Bank sues Rottman Group over Atascadero projects

October 31, 2011

A Central Coast bank filed a lawsuit earlier this month against the Rottman Group for defaulting on a $6.2 million debt related to the Atascadero Annex project. [PacificCoastBusinessTimes]

On Oct. 18, Montecito Bank & Trust filed a lawsuit in Santa Barbara Superior Court alleging the Rottman Group is in default for $6.2 million in interest, fees, a line of credit and several loans taken on the Atascadero projects.

In 2006, the Rottman Group and Wal-Mart submitted a joint application to build retail complexes at the corner of El Camino Real and Del Rio Road where Wal-Mart is slated to build a 125,000 square-foot store.

Compass Real Estate, an arm of the Rottman Group, is planning to build a 116,000 square-foot retail center known as the Annex. In addition, the group is also slated to construct a work-force housing development, according to the group’s website.

The principles of Compass Real Estate are Steven Rottman, Maury Froman, and Keith Mathias.

Nevertheless, the Rottman Group and Wal-Mart are at an impasse over who will pay the $3 million to $4.5 million needed to build a freeway interchange required by the project’s environmental review.

In Oct. 2007, Wal-Mart agreed to pay for an environmental review and any improvements the EIR determined were necessary. Now, both developers are asking Atascadero to pay a portion of the required traffic mitigation costs.

This summer, both developers said they wanted a portion of the funding for the interchange to be taken from traffic impact fees the developers owe the city. City officials are expected to come to a decision over funding before the end of the year.

In its lawsuit, Montecito Bank & Trust contends the Rottman Group deceived them by using some of the same assets to secure loans for the Atascadero projects the group used as collateral for a $15.3 million loan from City National Bank, for a project called Oak Canyon Ranch in Calaveras County.

The lawsuit also alleges City National Bank foreclosed on the property further diminishing the Rottman Group’s creditworthiness.


Loading...
inverse Condemnation

It is probably time to look into all of our local banks actions. Santa Barbara Bank & Trust as seen at http://www.sbbtfraud.com is trying to take property in Pismo.


It would be nice to hear what the Rottman group has to say! Im sure there is alot more to this story.


Typoqueen

Oh geez Bill, not another lawsuit.


MaryMalone

QUOTING ARTICLE: “In its lawsuit, Montecito Bank & Trust contends the Rottman Group deceived them by using some of the same assets to secure loans for the Atascadero projects the group used as collateral for a $15.3 million loan from City National Bank, for a project called Oak Canyon Ranch in Calaveras County.”


I would especially like to hear about the Rottman Group’s using the same assets as security for two different loans from two different lending institutions.


That’s blatant fraud, and if they have committed such blatant fraud, I believe it is just the tip of the iceberg.


darwin_is_rolling_over

You really have no idea how construction loans work, do you?


MaryMalone

Apparently Montecito Bank & Trust doesn’t know how “construction loans work,” either, since it is Montecito Bank & Trust which …”contends the Rottman Group deceived them by using some of the same assets to secure loans for the Atascadero projects the group used as collateral for a $15.3 million loan from City National Bank, for a project called Oak Canyon Ranch in Calaveras County.”


You might want to give them a call and advise them their legion of attorneys are wrong, and tell them to withdraw their lawsuit.


darwin_is_rolling_over

Incorrect. Again, You dont understand how this works.


When you are trying to secure money you believe is owed to you, you throw as much $h!t against the wall as you can, then you see what sticks. What I have seen more often than not the plaintiff trying to tie as many other projects as they can to the one that is in question.


There is nothing illegal or fraudulent about using the equity in one project as collateral on another. It is like using the equity in your home as collateral to by a vacation condo. You would call your mortgage company first and ask them if it is ok would you? Why, because it is your equity. Unfortunately when your home value falls, you are screwed and frankly so is the bank.


MaryMalone

QUOTING INVERSE CONDEMNATION: “Im sure there is alot more to this story.


I believe you are correct, and the discovery process should shed a lot of light on Rottman’s practices.


standup

Rottman is a straight up company. They may have pushed some people to sell smaller properties that made the large parcel that was sold to walmart. They did however, pay over market for many of them as the whole was worth more than the sum of the parts. As a contractor who worked for them, they were straight up and paid quickly compared to the a hole Kelly who I still need to catch up with.


