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...
Stefan

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

to Playing Outside


Setbacks are not Easements. "They do however leave room for a easement"


Setback (land use): the distance a structure must be from the edge of a lot."Trails do not have setbacks and therefore could be placed within the setback area"


Easement: an interest in land owned by another that entitles its holder to a specific limited use or enjoyment."Easements can be taken by eminent domain just ask the people who didn't want the waterline on thier property. To simpify it for you the CITY could aquire an EASEMENT by eminent domain"


Trails, as in the ordinance, is things YOU can put in."Trails are things I don't want put in."


Are you still inside? No one wants to play with you? Wah! "You sure seem too"


We may be in the North County but were not stupid.


Nothing you have stated would proclude the ultimate goal.


By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Setbacks are not Easements.


Setback (land use): the distance a structure must be from the edge of a lot.


Easement: an interest in land owned by another that entitles its holder to a specific limited use or enjoyment.


Trails, as in the ordinance, is things YOU can put in.


Are you still inside? No one wants to play with you? Wah!

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

All of these ideas are initiated within the Planning Department and in concert with the City Manager. The City Councils are so inept they just go along with staff since they think they are the best thing since peanut butter. You are absolutely correct regarding the Gaughn's situation regarding their property and who was sitting on the council then. But now we have 3 on the council, Luna, Brennler & Beraud, who do want those creek setbacks and we still have a city manager and planning department heads who want the trails. I see it as a perfect formula for them to go for it. They do know what they are doing.

Each council has a majority with there own special agenda. This council wants private property for public use.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Wow, what a leap in logic!


What the City (Manager) did to the Gaughn's was not a 'one step at a time' affair. They City (Manager) tried to use eminent domain to get their property (by buying it for cheap) to further the City (Manager)'s favorite builder. And that was stopped even though the reigning council (O'Malley, Clay, and Scalise) approved. Now that those members are in the minority, steps are being made to change how those sort of things are done in public.

Please don't try to claim that the current CC majority acts in the same fashion as the previous crooked council did.

Allof those scandals you claim (Gaughn's, FEMA, Wallyword, etc.) occurred during the previous CC. The only claim that can be spun on the current CC is the Setback issue, and that's so full of lies (see outsider's post below for examples) that the only way they can claim anything is wrong is to make things up.


Stefan

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

to insidious


You've picked a good name for yourself. Let me tell you the first thing any skilled developer knows. If you want to take an easement then the first thing you do is don't let anybody build in the area you want. You're creekside setbacks would take care of this requirement. Then of course tell everybody that you have no intention "at this time" of wanting an easement. Then you need to make sure that you have covered yourself by making what you want to do legal in the future should "by chance" it becomes appropriate and desirable. You neatly took care of that by making trails legal in the ordinance. What you fail to except is that a creek reservation is not a public access. You also have failed to tell all your comrads that the idea is to deceive. Note the many blogs demanding trails on creeks. Lies,Lies,Lies.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

They are attempting to go one step at a time. You are perfectly correct in your assessment of not putting a trails in the setback of the creek reservation.

But then you must remember what the city attempted to do to Pat & Sue Gaughn by taking their property away. It's called eminet domain-or acquiring the use of property for the betterment of the city. Who do you trust?

The city definetly has a batting record of not being truthfull, to say the least, and of deception in what they attemtp to do. So far they have lied to us, defrauded FEMA and attempted emeinet domain on a citizen of Atascadero.

If you trust them I pity you.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

to Public Property


I couldn't of put it better. You want to CARVE trails adjacent to Creeks on private land you want to call public. Right? So number one you obviously don't care about land disturbance along the entire creek or human interaction with the creek. So one would think the setbacks are really of no issue. Wait, you need the setbacks imposed on the owners of the property or else you wouldn't have a place to CARVE in your trails. So it seems the environmentalists in this case are interested in 100% development of the entire creek bed by CARVING in trails and sending in caravans of tourists. While the owners want virtually no development of the Creeks but simply want to maintain thier property rights. Interesting. Once again I ask what benefit is it to the creek and biological resources to Carve these trails.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Facts? Oh, that's right, you have none – just your poor recollection and comprehension.


