this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2025
56 points (98.3% liked)

news

24519 readers
825 users here now

Welcome to c/news! We aim to foster a book-club type environment for discussion and critical analysis of the news. Our policy objectives are:

We ask community members to appreciate the uncertainty inherent in critical analysis of current events, the need to constantly learn, and take part in the community with humility. None of us are the One True Leftist, not even you, the reader.

Newcomm and Newsmega Rules:

The Hexbear Code of Conduct and Terms of Service apply here.

  1. Link titles: Please use informative link titles. Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed.

  2. Content warnings: Posts on the newscomm and top-level replies on the newsmega should use content warnings appropriately. Please be thoughtful about wording and triggers when describing awful things in post titles.

  3. Fake news: No fake news posts ever, including April 1st. Deliberate fake news posting is a bannable offense. If you mistakenly post fake news the mod team may ask you to delete/modify the post or we may delete it ourselves.

  4. Link sources: All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. If you are citing a Twitter post as news, please include the Xcancel.com (or another Nitter instance) or at least strip out identifier information from the twitter link. There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance, such as Libredirect or archive them as you would any other reactionary source.

  5. Archive sites: We highly encourage use of non-paywalled archive sites (i.e. archive.is, web.archive.org, ghostarchive.org) so that links are widely accessible to the community and so that reactionary sources don’t derive data/ad revenue from Hexbear users. If you see a link without an archive link, please archive it yourself and add it to the thread, ask the OP to fix it, or report to mods. Including text of articles in threads is welcome.

  6. Low effort material: Avoid memes/jokes/shitposts in newscomm posts and top-level replies to the newsmega. This kind of content is OK in post replies and in newsmega sub-threads. We encourage the community to balance their contribution of low effort material with effort posts, links to real news/analysis, and meaningful engagement with material posted in the community.

  7. American politics: Discussion and effort posts on the (potential) material impacts of American electoral politics is welcome, but the never-ending circus of American Politics© Brought to You by Mountain Dew™ is not welcome. This refers to polling, pundit reactions, electoral horse races, rumors of who might run, etc.

  8. Electoralism: Please try to avoid struggle sessions about the value of voting/taking part in the electoral system in the West. c/electoralism is right over there.

  9. AI Slop: Don't post AI generated content. Posts about AI race/chip wars/data centers are fine.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

article

FREMONT — A long-simmering battle over public access to a regional park here has reached a literal roadblock.

For years, rancher Christopher George fought with county, city and parks district officials for control of a section of Morrison Canyon Road, a rural route to his property and to Vargas Plateau Regional Park. The war of words over 1,000 feet of the roadway spiraled into lawsuit and allegations of county corruption.

At long last, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors last month voted to hand responsibility of the 0.2-mile stretch over to George, and within weeks the rancher erected a gate. Just as quickly, an old foe — the city of Fremont — has re-emerged to demand the barrier be torn down, arguing the roadway has been part of the city’s jurisdiction since it incorporated in 1956.

In a letter to George’s attorney dated Nov. 6, City Attorney Rafael Alvarado Jr. wrote that the rancher has “illegally constructed an unpermitted gate” across the roadway and that he has “no legal authority” that would allow “a private party to construct a gate over public land.”

“For the past 70 years, the public has used and enjoyed the roadway as a public right of way, and said public use of the roadway has been open, notorious, continuous and adverse to any purported private interest of your client,” Alvarado wrote. George, who is also the CEO of CMG Financial, a mortgage company, did not respond to requests for comment.

The unlikely battleground has been the center of controversy for nearly two decades. In 2008, George and a neighbor filed a lawsuit over traffic and roadway conditions, leading to a settlement in 2012 that delayed the opening of Vargas Plateau Regional Park while East Bay Regional Park District and the city of Fremont spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to improve the road and reduce the number of parking spaces at the park.

While the 1,249-acre public park has other access points for hikers, bikers and horseback riders, it has only one staging area with a parking lot, restrooms and drinking water — which is accessible solely via Morrison Canyon Road.

Map showing the location of 1,000 feet of roadway of which ownership between a regional park in Fremont and a rancher has been in dispute.After settling the suit, George proposed that officials cede ownership of the last 1,000 feet of the road leading to his hundreds-plus acre property. George has claimed that people have used the remote strip of road as a location for sex, drug deals and illegal dumping. Speaking before county supervisors on Oct. 9, he said his family’s safety is at risk and urged the board to approve ceding the land over to him.

“This provides a buffer for us of safety. My wife is at home frequently by herself, either during the day or sometimes at night, and as a result this provides safety for her, but also provides safety for the community,” George told the board. “You have cars trying to turn around, you’ve got bicycle riders trying to turn around, you’ve got pedestrians trying to turn around, you’ve got people pushing baby strollers trying to turn around. It’s just unsafe.”