Robert1

I agree as I was also knowledgeable about 2 of the deals that were part of the entire project and I know 2 families that made out like bandits.


MaryMalone

A straight-up company doesn’t commit fraud, default on loans, or join with Wal-Mart in a bait-and-switch scam by demanding that the cities pay for the freeway overpass, something Wal-mart and Rottman originally agreed to pay for.


darwin_is_rolling_over

Again, incorrect and based on unproven allegations. Stick to facts. Proven facts.


MaryMalone

QUOTING DARWIN: Mb>”Again, incorrect and based on unproven allegations. Stick to facts. Proven facts.”


LOL. Your obsequious need to play Rottman’s toady is absurd. Do you really expect all news outlets and message boards to completely change their way of doing business and only “Stick to the facts. Proven facts” when publishing and/or discussing events?


The Watergate scandal–newspapers were wrong to publish allegations? People were wrong to discuss the allegations?


When you have to stoop to absurd demands to protect Rottman, you do more harm to Rottman than you do benefit.


standup

I don’t see any fraud charges. In your whacked out opinion, if someone defaults on a loan they are no good? Who the f are you? Queen of the do gooders? What if they don’t have the money for God’s sake? The lame city is to blame in a lot of this. If they had got off their lazy asses and moved on this years ago, the projects would have been done. The losers who run Atascadero deserve what they get in this case.


CitizenB

That’s right, Darwwin, everyone keeps writing as if cross-collateralization were illegal or at best shennanigans,when in fact it is fairly common practice and perfectly legal, the equivalent of taking out a second on your own home. The problem comes when, for various reasons, the projects fail to perform in a timely manner, the “lendee” falls behind on payments, the banks call on the loans, and the “downstream” bank is often left holding an empty bag, as is Montecito Bank here. Perhaps Montecito Bank thought the value of the other property would be enough to sustain both loans, and perhaps it was before the real estate bubble burst. And perhaps they thought a Wal-Mart associated project in A-town would be a sure thing….


On another note, most of the blame may not be on the feet-dragging of the City. I’ve heard Wall-Mart is none too eager to expand right now — they may be dragging their feet, deliberately trying to delay the project until their national balance sheet is a little more to their liking.


MaryMalone

I don’t see it as the same as taking out a second on your own home. In that case, you must reveal to both institutions of prior and applied for incumberances on the property, which it appears Rottman did not do. That is one of the things that brought on the Gearhart debacle.


In addition, Montecito Bank and Trust is “…alleging the Rottman Group is in default for $6.2 million in interest, fees, a line of credit and several loans taken on the Atascadero projects...” Again, this is the same thing that happened in the Gearhart debacle, which also was a result of incumberances not revealed to all parties and the worth of the deal ending up less than the amount of the incumberances.


Finally, contractors who worked for the project, although probably perfectly honest, are not reliable testimonials to Rottman’s standupedness. They have profited in the past from their association with Rottman and conceivably could profit again in the future from other contracts either with Rottman or its associated groups and projects.


Typoqueen

On a side note, I’m disappointed. This story has similarities of King, Textron and other business ventures by King and yet the King story was sugar coated. King is losing property right and left including some of the property that he was going to develop in Price Canyon, yet the city is still helping him develop in Price Canyon. King got in trouble for hiding assets when defaulting, I believe it was on some hotel that he was buying and defaulted on in Palm Springs or Palm Desert. King and the city are trying to also make it look as if King and his partners are going to pay for needed infrastructure when in reality that won’t happen. The City and King plan on trying to tax us, not just Pismo but perhaps the county to pay for that infrastructure. Deja Vue.


darwin_is_rolling_over

You are so right about John King. Someone who worked for King once told that there was never a contract signed by King that he ever intended to keep. That guy is greedy jerk. I think however that what we have in this case though is standard project cross collateralization. All developers do it. The banks do it them selves.


inverse Condemnation

Very interesting.