I'll quote you #3 since you can't seem to cut and paste a link:


Can the City use the setbacks on private property for trails or public access?

No, the City can not use the setbacks located on private property for trails or any other public use. As a setback, the City and/or public acquires no property interest in the property. If the City desires to have trails along the creeks and river the City would have

to acquire the property. There are no plans to acquire easements for trails across

private property along creeks.


There, see? They'd have to buy part of your worthless creekside property from you if they wanted to build a trail – which they STATE they have no intentions of doing. The setbacks were designed to lay down the rules where you can build – just like you can't build your house right next to the road in front of your house – there's a SETBACK there too!


Go outside.


Stefan

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

The blogger forgot to thank you for running numerous businesses out of town, for putting us on the path to bankruptcy, for allowing our City Manger and prior councilmembers (that's you George) to defraud FEMA out of $4,000,000+, thanks for taking care of our roads, thanks for spending hundreds of thousand of dollars for studies because you can't independantly make a decision. Thanks for lieing to us about Wal Mart and telling us what a good job the planning dept. is doing now that they have the permit process down to under a year when there only a couple of applications submitted, thank you for appointing your radicals to the planning commission so that all of you could try to get a marijuana dispensary in town. My hat is off to you, you all are really doind a great job. Oh I forgot that you are currently attempting to promote tourism in town by bringing prize fighting to town.

A job well done.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Who do you trust? Is it the folks at city hall who currently have the FBI and Treasury Dept. after them for possible fraud? Or do you want to listen to the folks who do not want to open up there private property to public access. I was in attendance at the workshops for the rewrite of the General Plan and yes, a trail from downtown to the Atascadero Lake was discussed and was possibly going to be implemented into the overall plan for development. Not really a bad idea until they discovered that some of the creekside reservations are private property and not open to public access.

So here we are today going for the creek setback and then see what they will do next. Remember these are the same people that told us they didn't know anything about Wal Mart. Again I'll ask you, who do you trust?

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Thanks for putting up with the realtor/developer Bull S**t over all these years. Until two years ago "pro-business" councils were controlling Atascadero and running it into the ground. Thanks for shutting down the Kelly Gearhart, Michael Sherer, Suzy Anderson, Roberta Fonzi, Jay Miller, Jolene Horn, ABA, et al. cabal.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

More BS from insider (as usual). Nowhere in the Creekside Setback ordinance does the City say it will take your property. In fact the FAQ's state the OPPOSITE!! (http://www.atascadero.org/files/CD/Memorandum%20o… – see question 3.


If you have other info, please show it – and no, your opinion is not fact.


Apart from your appalling spelling, you're showing that you're not a "insider", unless you mean it as if you have no life and never go outside.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

to you don't get it


These people think your property is thier property. They want nothing more than to take your property in anyway they can. First it will be the Creeks, then the Ridge lines, Then they will just start looking for who has too much property for one person and want to call it open space. Once they call it open space they want access. They are allready getting ready to turn Eagle Ranch into one big public park. You watch.


Stefan

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

I just finished reading this article and actually had to go back and read George Luns'a comment about not listening to lies. I ask George, how does he like it being on the other side of the fence. We, the citizens of Atascadero, have been listening to lies coming from the City Council, including George, and staff for as long as I can remember.

What do they say, people that live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

The town of Atascadero is a story in it's own.

You guys keep the cards and letters, oh ya, and lies coming.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

RIP. It's all over for Tom O'Malley it's time to pack your bags Tom and pursue your new business venture. Tom has lost most of his financial support in town due to being wishy washy. The question about Tom from his supporters is "what do you think Tom will do?" Usually the answer was whatever was best for Tom.

After the last election it was Tom's goal to become County Supervisor, his feeling out procees determined he had no support.

His most recent actions at the Building Trust meeting has brought out a side of Tom O'Malley that this city doesn't need even if some people think he is a nice guy which he probably is. It's time for Tom to move on and remove some of the barricades that prevents this town from moving forward.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

First their is nothing wrong with public trails on public land. The problem is that some of the creek reservations are private land and not public land. In case you don't get it private land owners do not want public trails on their private property. Simple you think, not in Atascadero.