County Public Works Director Daniel Woldesenbet, in comments to the supervisors, said he considers the land the George family’s “private driveway.”

“It really functions as a driveway, even though it was maintained and looked after by the county,” Woldesenbet said. He also said that the county spent over $200,000 on road maintenance over the past five years, adding that the road is in “very poor repair,” due to “eroded shoulders and sharp drops.”

“It’s very much apparent, at least from a public works point of view, that this roadway right now, as it stands, really serves as a private property,” Woldesenbet said. “We don’t think it’s warranted to continue to spend public funds maintaining that small piece of property or piece of road. And we also consider it to be potentially a hazard because there’s a lot of unsafe conditions on the side of the road for public use.”

The supervisors voted unanimously to surrender the land to George, with Supervisor Nate Miley calling the decision a “no-brainer” and Supervisor David Haubert saying it was “justified” and “warranted.”

Haubert’s office had previously faced blowback for an email his chief of staff sent advocating for “abandoning the right of way” and for accepting a $10,000 campaign donation from George’s mortgage company. At the time, the aide told this news organization he was simply passing along a request from a constituent and was shocked that it had raised any allegation of ill intent.

Jason Bezis, an attorney who represents a group of residents advocating against George’s claim to the roadway, called the rancher a “wily operator.” He said installing the gate was “brazen.”

“The law is very clear on this,” Bezis said Wednesday. “You’re not allowed to decide you’re going to put up a gate and a fence across a public road.”

“Why not leave it alone so people can use it?” added Kelly Abreu, a Fremont resident and advocate with Mission Peak Conservancy. “When we lose public spaces, then we end up having to buy the same amenities. This is not an amenity, really it’s a public asset.”

Others told the supervisors they were ignoring the fact that people regularly use the road.

“Why would the county give away this land when it’s part of the public road that many of us use and enjoy daily?” resident Daphne Lin said. “It seems like this is all made up stuff in order to give away public land just to benefit one particular property owner.”

Alvarado, the Fremont city attorney, warned in his letter that the city would monitor George’s property until the gate was gone. As of Wednesday evening, it was still there.

top 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] unmagical@lemmy.ml 39 points 1 month ago (3 children)

This provides a buffer for us of safety. My wife is at home frequently by herself, either during the day or sometimes at night, and as a result this provides safety for her, but also provides safety for the community.

You're so threatened by the existence of 1/5th of a mile of public road that you need to seize ownership of it? Why don't you retreat into your 100+ acre private compound and leave the rest of us whose housing directly abuts public roads or is stacked in tight construction with NO parking options alone?

You have cars trying to turn around, you’ve got bicycle riders trying to turn around, you’ve got pedestrians trying to turn around, you’ve got people pushing baby strollers trying to turn around. It’s just unsafe.

Are they trying and just can't so they are still there to this day piling up? Or are they succeeding after a 3-5 point turn and would be better served by the seizure of a minuscule portion on the edge of your land to build a roundabout to help them get out of your hair (and boot shaking fear) sooner? "It's just unsafe" how? Fucking prove how a person turning their baby stroller around and leaving the immediate vicinity of your property is so unsafe you need to seize 1/5th of a mile of public road to set your mind at ease.

[–] huf@hexbear.net 28 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

you dont get it, they're using a public road for traffic, and he has to see it! fucking unnatural behavior!

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 10 points 1 month ago

I suspect the road is probably so thin that people are driving all the way down it in order to turn around and he doesn't like them doing that.

[–] Infamousblt@hexbear.net 26 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Don't you know that the existence of other people in the world means that I personally am unsafe? Or something I dunno I'm not a conservative prick

[–] VILenin@hexbear.net 16 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You don't understand, that 8-year-old kid on a bicycle is casing my house so he can come back with his fellow gangsters and murder my entire family

[–] Infamousblt@hexbear.net 23 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I unironically grew up in a household and neighborhood that thinks this way. I had 2 cops show up at my door once because 16 year old me parked my beater half an inch into someone's "yard" (aka the mud next to the road). I know it was a half inch because the guy went out and took a picture of my tire with a tape measure and sent it to the cops (who showed me). The cops rolled up and I was in my driveway washing my car and they walked up with hands on their guns asking if I owned the car. They did not ticket me but told me not to park on that street again or they would.

There are many moments that radicalized me and that certainly was one of them. Property people are seriously broken.

