County supervisor blasts Fremont on public-access controversy over rancher’s gate

An Alameda County supervisor is calling out what he sees as hypocrisy on the part of Fremont officials in the gate controversy that has divided residents in the rural hills, as the ongoing public-access dispute escalates into a clash between city and county.

Supervisor David Haubert told this news organization that Fremont officials are “making a big deal out of nothing” in their ongoing effort to bring down the gate constructed by Christopher George, CEO of mortgage lender CMG Financial, that currently blocks about 1,000 feet of public roadway in front of George’s property.

While the county’s Board of Supervisors previously ceded its partial responsibility for the road to George, the city maintains that Fremont still controls the right of way and that George cannot block access to it. During busy days at the nearby Vargas Plateau Regional Park, many visitors previously used the disputed roadway to park and access the surrounding trails when the public lot was full.

City officials are threatening to fine George, who herds bison on his property, at least $100 for every day that the gate remains up. George has appealed the city’s order, with a public hearing on the matter tentatively set for March 16.

But Haubert says the city has no right to criticize George’s decisions about a road to which they’ve “never, ever, ever paid any attention” — and that they should cede stewardship of the small stretch of roadway to George, as the county did — since Fremont officials will only continue to ignore it.

“They’ve never chip sealed it, they’ve never cleaned the gutters, they’ve never removed litter, they’ve never enforced late-night activity,” Haubert told this news organization. “They’ve never paid one iota of attention to this road.”

Fremont Mayor Raj Salwan rejected that assertion, saying the city has maintained the road’s right of way for 70 years. He said that unlike the county, city officials are upholding their civic duty to the public interest in the road.

“The city’s role is to protect public safety and protect public access, especially where there is an established right of way,” Salwan said. “We want to protect public access and public safety, and we just want to make sure public rules are followed.”

George, who has repeatedly ignored multiple requests for comment from this news organization, has previously claimed that the gate was necessary to protect his property and family from nuisances, such as alleged sex, drug deals and illegal dumping on the strip of road.

Clark Morrison, George’s attorney, claimed in a letter to the city that the gate is “constructed entirely on private property,” and that “it is not legally possible” that his client violated any municipal code in the gate’s construction. He demanded the city rescind the order for its removal.

Fremont’s city attorney Rafael Alvarado Jr. wrote in a letter to George that use of the roadway behind George’s gate “has been open, notorious, continuous, and adverse to any purported private interest” by George.  He also added that George has “no legal authority” that would allow “a private party to construct a private gate over public land.”

City officials said that they have not yet fined George for the gate, and that any possible disciplinary action is pending the outcome of the hearing.

Haubert said the county “already made our decision for good reason,” following the board’s unanimous decision in October 2025 to hand responsibility of the road to George — making George responsible for its maintenance and care.

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.

Now, Haubert said, the gate issue has become an unnecessary distraction for all involved.

“We have better things to do than create a multi-jurisdictional quagmire,” he said.

But Salwan said the legal battle doesn’t impede the city’s other efforts and that “we’re not stopping anything” because of the gate issue.

“We’re just trying to follow the process and have a hearing and allow for a transparent process for everyone so anyone can present their case,” Salwan said. “We just want folks to work well and try to get this resolved.”