The Shield Initiative you say doesn't have a chance. I'm definetly not for it but they did get the signatures and I'm sure it will be on the ballot. These people are highly motivated and have stealth financing. I ask, is there any organized oppoasition to OPW? No! So no one ever thought Brennler would get elected to the city council. He had OPW behind him, along with the Luna machine and the Homeowners Association. No one in Atascadero is doing anything to oppose the OPW group but when, and if, it passes then everyone will come out and say

how did they do that?"

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Thats an excellent idea. We need those public trails along the creek to attract tourism. Put it to a vote of the people. PUBLIC TRAILS ON PUBLIC LAND.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Two or Three people went out on weekends for a couple of hours. There was no big push. It was done with ease and it most certainly will pass in November.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Lets talk about that shield initiative. That thing doesn't have a snowballs chance in hell of passing. You know it, I know it, and they know it. It's just a form of punishment to the whole city for not going along with them. It took 6 mo. of stalking, and pressing flesh with every freind, relative, and nieghbor they all had. In addition to that they staked out territory at every grocery store intown and agressively pursued every person that walked in. I'll bet there are hundreds of people that were coerced into signing that never would of without this I wont be your friend anymore attitude. Thank goodness they can't follow you into the polling place which Brennler certainly would if he could based on his lack of respect for peoples ability to collect signitures for his recall. The picture of him standing and confronting people at the public library as they arrived to sign the petition says it all. So I say by all means lets let the voters decide the Shield Initiatives fate. It probably can't get as many votes as signed it. I guess if you guys want to start a puplic trails initiative thats your right. Go for it you commies.


Stefan

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

The answer is NOT the City Council..Its simply WALMART…

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Its the mayors job to controll the meetings. If acouncil member is interupting a citizen and arguing with them while they are speaking, its the mayors job to direct the unruley to STOP. If the council member continues the mayor has to get that members attention and bring things back into order. This Buban, Burbach, Anderson , Jackson and O'Malley are some REAL NUT CASES. and they certainly do spin "all the facts" on every situation. The public is aware of you and they will become more aware for here on out. The party has just begun and the public isn't stupid. O'Malley is finished. The board of supervisors told him he wasn't good enough material. The ABA is a joke and there are some very sick, twisted people running that show.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

It looks like the gruop that is attacking Brennler and disrupting all the meetings are being encouraged by O'Malley and Clay. These people don't want the rest of the people of Atascadero to be able to walk along a trail by the creek that is carved out of public land. I think when November comes there should be a vote of the people abou public trails and public land just like there will be a vote of the Shiel initiative. If they want to make up stories about trails then by gooly lets get thosetrails and put it to a vote. Everyone will vote for it except a handful of selfish hate mongers.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

I don't believe it's against the LAW to verbally challenge someone man-to-man out in the parking lot, especially if that person is waving his hand or fist or arm at that person!


Whoever strikes the first blow, now you have the makings of headline news!


O’Malley didn’t verbally “threaten” anyone!

So get off Tom's back y’all!


It appears that Mike Brennler was contentious at that meeting!


By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

I don't believe it's against the LAW to verbally challenge someone man-to-man out in the parking lot, especially if that person is waving his hand or fist or arm at that person!


Whoever strikes the first blow, now you have the makings of headline news!


O’Malley didn’t verbally “threaten” anyone!

So get off Tom's back y’all!


It appears that Mike Brennler was contentious at that meeting!


So get off O'Malley's back Y'all!

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

to this is a great blog


You want to see a complete fool. Check out David Broadwater at Tues. City Councel meeting. Now theres a complete fool.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

No body said something didn't hapen. It's just you guys don't seem to get that Brennler provoked the situation by jumping in the middle of something that wasn't his buisness. Maybe Tom just thought if they took it outside they could chat about it without all the people.