bobfromsanluis

I have to wonder if anyone who is familiar with how Wal-Mart treats all other businesses can actually be somewhat surprised by Wal-Mart’s actions here. If the Rottman Group thought that Wal-Mart was going to be a good business partner, they apparently have their head where the sun don’t shine. For Wal-Mart, it has always been and will always be whatever is best for Wal-Mart, period. For a company that makes so much money, employs so many people and screws with so many of their suppliers, Wal-Mart will take any tax break, attempt to make any county or city government jump through their hoops to be able to have a Wal-Mart locate in their area so that government can supposedly benefit from the sales tax revenue the new store will generate, without regard as to which mom and pop businesses will suffer, without regard to how those tax breaks will cause the governing agency to have to pay more for the development of the area the Wal-Mart wants to locate at. The fact that the Rottman Group has itself over extended bodes ill for any other developer that thinks they can step up and take over for the Rottman Group to “help” Wal-Mart open a store in Atascadero; Wal-Mart doesn’t care if you make any money, Wal-Mart doesn’t care if your local government has to pay for improvements like overpasses or intersections, Wal-Mart only cares that they make as much money as possible while spending as little as possible, always. If the Rottman Group has to file for bankruptcy due to their dealings with Wal-Mart, it may be the fault of Wal-Mart, but it is also due to those in the Rottman Group not understanding how ruthless Wal-Mart is.


darwin_is_rolling_over

Very good points


mkaney

You are absolutely correct. I have dealt with a lot of different companies in my day and I have seen many different behaviors. But there are two companies that stand above all others in this single minded drive. Walmart, and Costco. Costco will cleverly structure the deal so you perceive getting all this revenue up front, but they work in guarantees that their partners and vendors are responsible for which ensure you will not make a dime, EVER.


Dealing with this companies is a tres bizarre experience, and a lot of people like to pride themselves on being the gatekeepers, as if they have it all figured out. Partnering with them is extremely hazardous to your health, but even selling to them can be a nightmare. You don’t just call these people and offer to sell your product. You have to go through the gatekeepers, and then the list of requirements that you have to comply with are ABSURD. You’d think you were prepping the suite for a high maintenance Hollywood actor. The box requirements, the shipping requirements, the electronic data transfer requirements, and on and on. The electronic “paperwork” and back and forth to complete a single transaction would blow your mind.


winedude

You should see the penalties for a supplier if there are any problems with a UPC (bar-code) when scanned. I have heard of contracts not being renewed because of a scan problem with Wal-Mart.


MaryMalone

QUOTING BOBFROMSANLUIS: “I have to wonder if anyone who is familiar with how Wal-Mart treats all other businesses can actually be somewhat surprised by Wal-Mart’s actions here.


Please, no pity-party for those who contract with Wal-Mart.


As my midwestern mother used to say, “When you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas.”


Wall-Mart is well-known for treating everybody it is associated with, including employees and contractors, very badly. Anyone contracting with Wal-Mart either knows this and accepts it, knows it and plans for all possible contingencies (such as a bait-and-switch on who is going to pay for the freeway overpass), or knows it and thinks they are so brilliant at business that Wal-Mart won’t pull that on them.


darwin_is_rolling_over

Those of “us” who have to work to make a product to sell to the Walmarts of the world, or provide a service to the Walmarts of the world HAVE to deal with the Walmarts of the world. It is a reality. Those who can stay sheltered in government and academic jobs and collect a nice pension when they are ready to stop working will not understand that.


Like it or not, the Walmarts of the world put groceries in our cupboards, sitting on Wall Street and crying does not.


MaryMalone

If your company dictates that you must do business with Wal-Mart, then your company has problems, as does any company which MUST contract with with any one contractor.


I realize people contract with Wal-Mart. I’m just saying that they knew going into the deal what Wal-Mart’s business practices are, and made the decision to contract with Wal-Mart, anyway.


Again, when you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas. And when your livelihood depends on lying down with dogs, your business model probably needs some tweeking.


darwin_is_rolling_over

Well, this article is almost correct. I am not surprised Rottman is in financial trouble, they have been waiting for Walmart to make up their mind about what they want to do for almost 5 years. Big store, little store, big store …. whatever. Then Walmart doesnt want to pay what they said they would for roads. Big shock, right?


