Hill rationalizes verbal assault on Thoma

December 21, 2012

Adam Hill

(EDITOR’S NOTE: On Friday, Adam Hill distributed an email apologizing for his attack on Bill Thoma, promising to be more civil in the future in his dealings with the public. That was preceded by CalCoastNews’ publication of this rambling self-justification of his earlier actions. See Hill’s comments in “Opinion.”)

County Supervisor Adam Hill issued a lengthy and impassioned apologia Thursday defending his vitriolic attack a day earlier on local business owner Bill Thoma amidst a dispute about location of a proposed homeless facility.

Responding to a flood of criticism following publication of his churlish commentary to Thoma, the District Three supervisor sent an email to himself, apparently to conceal the identity of his intended recipient.

Hill titled the email “Some salient facts regarding the proposed Homeless Services Center,” and noted, “This is all I have to say at this point on the clash with Bill Thoma. Very sorry to have created any anxiety for you.”

Thoma is out of town and unavailable for comment.

Hill’s email is reprinted here verbatim:

“A committee made up of city and county staff and homeless service providers evaluated a series of city and county owned properties for a new center because the Maxine Lewis Shelter is a dilapidated modular building that can’t properly meet the needs of homeless care and services.

“This committee spent nearly two years (2007-2009) in this process before contacting me about the county owned site on South Higuera next to our Department of Social Services.. I agreed then (May 2009) to speak with county administration and General Services about the availability of the property. Once it was determined it could be used for this important
public need, and once my colleagues on the Board of Supervisors agreed to have the property used for this, I joined a larger committee focused on planning for and entitling the property.

“As you know, in both processes, other sites and buildings were considered and evaluated. The county site on S. Higuera was deemed best and most practical each time (I had no role in these evaluations, just as I had no role in selecting the property to begin with).

“As you know, finding a location for a new homeless center is perhaps the most difficult land use related task. It is understood that a center focused on self-sufficiency services must be centrally located, but at the same time it is optimal for it to be located with the minimal amount of residential and retail areas surrounding it.

“Once we began work to plan for the property on South Higuera, we decided to publicize it as best we could so that we could receive feedback and gauge the issues of opposition. (Local media) reported on the plans and efforts, including the approvals at the Airport Land Use Commission and the city’s Planning Commission. Both TV stations also covered it extensively.

“Bill Thoma was opposed to the site, he registered that opposition at both public hearings and with the CAPSLO. It was promised and also conditioned that he would be involved/informed as efforts moved forward.

“For 16 months after the last public hearing, CAPSLO organized a capital campaign and began pursuing a quiet period fundraising campaign.  For a host of reasons, including renewed and broader opposition led by Bill Thoma, it was agreed that the public capital campaign should be delayed, better outreach efforts deployed, and revisions on design, policies, and practices should be pursued.

“There were several outreach meetings, meetings with committees of the SLO Chamber, and efforts to include more people from the business community in the newly constituted planning process.  Along with others from the SLO Chamber, Bill Thoma was included on a committee of leaders from the city, county, and CAPSLO.

“At no time did Bill Thoma express that he would always and forever be opposed to the South Higuera site. When he was told that we would make substantial changes to policies, procedures, and design, he was pleased, and when drafts of the documents were presented for input, Bill provided us with substantial feedback and suggestions.

“At the same time, Bill Thoma strongly encouraged that 40 Prado Rd be considered as an alternative. This site had been evaluated previously by city staff and some engineers from Cannon. It was determined that it had a variety of challenges hat would substantially add to the cost of development. Still, CAPSLO gathered more information. While Bill Thoma continued to insist that this site was better than the free, entitled one on South Higuera, it was explained to him that it made no sense to keep pursuing a property that would cost at least $2 million to acquire, would cost perhaps another $1 million to prepare for development, and was not zoned for a homeless shelter. CAPSLO simply does not have the money to acquire this site. Nor does the city or county have the funds to purchase this site. (Cannon provided a proposal to assess the development feasibility of the site at a cost of $80,000 for the study.)

“Despite the reality of the situation, Bill Thoma decided to re-launch his opposition campaign among the businesses in the area, circulating a flyer that is highly misleading in its claims. Bill did not tell anyone in the HSC effort, who he was putatively working with, that he would do this, and that he would do it during Christmas week.