Stefan

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Except for that crazy person insider. He sire hates Luna, Brennler and Beraud. He is obviously a part of the Buban Group who twist all the facts and make up stories. The Brennler (other side)always wins because they tell the truth. I heard Buban on the radio last night and Anderson too. They both sounded like complete fools.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

to bored with insider


You may very well be bored with me but untill the Comar-Broadwater over the Hill gang stops thier constant yammering your stuck with me. Get used to it.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Take a break and listen to the podcast of the last city council meeting. Exclude Comar and Broadwater and listen to the discussion amongst the councilmembers regarding the incident. No one, yes no one, refutes that the incident happened. The ever talkable Tom O'Malley didn't even deny it. So far I think you are the only one that tends to believe that it didn't happen. You are the sole minority in your thinking.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

to Back to the Topic


No they are not going to do anything nor should they. All the sources you quote are Brennlers lackeys. Even the atricle is writen with third party information from Brennlers lackeys. Brennler even called in himself in his usual manner and made sure the story was told his way. He has obviously learned good from the perps. he has kept company with over the years. There is no tape and I certainly give zero credibility to Broadwater and Comar they probably had a brownie breakfast and sat around and listened to pink floyd before the meeting who knows what they saw.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Is the city council going to take any action regarding the actions of Tom O'Malley. After watching the podcast of the council meeting, reading this blog and listening to Brennler on the Congleton show it is very clear that Tom was wrong. Is this just going to be ANOTHER incident where the city just sweeps this mess under the carpet. Isn't it about time somebody takes responsibility for their actions.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

whatsamatter insider, nobody to play with this AM?

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Thanks to Luna, Brennler and Beruad we get to watch O'Malley and Clay for the a**holes they are. Clay and O'Malley always voted against televising meetings.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Brennler, Beraud, and Luna are puppets of Tom Comar, OWM, and the Unions. Watch what they do next.

By: Anonymous on 5/29/08

Name one thing Brennler, Beraud, Luna have done over the last 2 years with their majority vote. Except give OWM run of the town.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

I listened to Mike Brennler's attempt to make the Tom O'Malley's confrontation issue a thing of the past. Tom had his chance last night.

Where is Tom on all of this? It appears that Tom is the guilty party here irregardless what the cause of his outburst was. Tom has always taken credit for being the consensus builder. It appears that the consensus of opinions is that Tom screwed up. TOM PLEASE STAND UP AND ADMIT YOUR MISTAKE AND APOLOGIZE TO ALL OF US AND LET'S MOVE ON. I think most everyone is willing to give and forgive. If you don't take any action, this blog and others will continue to tear Atascadero apart.

STEP UP TO THE PLATE TOM, EAT A LITTLE CROW AND LET'S MOVE ON.


Stefan

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

David Broadwater is a prime example of why Atascadero doesn't have a chance. He obviously is from the Atascadero Homeowners Association and Oppose Wal Mart. Nothing wrong with that, everyone should have the right to express themselves. But the only problem I have is how some of these people represent themselves and/or their cause. There are some class people in Atascadero who can present their viewpoints with compassion and composure and non threatening. And then we have some people, like Broadwater, who express their opinions etc. Although their presentations come across as being confrontational almost as if they are looking for a "fight." All of this evidently led up to Tom O'Malley wanting to have a fight.

It certainly would be nice to see "both sides" attempt to work things out in a civil manner. It appears to me that Mike Brennler, his opinions aside, is attempting to bring some integrity back to the city by attempting to conduct an organized meeting. I'm still waiting for him to honor his campaign pledge to rid city hall of the dishonest liars that are there (the majority of staff are good people, management and some department heads are not doing this city any favors)Unfortunately I don't think that some of the "players" in Atascadero either want to or know how to conduct themselves with any class.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

Did you hear that idiot Broadwater. He gets on and recites practically every word of his little speach from last night and does it in such a way as to imply his demands from City Councel came from the mountain top. As if these were demands for cencership from the community instead of his tiny little brain. Of course he had heard these guys cracking up about the whole thing before his call so he starts with a statement of how he has quite a sense of humor himself. Yeah David I'll bet your a scream at the OWM parties where you split up the money and each go spend $999 for the canidate of your choice. I'll bet your a real card.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

Great Show Dave, Thank You so much for helping to get the truth out and being a leader in honest, investigative reporting.

