Front Page  »  

O’Malley threatens mayor with alley brawl

May 23, 2008

By KAREN VELIE

Atascadero City Council member Tom O’Malley challenged Mayor Mike Brennler to handle a dispute regarding council procedures his way, man-to-man out in the parking lot, said numerous attendees of Thursday’s “public trust and campaign reform workshop.”

During the conciliatory-turned-contentious meeting, O’Malley interrupted and argued with a speaker during public comment. Brennler asked O’Malley to let the speaker finish. When it appeared O’Malley couldn’t hear the mayor over the altercation, Brennler began waving his hand at the council member.

“If you don’t stop shaking your hand at me, we are going to have to meet out back in the parking lot,” O’Malley is reported by numerous witnesses to have said.

O’Malley did not respond to requests for comment.

Late last year, the council voted to hire a mediator at a cost of around $9,000 to oversee a series of meetings designed to help city leaders develop skills needed to foster publics trust and confidence. At the first meeting a few months ago, O’Malley is reported to have hurled insults and argued with Brennler and Tom Shanks, the mediator.

Shortly before O’Malley’s latest threat, Suzy Anderson, a member of “A Better Atascadero,” — a political action committee — accused council member George Luna’s wife Ursula of taking certain actions during an election eight years ago.

George Luna said he was not going to listen to “lies,” and walked out of the meeting. Anderson later said she was not speaking on behalf of her group.

Following lunch, Luna returned, and Brennler asked attendees to follow meeting decorum and refrain from personal insults and requests for fist fights. Shanks put a limit on public participation, and the focus turned towards public finance reform.


Loading...
Subjects:     
Related:


62 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

There is no such thing as boxing on Objectivist principles. Man can only live by his reason, so it would have to be some sort of head-butting competition.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Whoisjohngalt has a good idea. I'd like to referee such a match on Objectivist principles, i.e., there should be no collectivist "ring" confining the fight, and the combatants should wear brass knuckles made of Rearden Metal.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Prize Fight has the right idea. Maybe UncoSlo could sponsor a free-for-all cagematch between all the craziest members of local government. Atascadero could send O'Malley and Brennler. Pismo could send Bill Rabenault. Kelley Gearhart could promote and make book on the fight, which could be held at the Tri-W site in Los Osos. (At least the land will get SOME use that way.) The last person standing gets to decide what happens to the Dalidio property.

That's my idea. Who would you like to see in the ring?

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

I think Tom O'Malley did this deliberately because he was tired of Kelly Gearhart getting all the publicity!

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

To Mike Hunt~

Well….you started it! You and Ray Buban.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Congratulations Attrashcadero!

You all make Los Osos look normal.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to to insider


Sure they do. They said they want to put public trails in creek reservations. They said they wanted the right to put testing stations in any creek. One step at a time thats how they work. If they think its OK to build trails next to the Creek in reservations for the entire length then why do they need additional setbacks from the property owners. Its OK for them to contruct trails inside the proposed setbacks but not the property owner.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

You need to listen: the city doesn't want your property for trails. A setback does not take property it just says you can't build on it just like the 15-25 in the front setback or 10 feet on the side setback.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to: to to yes on creek setbacks


I think you might be the questionable one here. If his property is going to wash away why would you want to spend City money to carve trails into the Creekside banks. It will just wash away wont it?

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

You are an idiot. Eventually, you and your property will just wash away. Then you will come to the government to bail you out like all the other corporate socialists!

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

The developers and investors on creek setbacks is the city and the environmentalist that want to take yours and my property rights away. Just try to take a look at this issue by iotself and see what the commies are try to do. Next it will be a little bit more of your front yard and then some of your side yard and then increase the setback for the front yard. After all of that, all of the setbacks will encompass your entire property and prevent you from improving your property. That is part of their smart growth program-no growth.


0

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

If the city widened the road in front of your house there had to be an existing road easement that has been there forever. If they actually came unto your property they needed to negotiate $$$ that with you or they took it from you. Similar to the creek setback and trails. Some of that property is privately owned, like your front yard, and they can't take it unless they want to negotiate for it. A set back ordinance is a silent form of eminent domain. By the way if it's ok for people to go onto private property for the sake of tourism in this town could I bring a few people over to camp out in your yard next weekend?