[–] VILenin@hexbear.net 12 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Property rights are completely unhinged in America. Two people were criminally charged with trespassing for doing this:

on the basis that their feet violated private airspace as they “flew” over private land (without touching it) in the process of stepping from one parcel of public land to another. The landowner, a pharmaceutical executive, tried to prevent access to public land by doing this:

two T-posts [were] driven into the private land near the first corners. The posts were chained together, creating an obstacle the ladder overcame. Each post had a “No trespassing” sign and the Elk Mountain Ranch phone number.

Grende complained the hunters had shot a bull elk.

“Mr Grende explained that the area where the three hunters had shot the elk was only accessible to the hunters by means of crossing the private land of the Elk Mountain Ranch,” the affidavit reads.

After they were acquitted the landowner sued them in civil court for 9 million dollars and lost, but only because their property wasn’t physically touched. So it is still legal to block access to public land if you build a tall fence.

Really cool how you can potentially get a criminal record because your foot briefly passed over an inch of Joe Blow’s shitty land

[–] SuperZutsuki@hexbear.net 22 points 1 month ago (2 children)
[–] Crystalline_Prairie_Dog@hexbear.net 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Guy isn't even just a rancher either:

George, who is also the CEO of CMG Financial, a mortgage company, did not respond to requests for comment.

[–] SuperZutsuki@hexbear.net 10 points 1 month ago

Fuck the wall, get in the pit barbara-pit

[–] 9to5@hexbear.net 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

please not my jolly ranchers

[–] huf@hexbear.net 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

alongside john brown, one of the good things america has produced

[–] JoeByeThen@hexbear.net 31 points 1 month ago (3 children)

George has claimed that people have used the remote strip of road as a location for sex, drug deals and illegal dumping.

Hell yeah! Minus the illegal dumping that sounds like a good time. nicholson-yes

[–] buckykat@hexbear.net 17 points 1 month ago

I'm gonna need to see twenty seven eight-by-ten color glossy pictures with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one explaining what each one is to believe the illegal dumping claim

[–] unmagical@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 month ago

Sometimes you just gotta take a deuce in some discarded tires though, ya know?

[–] cmhickman358@hexbear.net 8 points 1 month ago

Add a little Rock 'n Roll and you got yourself a party!

[–] Coolkidbozzy@hexbear.net 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] Are_Euclidding_Me@hexbear.net 17 points 1 month ago (1 children)

This kind of thing happens in rural America waaay more often than you'd think. When I was a kid my dad had a years long standoff with one of our neighbors over a road. The neighbor kept trying to block the road, my dad would get the backhoe out and unblock it, it went to court at least twice, and was so contentious that eventually the neighbors ended up moving because everyone else hated them so much.

Looking back on it now, I'm not entirely sure my dad (and most of the neighborhood) were entirely in the right, there was another road we could use, it was just slightly less convenient.

But yeah, years long fights over county roads seems like a rural america tradition, really!

[–] Coolkidbozzy@hexbear.net 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] HexReplyBot@hexbear.net 1 points 1 month ago

I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:

[–] Awoo@hexbear.net 16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Since the gov laid the road they should just drop by and take it back and leave his gate there. If he wants to own the road he can lay it himself.

[–] VILenin@hexbear.net 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

These types are usually itching for an excuse to murder somebody, the workers would need an armed escort

[–] buckykat@hexbear.net 3 points 1 month ago

Doing Operation Paul Bunyan 2: good this time

[–] Assian_Candor@hexbear.net 7 points 1 month ago
[–] came_apart_at_Kmart@hexbear.net 6 points 1 month ago

it's pretty obviously a case of corruption and quid pro quo with the $10,000 campaign contribution. the county paid $200k to maintain the road, it abuts a public park, and people actively use it. there is no reasonable argument to transfer exclusive use rights with no public-use easement for the portion leading up to this asshole's driveway.

the US is stupid as hell and gives more power to landowners than most countries, but there is so much legal precedent for these types of cases that large property owners and their friends in local government just believe they can ignore because, in their minds, they imagine land ownership makes you some kind of sovereign nation.

during the early settler days, all kinds of asshole land barons and speculators bought strips of land surrounding obviously critical resources and geographic features like gaps and portages, set up toll roads, and set about fleecing everybody. eventually, it was recognized that this was an unstable arrangement because whole areas and communities were organizing to fight battles over it. so all manner of state laws and precedents were established for public right of ways, adverse possession, and eminent domain. no longer could some mind genius be elected mayor and sell main street to his brother for $1 and then set up a toll booth.

literally the only way people get away with shit like what this guy is doing is if it just sort of happens quietly where nobody notices or knows enough to bring a case to a courtroom.

[–] JustSo@hexbear.net 2 points 1 month ago

stirner-cool

This is my road now.