P.S. Is Karen really in a bunker? Is she being threatened? Tell us .

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

I know there are many new people here. There is an obsessive blogger "Insider" who slimes every blog. Please unless you agree with him/her please don't respond to any posts from "Insider". That person will not stop with the foolish behavior and will go off topic and slime another blog (this one). He/She has already come close to doing that with this important blog.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

Well I listened to Tom Comar add his 2 cents. First he complained about the disruptive people at the meetig. I wasn't there but I'm sure it did happen. But let's go back to all of the disruptive behavior that Oppose Wal Mart has done at public workshops, Planning Commission meetings and and City council meetings, none apparently were not as bad as what Tom O'Malley did but they were disruptive. And who was the leader of that group-TOM COMAR.

Then his staements regarding campaign reform and what Wal Mart might do at the next election. Look who is calling the kettle black. Tom has a vast knowledge of how outside support works. He stated that OPM didn't spend the $1000 which initiate reporting procedures like candidates and other LEGITIMATE groups do. Simply add up the costs of all their signs, t-shirts, propaganda mailings to the entire city (supporting Luna, Beraud and Brennler) their web page designs and administrators and then convince me that they did not spend the $1000 or that they are not a PAC )political action committee) My only question is-Why will you not disclose your source of funding Tom?

Which union is it.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

For anyone who missed it you should be able to go and stream it within 48 hours. Ray Buban & Suzy Anderson called in. So did many other people. Go and listen to the people who were there and judge for yourself. Ray Buban sounded like an O'Malley clone and as usual he twisted all the facts but the truth came out. Go and listen.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

I'm sitting here listening to David Broadwater. What an ass. He states that for the last 2 years the councel has been held hostage by O'Malley and Clay. What a joke you guys have a 3 to 2 margin on the councel yet you continue to blame the minority for your inability to get something done. You have a majority why don't you get on with it if you know so much. Your impotant and I don't mean important. Whats stopping you?

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

Plain and simple, put all of the pieces together and the city has certainly committed a felony, FRAUD, and got Fema for $4,200,000. We the taxpayers and citizens of Atascadero have been uded by our city administration to the tune of $4,200,000 and have been deprived of the The Printery.

Stay tuned for the city hall which will be following in the future.


Stefan

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

The bottom line was the building was unsafe and the city didn't want to spend the money required thats why they were more than willing to start the process of returning the building.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

You should check the records at city hall a little closer. The Mason's wanted the building back because the CITY was not fullfilling there promise to utilize it as a youth center. The city council directed the city manager to draw up the necessary paperwork to give it back to the Masons. Along comes the earthquake. The city immediately flip flops and determines they should try to keep in good terms with the Masons. Why? FEMA MONEY. The doors slam shut at city hall and Kelly Gearhart is asked to extend the escrow until the city can obtain their FEMA money. In return the city promises to issue permits immediately upon the close of escrow. The reat of the story is history.

It's all documented except for the closed door part.

Maybe the way things are going with the city the rats at city hall can move over to the abandoned Printery and feel right at home.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

The insider is no one you have suspected its just me.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

What's with the realtor on realtor attack? I'm talking about the one you both pulled on Mike Shearer. We all know that the two of you are insider.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

to to the insider


Check the record the City wants nothing to do with the printery. They had many meetings and had decided to give it back to the Masons. Kelly got in with the Masons and promised them a new meeting hall to get in line. Why he wanted it? Only because he is obsessed with buying every piece of property he can get his hands on. He's just not right if you know what I mean. He doesn't even have a financial plan just get the property.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

I would really like to see the city step up to the plate and take the project over. It would be better for them to show by example rather than their word which is worth nothing.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

Wait thats it. If Kelly waits until demolition is all thats left he will have a great lot that he can get a loan on.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

I don't think the city should be involved in development period. And niether should Gearhart either, obviously ask his investors or lenders or should I say suckers. Unfortunately I would say the ultimate fate for the printery is demolition.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

To all of those that think the city government of Atascadero is the best thing in the world and that Kelly Gearhart couldn't perform on The Printery I have a great idea.