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to not so innocent bystander


Boy you really put it out there. I have to hand it to you most of you folks like to hide what you're real agenda is. Quite a pair.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

You developers and investors and O'Malley supporters kicked all our butts around and now you want special treatment. Like Hell. Yes on Creek Sets Backs

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Oh! I get it now! It's perfectly OK for the city to take a huge chunk of my front yard so they can widen the road to accommodate all the new houses that were built nearby, and it's perfectly OK to cram Wal-Wort down my throat so the city can get it's 'much needed tax revenue', but ask a couple of you greedy real estate lawyers to give up a few feet of your creek frontage so Atascadero can have a cool river walk that would actually encourage tourists to hang around and spend a little money here and boy you start squealing like the pigs that you are! Fair is fair. We need that creek setback. Trying to scare people into thinking the city is stealing their land is no different then all the land that got TAKEN from me and that's perfectly ok? I have no pity for you. You might have an occasional person walk by on a trail you won't even see, but I have to listen to motorcycles zooming through my bedroom at 3am now that the street is so much closer.

Give me a break. Stop your whining. I'm sure you would still be able to build those condos on the creek and destroy it even WITH the set back. I vote YES on the creek setback!!!!!!!!

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to to everyone


I just love it when a plan comes together. Don't you. Thanks for the help.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

I think Atascadero needs to have its own blog with sub-titles for all of its main players. That way when we all get bored we could just go to the blog and see what they are up to on any given day.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

This is the same Ellen Beraud who has voted no against any fast food restaurant coming to town, especially if they have a drive thru. Her reasoning behind this is due to the fact that she is a nutritionist at the State Hospital she would never go to one. Well folks and her loyal followers Ellen had her entire clan at In-N-Out Burger for lunch. She must be starting to feel pretty comfortable with her position within the city which now allows her to start lie to us from her city council pulpit. Or I guess you could just say she is a hypocrite. Or you could just say she is just against all development.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

I didn't think running for city council was about money. Boy am I wrong. Let me see now is this the same Ellen Beraud who only wanted to serve her community and now she wants more money for doing so? Is this the same Ellen Beraud who voted no against have the citizens of Atascadero electing their mayor? Her reasoning for the no vote was that she was afraid the $300 a month stipend may go up. Does Ellen Beraud have any idea at all what is going on? It seems that she is just programmed to vote no. Oh her only exception may have been to permit to sell marijuana in our town which happens to be the same location where Jim Patterson has his headquarters. I wonder if there any leftovers there?


0

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

To make things a little simpler for Ellen Beraud, those $99 "donations" to her cause should be mailed directly to Oppose Wal Mart c/o Tom Comar and Lee Perkins, the ones who are pulling Ellen's strings.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

This is what happends when you respond to insider. You will get back all these obtuse posts. Please learn, I know many of you are new here, don't respond to him unless you agree. He will become a one man show. This has happend on many blogs no matter what the issue was.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to to insider


All I know is everytime she got to speak at the last City Councel she complained her pay for her Councel work was inadequate and she needed a raise. Must of been three times.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Why does Ellen need the money. All thru the last election all she could talk about was what a successful business person she was. What that meant is that her husband is an electrician and she did the books for him. Do you think that maybe because of all her negative votes against development that possibly she doesn't have anymore books to keep. Sadly, at our costs, the woman is hysterical.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

I agree, if non of them run for reelection and Tom resignd that does leave 4 available seats. If the recall is activated against Bereau that would make 5 seats a available. Could that mean a new functional Atascadero.

Ellen could the quit complaining.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Unfortunately Beruad is not up for reelection. Brennler, Clay and Luna are going for it this time. I think all of them have served their time. It would be to the best interest of this town if non of them ran and we tried a new slate. If Tom resigns we could have 4 new faces on the council.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Campaign Slogan


I'm Ellen the Turtle Bereau

I'm very very slow

I always always vote no!

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

IDIOT

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

I know but she wants to campaign anyway. She needs the money.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Atascadero is deffinetly dysfunctional. O'Malley should step down and Clay shouldn't run again because (if for no other reason he has to admit) that he forgets everything. George Luna has a physiclly ill wife whom he is devoted to and I hope he stay's with us but thats a hard call right now. I know many people read this site and the blogs. To those who are brave I hope you will step up. November is closer than you think.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Ellen won a 4 year seat, IDIOT.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

By the way if your thinking of donating to Ellens upcoming campaign I think she would perfer cash only donations preferably $99 or less no checks please.


