi toting guards patrol the grounds of his mansion while young men are ferried into parties. Anyone know more?

[Southack]

Heaven forbid that celebs start moving to states that better support private property rights...

[tomball]

Hey, David Geffin - This is exactly what you get when you support democrats: What you perceive as yours, they perceive as theirs. What you work for, they want access to. By the way, it isn't just Malibu that these guys want access to.

[mlibertarianj]

Rereading this story again, I can't help thinking of a couple things. The Celebs are scared of increased crime, May I suggest the Celebs embrace the 2nd Admendment, maybe get shooting lessons from Charlton Heston, second this idea of protecting the so called "unique citizenry", would that definition also apply the farmers of the Klamath Valley, or the people who work in the logging industry, Mayor Jennings? Of course when someone else's ox get gored, the celebs would not give a dilly ding-dong, but now, it will be interesting if Malibu, suddenly discovers the U.S. Constitution. Patriots in Malibu? We'll see.

[Age of Reason]

So...is this good or bad?

It's bad.

Because today the teeming mob hungers for more beaches--but tomorrow, they'll be after your frontyard.

Of course if America were to greatly reduce immigration, then there might be enough beaches and wilderness and parkland and private land to go around.

[Tacis]

These elitists SCREAM when a major storm hits Malibu, they want government (taxpayer) action to fix their beach and undo the damage. But, let one of the little people try to use the state maintained beach and they go balistic.

I have to admit that, were these homes owned by rock-ribbed Republican conservatives, folks of character and good reputation, I might see some of their arguments regarding property rights. But they are not, they are leftie sleazes who profess to hold positions that appear to be against their own interests. The are hypocrits, liars, and lefties.

What the "Free Access to the Public Beach" forces should do, of course, is bus in hundreds of crippled, black inner city kids and photgraph them trying/wanting to get to the public beach. The stars PR folks would go crazy. It would portray these very wealthy lefties as using their resources against the very people the lefties SAY they support.

[kitkat]

Actually, Age, it's GOOD~! They should never have been allowed to build on public rights of way in the first place. Look at it this way--you own a house on a corner. People keep cutting across your lawn. If you permit it for a certain number of years, it becomes a public right of way. If you then put up a fence, you'd be breaking the law. The builders of these properties broke the law. The law is now correcting the situation. I DO believe in the right to own private property, but not land set aside for the people BEFORE someone tries to build on it. You can't build a private home in a park, in the middle of the freeway, or on a public right of way. Where were the attorneys for these multi-millionaires when they examined the titles for them? The search should have shown the rights of way.

[Aim small miss small]

Exactly, I live in LA. and we all are expected to help repair their storm damage , fight their huge fires and despite state law allowing beach access to the public everywhere in the state, these winners of life's lottery illegally employ armed guards to shoo the public from the beach in front of their empty mansions.

[LarryLied]

ABC news tonight said Geffen and others were allowed to build on the beach only if they allowed a right of way. Some how they bottled that up. Until now.

[vance]

**These winners of life's lottery illegally employ armed guards to shoo the public from the beach in front of their empty mansions.

Agree or disagree with what they are doing they are winners because they worked hard and figured out how to flourish. Are you jealous of their success?

[Khepera]

Heaven forbid that celebs start moving to states that better support private property rights...

Oh yea? Where is that?

[Aim small miss small]

Agree or disagree with what they are doing they are winners because they worked hard and figured out how to flourish. Are you jealous of their success?

Tell you what Vance to make you feel better, I will withdraw my attempt at humor, as far as the "life's lotto" thang, but you can stuff your BS about my jealously towards anyone. they aren't the only ones who work hard and neither are you. The beach is not theirs, it belongs to all of us

[daviddennis]

Well, it is rather nasty rhetoric.

Last time I checked, the beaches referred to would not be very appealing to the typical beach visitor - and there are miles of beaches elsewhere in Malibu.

Why wouldn't they be appealing? Miles of nothing but not particularly attractive looking houses, that's why.

Incidentally, the houses referred to run from about $1 million to $8 million. There might be one or two $15 million homes scattered around, but not many. I might add that these nice folks pay taxes commesurate with the value of the property. Considering what that is, I suspect most of them actually pay their own way. If there's a disasterous fire every ten years, and houses cost an average of $1.3 million, the taxes are about $130k per house every ten years. (They might be more; I'm not sure what the actual tax rate is).

D

[NovemberCharlie]

It looks like a taking to me. The state should buy the land if it wants it. But, like you, perhaps an exception could be made considering those who support tyrannical laws are the ones affected.

It appears that the taking already took place; the easements have been there all along, but only now has the government decided to enforce them.

[LarryLied]

Correct. I didn't know that when I made the comment. Don't believe they have any case at all to prevent access.

Connecticut is another story. The state has a history of town beaches and now a court has ruled anyone in the stae should have access. If people from New Haven, Bridgeport and Hartford start using beaches in Madison and Greenwich, property values will dive just as taxes rise to cope with the influx.

2trievers...how's it going in CT? Any effects from this yet?

[2Trievers]

You recall the flap in Greenwich last summer ... and the town fathers passed an ordinance that the daily permit fees will be $50. That kinda' eliminates the folks from the 'hood coming in droves. Too soon to tell about property values. &;-)