The city seems to have a hole burning in it's pocket to spend what little money they have left.

There claims are that Kelly Gearhart couldn't do it right. George Luna insisted that it be made a historical "something" prior to the city releasing it to Gearhart. The restriction was never mentioned while the city had control of The printery. Plain and simple just another shaft job to Gearhart and consequently the rest of the city.

Well it's time for the city to "man up" and offer to purchase the The Printery back from Kelly Gearhart. He's hurtin now, much to their delight, so they probably could get the City manager to cut them a fat deal. And then let's see what a wonderfull job they would do.

First off they would just start and probably half ways thru decide it might be a good idea to get a permit. Then towards the completion they would order the donuts and coffee for all of staff to get together one morning for the walk-thru inspection and declare what a wonderfull job they have.

You know, if I keep writing this BS I might start beleiving it just like they do.


Stefan

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

Scuttle butt has it that our wonderfull city is considering purchasing one of the phases of Colony Square. I've heard it's one of the last phases in the rear of the project that has been designated as "mixed use." The city has been looking for ways to filter redevelopment money into the Colony Square project because their financing is lacking. I, like most people, want to see Colony Square get started. Although partnerships rarely work. The City of Atascadero would have to be the last entity in the world that anyone would want to have for a partner. Just look at the fraud they have committed against FEMA, and the dysfunctional city council. What do you think they would do to a private party.

Then on the other hand, one of the conditions for approval on that project was the mixed use unit, that's a combination of commercial/residential use. Is the City of Atascadero even remotely in a position to become developers? Would the city even attempt to build anything like this? I certainly would hope that my tax money is not directed in that direction. The city's record on spending is dismal at best. This would just be another city project that would be a bottomless pit to expedite the bankruptcy proceedings that are enevitable.

Now there is something that would make Colony Square and the rest of downtown a success. Development at the Annex would pour hundreds of thousands of dollars into the redevelopment agency which could be spent on downtown. Thousands, yes I said thousands, of people would not only come to this town to shop but they would also visit our downtown to go see a movie and have dinner. Unfortunately the majority of our current city council is so narrow minded that they are willing to let this city fail. The Future of Atascadero is in it's City Council.

I'M not holding my breath though.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

A slash and trash contractor like Gearhart had no buisiness getting involved with something like the printery. Likewise the City never should have allowed it. They only gave it to Kelly because its a money pit. Poor choices all around. A couple of more tremors and they will both be done for good. Any money we put into either is most likely lost. Maybe Kelly can get weekend work release to maintenance his little park behind the Circle K the City recently approved in its infinate wisdom.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

That City Hall is only a dream. If times were still good, and they are not good now, Kelly Gearhart would probably have been the only one that could have saved that building. But just look at the timeline for the permit process for The Printery. You all can say what you want to about Kelly Gearhart but he was the ONLY one who was ready, willing and wanting to restore The Printery. That dream for this city is all but over. There are still those in town who will rub The Printery into the ground. The main culprit on The Printery, like most projects in town, is their streamling of the permit process.

In reality if they hadn't "jacked" people around like they do, there is no doubt in my mind that the city would have had a competed Printery and The Colony Square. Sad to say I don't think you will see either one.

THANK YOU_CITY OF ATASCADERO

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

Maybe we could just take the 18 mil. and give the building to Kelly Gearhart he has a good track record with hysterical restoration.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

to to insider


I think it was during the redevelopement segment towards the end when they were talking about ways they could help colony park. Maybe they said something about commiting 6 mil. but there was also the word loan used. It defenately was about City Hall. I'm confused I thought we were pretty much broke outside of the smoke and mirrors they have been using to discuss the budget. Maybe they think they are getting 18 mil. from uncle sam and have been talking about how to come up with the other 6 mil in closed sesion and it just slipped out. As you point out there is no way they are going to fix that building with 25 mil. and it will be a prevailing wage job and then some.

By: Anonymous on 5/28/08

Regarding the loan on the old city hall, what part of the meeting was that referred to? I would hate to waste my time and have to listens to the entire circus act to get that info. Any help you could provide on the timeline would be appreciated.