“The holiday season is when CAPSLO’s homeless services receives nearly 50 percent of its operating funds in donations.

“While it is regrettable that the focus has come down to a personal clash between Bill and me, I believe that despite the sincere and substantial efforts made to include Bill in the efforts to better plan for the HSC and to better address the associated problems with homelessness in our community, including the business park, at no time was Bill acting in good faith. It now appears that including him only further empowered him in his opposition.” Adam Hill

(Updated Dec. 22 to incorporate mention of Hill’s apology.)


52 Comments

  1. rogerfreberg says:

    I would think Adam Hill has a conflict of interest in dealing with the homeless center? Certainly knowing someone… ah.. well.. that he cares for and desires to make happy should keep him out of the discussion.

    Most people have an opinion on the canoodling adventures of our supervisors over the years… some groan , some wince and some just walk away. I do wonder sometimes what head they are using in the supervisorial chambers.

    People reelect the bums at election time because they ride in on a single issue and effectively slime their opponents. I guess trashing Thoma is just part of the same game, Adam? I hear rumors that Adam or someone supporting him has turned people over to various authorities on questionable charges… like informing the IRS by saying that this person or that person has secret accounts in the Cayman Islands. Will ‘swatting’ be next??

    I don’t know if this is true, but we got a 4 year audit after I first criticized Adam Hill… but I am sure there is no connection… is there Adam?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0

  2. obispan says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating Click here to see.

    Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 45

    • kettle says:

      And as a fake name on the internet “obispan” is a coward to attack Bill.

      Post some proof with your real name or Stfu. Let’s hope ccn saves IP,s for the future court action.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 2

      • obispan says:

        Jesus, relax, get the concept of satire, and read the entire thread. I’m supporting, not attacking Bill.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9

      • obispan says:

        I’m sure CCN can track me me down and subpoena me if they’re as crazy as you are and can’t get it.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9

      • obispan says:

        WTF does “kettle” do to identify you?

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6

    • rogerfreberg says:

      you gotta be his momma!

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

  3. Mr. Holly says:

    Could 2013 be the year that Adam Hill goes “postal”?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 2

    • isoslo says:

      I sure hope SLO mental health services pays attention to the warning signs and schedules and interview with Mr. Hill. The sheriff’s office should also make sure he does not have access to any weapons.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 1

    • RU4Real says:

      It’s time for this fool to resign…He can take Gibson with him, SLO County will be better off without these two Neanderthals…

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 1

    • kayaknut says:

      I think there are many who hope he just goes………

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 2

  4. letsbhonest says:

    With the latest article this morning in the Tribune, We will see how long Hill`s apologies last before he
    opens his “combative” mouth again! I hope Mr.Thoma shows up at the next meeting and calls out
    Mr. ” Combative” mouth! and gets a public apology not a newspaper one.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 2

  5. msminiver says:

    Maybe Hill was sending an email to his other identity? Does he often have lengthy conversations with himself or that is his other identity? Maybe we should collectively encourage our embattled Supervisor to seek professional care for what appears to be a split or dual personality? This situation and related situations involving this Supervisor remind me of the story of the Seven Faces of Eve, just tragic. Please get help for obvious anger management issues and other mental health issues?

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 2

    • Citizen says:

      We’ve already had a suicide within a citizen group demonized and ridiculed by Adam Hill. It’s too bad we can’t insist on a psychiatric evaluation before he continues as a supervisor.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 32 Thumb down 3

      • IronHub says:

        Or mandatory drug tests. Ever hear of cocaine-fueled rage?

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 2

  6. standup says:

    Adam Hill is pathetic in every sense of the word. But what is even funnier is the lack of mental capacity of those that re-elected this bum.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 45 Thumb down 3

    • isoslo says:

      Sad but true

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 2

    • obispan says:

      Unfortunately the public has no way to distinguish between Debbie Arnold and Ed Waage. Regardless of whatever an a-hole Hill is, and it appears he is quite the a-hole, I would vote for him (hypothetically) over Arnold, but by no means over Waage.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9

Comments are closed.