0

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to Tom's Salvation


Mike Brennler could follow along dressed in his Smokey the Bear outfit with Ellen on a leash in her brand new Turtle outfit purchased with $99 cash donations with a big smile to see that campaign season back where she no longer has to complain about how much money she needs.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

To Tom's Salvation,

I don't know what it is about this blog and site in general but I have so many laughs here. That was really really funny. I never knew that intellectualls could be so humorous. I always thought they were "dry". Thats not so here.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

How can Ellen come back fighting? After the election where has she been? She is a one issue person. Plain and simple no on Wal Mart. Ellen will not even attend meetings of the different groups in town let alone meet anyone on a one on one basis. She is a waste of a council seat.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Tom is basically a nice guy and probably means well. It just appears that he has some personel problems.

Maybe Tom could redeem himself by sponsoring a rubber ducky race in Atascadero Creek. The race could start at either San Gabriel or Portola and could terminate behind City Hall or at the Lewis Ave. bridge. People could tromp down the creek watching their ducks. At the conclusion of the race the city could showcase their city hall repair and the new bridge at which time Tom could take credit for both projects. Tom could be in charge of this event which would draw hundred to town and maybe kick start our much needed tourism package. It would also show what a trail along the creek would do. This could be Tom's trail to recovery.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

I support you and want to say thank you for the thankless job that you are trying to do for all of us. I apologize for all the insults and cruelty you have suffered on behalf of the people of Atascadero. Please don't give up on us. I hope you will run for re-election. I know you'll win by a land slide the same way that George always does. Many of us love and appreciate you.

To Ellen, Please don't let them get you down. I know it hurt but you have it in you to come back fighting for us.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Thats it. I'm fair minded. I take no sides. Blah Blah Blah

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

If you only knew. I am the last one to support Brennler or Beraud.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

I was putting politics aside and attempting to comment on the behavior of the 2 people you have been talking about. I think I madet clear that Tom has been out of line during the meetings and Breenler was trying to conduct an orderly meeting. As it stands right now, and with most people who I talk to in this town, the consensus is that the town so dysfunctional that no one really even cares anymore. One councilman challenging the Mayor to a fight in an alley kind of explains everything. Tom was guilty on this one.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to Bully Tactics


Your just like all the other Brennler and his pet Turtle supporters. You start your comment with how you take no side and how fair minded and only the high road for you then proceed to trash O'Malley. Sorry it doesn't work.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Tom O'Malley started all of this shortly after getting on the City Council by trying to take control of the lecturn. We have all heard Tom take sole credit for every possible thing in the world. His supporters and everyone else just got tired of listening to him and the his wishy washy voting record. After the last election the rug was pulled out from underneath Tom and he can't handle it. I don't agree with Mike Brennler on some of his votes. Although I find it difficult to listen to City Council meetings due to the behavior of some councilmembers, mostly O'Malley I have noticed that Brennler attempts to run an orderly meeting although Tom just can't keep his mouth shut and this is where the conflict arises.

Tom-you have lost, take your bat and ball and go home. Your game is over for now, you just struck out.


0

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

No this is really about the Bully Smokey the Bear Brennler putting all his years as a detective to work provoking O'Malley and Clay every chance he gets. Tom needs to just calm down and let this thing play out Brennler will get his.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Insider is going to try and turn this blog into a Wal-Mart issue. He is obsessive and won't stop once he begins. He has slimed many blogs on this site and we have learned to ignore him and not respond. The WM issue will (most likely) be going to a public vote under the ASI initiative. The creek set backs have already begun to over take the real story here. Lets try and stay on track. Maybe Karen and Dan can do a story about creek set backs later. That ordinance won't be coming up again until after November. The city staff put that ordinance together and did a poor job considering that there are already many 50' setbacks in exsitance. I'm sure the issue will play a large roll in the next elections. This is about O'Malley & friends undermining CC meetings and loosing control of himself. This is about the CC not being able to get anything done because of O'Malley and Clay causing chaos.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Why you guys are so concerned with O'Malley is just piling on. It's Brennler and Bereau who are obviously bought and paid for. I think they have OWM stickers in thier underoos.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

To Andrew K,

Different people have different ideas about what "personal property rights mean". It makes a differnce if your a developer vs a homeowner protecting their property.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Where is O'Malley? What does he have to say for himself. Speak up Tom.