OsborneCox

I knew this Rothman Group was pretty shady. They’ve been employing people in this town to writer letters to the editor of the local paper… definitely a dumb out-of-towner move since nobody younger than 75 reads Atascadero’s local paper.


darwin_is_rolling_over

Funny, but probably inaccurate. You want to know who has been writing the letters (or paying for them) follow the bouncing yellow happy face. The worst thing Rottman ever did was sell that property to Walmart. I bet if you asked them they would agree. The typical A-town twist is that the city manager and his assistant along with the then City council strong armed Rottman into selling it the first place. How quickly we all forget and just assume the developer is evil. Maybe we should start a movement, Occupy Del Rio, or something catchy like that.


Mr. Holly

I don’t think the Rottman Group got strong armed by anyone. The reported selling price was between 16 million dollars and 19 million dollars. Nobody would have to twist my arm to make that decision.

I will have to agree that the city manager has completely dropped the ball on this issue. This really comes to light when the city of Paso Robles approved and completed the Lowe’s shopping center in 2 years. Even SLO was on the ball, their Target center took around a year and a half from start to finish. Atascadero is into the Annex/WalMart project 5-6 years now it and appears to be going nowhere.

This is probably the reason that the city manager is on a 3 week vacation trying to figure out what to do with all of the accrued vacation time on the books. And NOTHING happens in Atown unless the city manager says so.

Will Atascadero ever have a city council that will have a majority of councilmembers who really want to get anything done. Currently I think Fonzi would like to, but things could be a little too political to step forward for her. I think she is still thinking about the upcoming Mayoral election. From all out appearances Kelly seems to be the only one who is ready to go forward and start making decisions in a timely manner.


darwin_is_rolling_over

Kelly will absolutely make timely decisions especially when they benefit him or his realtor comrades. As I understand it, the selling price for the Walmart property was not a listed price, solicited by Rottman. I also understand that Walmart said no to Walmart several times as they didnt want the baggage Walmart brings with it. The sales price was an amount that Walmart knew no one in their right mind would pass up, especially given the pressure from the City in the form of veiled threats and empty promises about future project approvals. I believe that the Rottman group (who by the way owned Dove Creek before Centex did, as well as several other properties in town) understood well and clearly that project approvals would be made very difficult for them if they didn’t sell the property to Walmart.


darwin_is_rolling_over

That is ‘Rottman said no to Walmart’


mkaney

This right here is the conversation to pay attention to, I think, if anyone really wants to understand what happened and prevent it from happening again.


MaryMalone

If Rottman is paying people to write letters to the editor, and if the quality is anything like what we are seeing here, then it is no wonder Rottman’s financial status is in the toilet.


Cindy

I’m not surprised. What else is new in A-Town? So the big players took creative finance 6.0 from Kelly Gearhart, next……………


darwin_is_rolling_over

Kelly used hard money lenders and defrauded old people. It looks like the Rottman group went to this thing called a … BANK. Not terribly creative, actually pretty normal behavior for a legit developer. I wonder what they pay every month in interest alone so they can put up with a City staff that is afraid of their own shadow, a council that comprises the living definition of conflict of interest and a citizenry that hated them before they ever had a chance to build. Maybe they are bad guys, but buying property with an expectation of building something to make a profit doesnt make them bad. God forbid anyone invest in our community and try to bring back some lost tax dollars from Paso or SLO. You know what would be great … another movie theater or maybe another Tattoo parlor, or even better a new Mexican restaurant.


Cindy

Kelly Gearhart also went to banks and procured financing with “white washed” titles and other assets with undisclosed encumbrances.


Perhaps you missed the following :


“In its lawsuit, Montecito Bank & Trust contends the Rottman Group deceived them by using some of the same assets to secure loans for the Atascadero projects the group used as collateral for a $15.3 million loan from City National Bank, for a project called Oak Canyon Ranch in Calaveras County.”


Sound Familiar?


darwin_is_rolling_over

Unfortunately you are wrong and misinformed. What Kelly and his investors did is use one loan (based on a bogus property values) to service the interest on another loan (based on bogus property values). Kelly did not borrow from real Banks. Kelly borrowed from hard money lenders because his credit was horrible and he was over extended. In short Kelly stole money from innocent people he duped.


