Not many individuals are eager to publicize their disputes with neighbors, and Elon Musk is no exception.
In March, Musk’s team engaged with officials from the upscale city of Westlake Hills, Texas, while keeping details about his mansion and security measures under wraps.
In emails, employees from Tech Bylionaire requested Westlake Hills officials to release their private information in April. They pointed out Musk’s involvement with the Trump administration as grounds for considering his property records and communications with the city exempt from state and federal public records regulations, according to the email.
One of Musk’s employees mentioned in a March 3 email that homeowners should be exempt from public disclosure as they are “federal civil servants,” and that “federal clearance documents can be provided if required.”
At age 53, Musk aimed to shield his neighbors from tensions surrounding the construction of a 16-foot chain-link fence and a metal gate equipped with cameras near his apartment complex. He modified the property without the necessary permits, violating six city ordinances, and sought to address the matter retroactively.
However, Musk’s attempt to safeguard his privacy was unsuccessful. City lawyers in Westlake Hills opposed the closure meeting, as shown by emails. Recently, at a Zoning and Planning Committee meeting, Musk’s appeal to keep the fence and gate on his property was denied. This matter will be discussed in a city council meeting originally set for May 14 but postponed to June 11 at the request of the applicant.
Fletcher declined to comment on the city’s records, and Musk’s team did not respond to requests for comment.
The 6,900-square-foot mansion in Westlake Hills is one of three properties Musk has acquired in recent years for his children and mother. This apartment complex, located at the end of a street lined with four homes, served as Musk’s base during his stays in Austin and became central to his expanding security business. He acquired the property in 2022 through a limited liability company.
Following the installation of the 16-foot fence and separate gates, neighbors raised concerns regarding traffic and the structure’s impact on the neighborhood. Consequently, officials in Westlake Hills initiated an investigation.
By March, Musk’s staff expressed concern that documents they had submitted to the city might be disclosed, according to the email. Tisha Litta, a licensing officer working for Musk’s limited liability company, reached out to the city requesting a hearing to discuss keeping the property issues private.
Inna Kaplun, identified as a lawyer representing a “real estate owner,” also contacted the city asserting that owners should be exempt from hearings due to the presence of numerous security personnel on-site, including former federal agents. Citing Texas law, the lawyers contended that agencies are not required to hold public meetings to deliberate on matters involving “security officers or devices.”
Musk’s team and city officials convened at least once in March to discuss the property, per the email. In mid-March, the Westlake Hills city attorney challenged Musk’s request for a private hearing, referencing the Texas Open Meeting Act in an email.
During a meeting of the Public Zoning and Planning Committee last month, city employees recommended that Musk be allowed to keep the fences and gates that were erected without permission, although minor adjustments were deemed necessary. Meeting records indicate that several committee members inquired about the proposal.
Ultimately, the committee voted in favor of recommending that the city council deny Musk’s exception for his project.
Source: www.nytimes.com