P.S. The history of easement titles in Atascadero was very interesting. It appears that some people aren't really in opposition afterall. They are obviously "Personnal Property Rights Advocates" and radical ones at that!

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Please its very simple


I think putting trails on creeks is good because _______________________________(just fill in the blank)

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

If a private developer wanted to put a trail along a creek this blog would probably have a meltdown.

What we have here is the city wanting to link their "downtown" to the lake. It's part of their masterplan. Like other things in this city staff will lie, misrepresent the facts and attempt to do whatever it takes to accomplish their goal. Unfortunately for staff there is agroup that has caught onto them and is challenging them.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

I still have not seen one post that can explain why trails are good for Creeks.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to to insider


exactly. Trails are a ridiculous idea. Its bad for the environment, its bad for private property, and its incredibly expensive. They never go anywhere because there is always a point of discontinuity. It is almost imposible to have them meet the intent of the accessability laws. If these reservation allow for public access then if your the public you can access them. Go for it. I for one would perfer not to be picking buckshot out of my a@@ from the actions of a misinformed property owner.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Cindy that's Tom O'Malley to T. Like what was posted earlier, you can gage the character of a person by the way he treats those who can do nothing for him.

And now I'm calling time out on Encino/driveway and hopefully get back to Mr. O'Malley. iT'S BEEN FUN.


0

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

To: To Cindy,

You are missing the point. It was previous development that caused the "20 foot paved fire road". The development behind my home had nothing to do with the road except it was an excuse to correct Stones past favors to the developer (cheap). The devloper had been developing for a long time taking illegal access (sanctioned by Stone)rather than incurring the expense of crossing the blue line creek at Chaupin. I called every CC for HELP.Luna and Pacas understood what I was telling them immediately. Clay was pleasant and sympathetic but O'Malley…. I'll tell all you personal property rights buffs about O'Malley. He said that he liked the fire chief, that his father had been a fire fighter, that his family had been involved in fire fighting and that I was talking to the "wrong person". How about them apples folks? And thats the God's honest truth.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

You must remember that you are in Atascadero. The first link of trails west of Portola Rd. was another Atascadero project where they tried to be above the law and not follow the rules. That trail did not meet ADA standards and they got caught on that one too.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Lets get back to the Creek reservations instead of Cindys driveway. Since the Creek setback supportors want to put trails in the creek reservation be damn the enviromental impacts I'm sure people of thier intellectual superiority are aware these trails as they like to call them will need to meet the accessabliliy standards of the ADA. Therefore they will most likely need to be 8' wide. Can you immagine the impact. Well if we can do that we could certainly just take it a step further and put in a scenic road. That way tourist from around the world could come and enjoy our wonderful area. It's just a public access. So what do you think? Great idea huh? Just a few extra feet in width.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Access across a blue line creek. Come on now you know better than that. The city may direct someone to try that but you know it has to go before the Fish & Game and water Resource Board. You also know what the answer and mitgation to that would be, especially after someone planted a salamander in the creek. That paper rd. extension of Encino was ok although it was the city that caused all of the so called "improvements" that caused your problems. The Developer was following the lead of the city.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

To: To Cindy,

You are missing the point. It was previous development that caused the "20 foot paved fire road". The development behind my home had nothing to do with the road except it was an excuse to correct Stones past favors to the developer (cheap). The devloper had been developing for a long time taking illegal access (sanctioned by Stone)rather than incurring the expense of crossing the blue line creek at Chaupin.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Cindy please tell everyone who you had in your camp when you started your conflict on Encino Rd,. You had Planning Commissioner Joan O'Keefe and Tim representing you regarding the tree issue. Then you had the Luna group that was pushing the issue also. These are the same people who have harrassed the developer and other developers for years and are stil doing it. There is an underground group of people in this town that are just looking for a fight. You seem to be part of them and now we even have Tom O'Malley wanting to fight.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to Cindy Sasur


So you won what. Aren't the other houses there. Isn't that what you really wanted to stop. How much did it cost you to win?

