|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
A years-long legal battle involving the city of Dublin and the owners of a parcel in town is poised for a trial by jury next year as both sides butt heads over control of the land.
The contended property is an approximately 8.8-acre parcel located at 2061 Collier Canyon Road, a site through which the proposed Dublin Boulevard extension would pass to reach North Canyons Parkway in Livermore.
Ongoing litigation began when the city initiated a lawsuit in September 2023 alleging unlawful, dangerous and substandard conditions on site. It named responsible entities as joint property owners Town and Country H Fund LLC and CHMH Dublin LLC; then-tenant Brad Benson Motorsports Corporation, doing business as East Bay Trailers.com; and Fremont Bank.
During the case so far, an Alameda County Superior Court judge has ordered the abatement of alleged violations, the city has unsuccessfully requested transfer of the property to a receiver and the defendants have filed a cross-complaint alleging the city interfered with a potential property sale agreement.
“I just think they got a bee in their bonnet about us and this property, and they kind of lost rational reason,” CHMH Dublin member Clifford Horner told the Pleasanton Weekly. “I would think that they would have other things to do with their time and their money, but I guess not.”
City of Dublin officials decline to comment on the case, given its status as ongoing litigation.
Initially, two businesses operated on the Collier Canyon property with East Bay Trailers in the front section of the site and a business processing mulch and dirt for sale in the back, according to Brad Cavanagh, member of Town and Country.
According to Horner, the city verbally approved both uses.
However, the city initiated a lawsuit Sept. 28, 2023 alleging unpermitted business activities and a public nuisance due to the unpermitted storage and sale of trailers and golf carts on site.
As described in the city’s legal complaint, it issued a notice of violation to the property owners and East Bay Trailers in August 2022 due to the alleged presence of about 80 to 100 utility trailers and an East Bay Trailers sign inconsistent with the Dublin Municipal Code.
The city issued a final notice regarding the same violations after staff observed noncompliance at the site during November 2022, according to the city’s outside attorney, Daniel K. Ohl.
By mid-August 2023, no steps were taken to eliminate violations, according to Ohl.
According to Horner, the city indicated that evicting the tenant would solve the issue — which the owners did to East Bay Trailers in January 2024, he said.
“We evicted that tenant because we just didn’t want to have this big fight with the city,” Horner explained.
But the city later filed amended complaints, alleging code violations including an electrical service panel in disrepair; accumulation of dirt, litter or debris; overgrown vegetation and weeds; various piles of lumber and conducting business without a business license.
Borkon ordered the defendants to abate code violations on the property, in a preliminary injunction order Sept. 23, 2025.
About six months later, the city filed a motion requesting the property’s transfer to a receiver due to the alleged failure to abate code violations.
Alameda County Superior Court Judge Peter Borkon denied the request for a receiver April 29, 2026.
“The City argues a receivership is necessary and appropriate to prevent a significant fire risk, preserve the property, and end illegal business operations,” Borkon wrote.
The owners have made a “credible effort” to comply with the previous court order, the judge reasoned.
Borkon added, the city did not identify the remaining violations before filing the motion for appointment of a receiver. “This suggests that the City chose the drastic remedy of a receivership over communicating with Owners’ counsel regarding the remaining violations,” he wrote.
Regarding the on-site business, the owners filed an application with the city in August 2025 for a business permit — the city’s counsel acknowledged the application in court, Borkon wrote.
Dublin counsel said the city prepared its response stating a pending application in November 2025, but owners did not receive the response until February 2026 due to an administrative error by a third party, according to the judge. “Failure to acknowledge that lapse when the City conducted an inspection on March 13, 2026 boarders (sic) on disingenuous,” he wrote.
As for the alleged dirt, overgrown vegetation and mulch on site, Borkon said there was conflicting evidence about its presence. “Owners argue – not unreasonably – that removing all dirt and mulch from agricultural land is not realistic,” the judge added.
The city does not seek removal of all the material, its attorney argued, just compliance with the preliminary injunction order from September 2025.
Even if all the submitted evidence were accepted, the conditions on the property do not warrant the “drastic” remedy of a receivership, according to the judge.
“The conflicting evidence further indicates that the requested receivership is unnecessary because Owners are attempting to bring the property into compliance,” Borkon added.
Earlier this month, mounds of dirt and wood on the property were taller than a truck in some areas.
The dirt on site is intended to level the ground for the construction of the Dublin Boulevard extension, Cavanagh explained. They willing to give the city a portion of the property for the proposed roadway extension, he added.
As the city pursued its line of allegations, the owners filed a twice amended crosscomplaint, Sept. 30, 2025 for eminent domain/taking, constitutional due process violation, interference with contract, intentional and negligent interference with prospective economic advantage, vicarious liability of public employees and declaratory/injunctive relief.
“We cross-complained against the city for not allowing us to do anything with our land without their express say-so and that’s a taking,” Horner said.
The city challenged the cross-complaint, but Borkon overruled the majority of the city’s demurrer. He sustained all of the owners’ claims except their allegation of the city violating constitutional due process.
“We had a buyer for the property, a large multi-billion dollar company … it was for warehouse and transportation and that’s absolutely allowed under the zoning for that property,” Horner told the Weekly. “The city, though, went ahead and told our buyer that that’s not allowed under the zoning because they didn’t want that”.
The potential buyer walked away from a $14.5 million contract, according to Horner.
“The city knew about the agreement between Town and Country and Old Dominion, misrepresented what use was allowed at the property, intentionally withheld material information, and refused to accept a development application, which caused the agreement to fail,” the cross-complaint states.
Horner expressed doubt that a different buyer will come forward.
“There’s no way that we’re gonna be able to do anything with this property, and that’s the way the city likes it. They like to be, and they want to be, the sole arbiters of what goes in there and that’s not allowed,” Horner said.
Town and Country seeks compensation for the alleged “taking of the property”, according to the cross-complaint. The company also sought a court order directing the city to identify steps needed to restore power unavailable to the property.
“What they have done to us will permanently damage our ability to sell that property at a fair market value,” Cavanagh said.
Litigation against the city has cost nearly $1 million, according to Cavanagh.
When asked how much the city has paid in legal fees related to the lawsuit to date, Dublin officials did not respond by the time of publication.
Prior to the series of litigation, the city of Dublin in 2022 was slated to discuss purchase of the property during the closed sessions of at least two Dublin City Council meetings. Other properties in the right-of-way were also poised for negotiation during the closed sessions.
However, negotiations for the Collier Canyon property never occurred, according to Dublin assistant city manager Hazel Wetherford.
Looking ahead to 2027, the case is scheduled for a mandatory settlement conference Aug. 26, followed by a pre-trial conference Sept. 15 and a jury trial Sept. 27.
San Mateo County sheriff's deputy seeks mental health diversion in Livermore child abuse caseSeptember 13, 2026 11:32 pm
LVJUSD to present 2025-26 budget reports showing ‘resilient financial position’September 14, 2026 3:15 pm