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Not quite right. Remember the original layout of the lots, some didn't require access from Encino and that was the case that the Developer made. The City made

it arequirement that the road be improved to 20' and paved. After that the road was to be blocked and never used except for fire access. During the hearings I believe it was brought up that the existing road didn't meet the standards that were put on the developer for the road that ws not going to be used. Once again my part of this issue is what the city required against the wishes of others. The road wasn't necessary it was just another harassment issue that this city puts onto its citizens. If the city didn't make this judgement everyone would be happy with what was there.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Whats really interresting is that even with Brennler, Bereau, Luna, and even Sup. Paterson wanting to take your property rights with this creek setbacks ordinance which we all know was so much more than they indicated, they still voted it down. Why? Because even with your majority on the City councel they knew the vast majority of Atascadero residents would never put up with it. You have done us all a favor by uncovering the nice guy Paterson who will say anything he has to to keep the only paying job he has ever had. Thank you, Thank you, Thank you all of the supporters of Smokey, The Turtle and Sup. Paterson for being so abnoxious and waking us up before we slept through another election.


0

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

To: To Cindy,

Wrong. The reason Kurt Stone wanted that road is because he had been breaking the rules for his developer friend by allowing him to develop property at the top of Encino and thus allowing “illegal access”. There were already 14 homes taking access on a 10 foot road. The developer was supposed to take access from Chauplin and city management knew that. The only way to make it legal was to add a 20 foot road at the top of the mountain. The new development had nothing to do with the road and the new development had no effect on Encino. But Stone had to correct the danger he had created from his past favors so he decided to call it a fire road to avoid the truth of what he had done.

The city did the developer a favor to save him money and we all paid for it in the end. It was a Good Ole Boys deal right from the get go and they tried to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes. The only “Good Guys” were Luna and Pacas (once they realized that they too had been “duped into voting for it”).

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to innocent bystander


Waterways are regulated by the federal government. That means you can not dam them, put harmfull chemicals in them, etc. However they are land and as such are owned by the person or persons who have title. period.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

If in doubt about access to creeks or rivers just check and see what you can and cannot do along the Salinas River. Go rafting along the Salinas River north of Camp Roberts and if you beach your tube on some of the private property and get caught, you are going to jail.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to innocent bystander


Maybe we should do nothing. Just leave the creeks in thier own natural pritine state. Leave the Ordinance in its own natural Pristine state and take a walk on ones own property instead of trying to get rights to trespass on our nieghbors property. How unamerican is that.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Let's not forget that this is Tom O'Malley's page. Where is Tom? It would be nice to hear his 2 cents on this.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to Cindy Sasur


What this has to do with creek reservations is nothing. Sounds like you loss to me. You fought and paid attorneys to get access to your land. You probably didn't want it considered a City road or something. Anyway access easment or road you are using it for access which is spelled out either way. Creek reservations are not access easments or the city would be able to put roads on them. Are you sugesting the City should put senic drives on Creek Reservations?

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

I always thought is was illegal to "own" rivers or creeks or waterways in general. It was my understanding that the property lines were illegally placed in the middle of the creek or beyond to begin with so that the property owner would technically own a bigger lot that he could build more homes or condos on. With the present zoning, I think property owners can build right into the creek if they want to. Bottom line…it's about money. When the city widened the road in front of my house and took away some of my land, I was never compensated for it. Maybe the city could 'buy' the creekside.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Another trick of the city is that 20' easement. If you want to do a lot split the city will not allow the 20' easement strip as part of the gross measurement for calculations. Although walk out the door and come back in and ask them about the road in front of your property. All of a sudden the 20' is yours and it's your responsibility to take care of it. That 20' easement is no man's land and the city uses it to their benefit with the rest of us being their victims again.


0

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Cindy you must remember that the actions that resulted with your case originated at th city level. The Fire Dept. and Planning Dept. wanted that road in for Fire Dept. access only. There was to be a gate across Encino Rd. to prevent public access, The developer attempted to "fight" this requirement but lost. I believe the city flipped flopped on the road location and your tree loss etc. was the result of the city's incompetance. You can't sue the city so the next best target is always the developer. But the crux of this issue is the deprivation of your property originated at the city level.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

To: To Cindy,

I had 3 attorneys! Been there done that. The lines on the maps detailed the gross property (including the 20 feet I fought over). The property taxes were based on my gross acerage not net. I've done the research. Like I said, I wish you luck with this. maybe your right. By the way the only CC that tried to help me was Luna and Pacas.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to to insider


Well you've been here a while allthough that doesn't tell me if you were fully weened at that time. Obviously someboby put some twisted information into your programing. Fear not you still have time to change. If you want to have every aspect of your life controlled by big brother keep hanging with the group your with. If you want to make individual judgements in your life get on board the trains leaving the station.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

To Insider,

Wrong. I have this knowledge because I fought the city of Atascadero and a Developer in the SLO courts for three years over a private road. I won my case in the end but not because I could outright prove that the 20 feet of land was mine and private (the city couldn't prove they had rights either). I won because I ended up deprived of access to land that I had private rights to. Big difference.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to to Cindy


Thank you for your excellent presentation of the facts. It is as I thought.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to Cindy Sasur


To what bennefit to the creek itself will there be to excavated the banks and remove vegitation to provide trails. It seems like trails are for humans not plants and wildlife.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Cindy you are doing alot of talking here so let me help you out a little. First I fully agree with you that the City can't figure it out. Although it is really quite simple and let me reassure you that the city does know as I have talked to them regarding this issue. All you have to do is take each property that borders the creek and check the county tax records. Within those records it will tell you who the owner is, it will give you a legal description of the property and then there is the tax/tract map that will show you that the private property goes to the center of the creek or beyond.No where in the title reports does it allow public access to private property with the exception of some of the easements that mentioned. All of the easements are located along the roads that border these properties non of which are in the creek.

These few privately owned ceekside reserrvations is what throwing the wrench in the city's attempted plan to have a trail from downtown to the Lake.

Take some time do some reserarch, I'm sure you will be as surprised as I was.


0

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to Cindy Sasur


So you have no specified easement for any purpose than to protect the creek. Sounds like you have tried pretty hard to put together a case for developing on the creek reservations to date to no avail.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

About "Privately Owned Creek Reservations".

Oh Lord ask him for,

Luck with the Oscar Willett, Atascadero Development Syndicate, EG Lewis, Wells Fargo Bank trust (now dedicated) and the (previous) Crocker Bank Trust and the deceased (murdered) Gordon D. whose step daughter/wife lost the ADS trust records. Then there are 20 years of missing court records from the previous trustee (Jesperson?). Privately owned creek reservations and titles are going to be as much fun as privately owned roads. If you have been researching these things you haven't even begun. Like I said good luck and I really do wish you luck. Even the city with all the resources they had couldn't figure it out. I doubt that you have privately owned creek reservations (maybe they existed at one time) for every document you find there will be a counter document that superceeds it!

I wish you the best with your research.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

1975

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to to insider


I've been here and paying close atention since 1978, how about you?

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

to Kyle


You are a NIMBY by nature. You obviously care more about controlling whats outside of your property lines than I. I am most concerned about maintaining whats inside my property lines and just keeping people like you out.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Apparently you are not familiar with the antics and tactics of Atascadero.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Apparently you goons don't know what a creek resevation is. It's to protect the creek not allow trails. How could allowing trails in anyway be a possitive thing for the creek. Maybe a possitive thing for the creeps you might want to hang out there.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

A creek reservation is to preserve the creek and designated boundries apparently when you tree huggers want to damage the enviroment so you can take a walk in someone elses back yard its OK. Why would you want creek setbacks to protect the environment and them on the other hand want to alter the land on the most sensitive areas just so you can take a nature walk on someone elses property. I heard Sarah Cristee invites you all out to a nature hike at her place with her and Jim Patterson. Oh please call first.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

There is no problem with putting a public trail on public land. In fact it's a great idea. The problem is when you want to put a public trail on private property. Some of the creek reservations are entirely private property with no public access.

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

This is about a few and I mean a few activists trying to tell everyone how to live, how to shop, If you are so against changing the General Plan why are you so for changing the Land Use Ordinance. If you are so against Wal-Mart why are you so for Cosco. Is it because you're really backed by the Unions is the form of Tom Comar?

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

if they put public trails on public property?!

By: Anonymous on 5/25/08

Sorry to burst your bubble, but I have researched Title Reports and there are privately owned creek reservations. I too was very surprised about this. When I heard it I didn't beieve it also and that is why I researched it. In fact there are many of them.I've heard that this is the reason talk about the trails have been limited until the city can get some control of the ENTIRE creek. Call the city, they will even confirm this.


0
1 2 3 4 5 … 7