The rottman group borrowed, with good credit, from reputable lending institutions based on a property value that was appropriate. They then used that property on another project as collateral. All completely legal (that is different than grooming and stealing like Kelly.)


It is really pretty simple to see what has happened here. Rottman borrowed money to finance projects. They paid their bills for what seems to be a long time while the city and Walmart drug them through an expensive process that Walmart said they would pay for, then decided that they want more from everyone else.


Just because a company is successful doesnt mean they did anything illegal or immoral to get there. You assume that that they are not capable of being victims, when in fact they are little different than your neighbors or friends who lost their houses. Can you imagine buying a piece of property with the hope and dream of building a project that you can be proud of so that you can be jerked around for years by a city full of corrupt self serving criminals and a “partner” that expertly uses a bait and switch, just to have the property repossessed because you cant keep paying the thousands of dollars a month for vacant property.


And in the end you and I lose as we waste more of our life driving out of time to buy the things we need. What a waste.


Cindy

It’s one thing to tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about once but twice!!

Here yah go, know it all……………..


A million-dollar loan from Heritage Oaks Bank to North County developer Kelly

Gearhart earlier this year was based on “erroneous” and …

calcoastnews.com/…/banks-own-appraisal-questions-gearhart-loan/


calcoastnews.com/…/heritage-oaks-bank-makes-out-while-investors-lose/


calcoastnews.com/…/fraud-lawsuit-filed-against-heritage-oaks-bank-and-stewart-title/


darwin_is_rolling_over

The problem is Heritage Oaks and Stewart title are locally owned institutions, owned by people who never bothered to check Kelly’s credit because they knew what they were getting into. Comparing Montecito Trust to Heritage Oaks is irrational. Heritage Oaks loaned over the value of the properties. PLUS, most of Kellys money didnt come from there, most of it came from hard money.


Again, Rottman didnt borrow more than the property was worth, but they did, most of the time, pay more than market value when they bought it. They didnt use hard money and they didnt steal from old people. They also didnt abandon the project. Let me ask you a question … if you own a home, is it worth more than you owe right now? Did you ever take out a second mortgage? Did you ever get a loan modification? If you had you would know that you have to miss a payment to get a loan mod. I bet this is very similar.


Cindy

LOL, What a piece of work.


In the mean time, HOB is a Bank, Dude.


darwin_is_rolling_over

Glad we could make you laugh out load, but that doesn’t make your incorrect arguments any stronger.


Yes, HOB is a local, small, community, unsophisticated, good ole boy bank. Hurst Financial is not a bank at all. Most of Kelly’s funds came from HFI and Estate Fiancial, who had backing from the good ole boy network at HOB.


I know if you are not in the development business this is hard to understand, but a developer like Kelly, who has built two bit projects (houses) all over SLO county, would never be able to walk into a reputable financial institution and get a loan based on credit. So he had to go to hard money, high interest lenders (HFI, EFI) and rely on the good ole boy new work (HOB and the Porter family) to get funding. (By the way, loans approved by greedy people willing to take a risk in slime bags to get 20% on the money.)


Rottman, who has built large commercial projects all over the western united states, would never go to a hard money lender or rely on the good ole boy network because they don’t have to. They have this thing called credit, which they used to get real loans on actual projects.


You don’t have to like them, I am not sure I do, but I do respect their success and you should understand the mechanics of the construction lending world before you make incorrect comments to the world.


MaryMalone

QUOTING DARWIN: “Glad we could make you laugh out load, but that doesn’t make your incorrect arguments any stronger.”


“WE”? Either you are pregnant, royalty (speaking in the Royal We), or part of a group, such as, oh…for instance…, The Rothman Group.


Robert1

Some of what you say is true, but I know for a fact Rottman’s group in fact used private money as well with higher interest rates then what the bank’s were charging at the time. You have much more flexibility as a developer to move quickly on deals and without delays as they did on some of these parcels. This is not their first rodeo, and when you borrow from a bank they want all your assets listed.


MaryMalone

An argument constructed mainly of logical fallacies is not credible. Indeed, it conveys a sense of being desperate to whitewash what The Rothman Group has done. If you cannot make a solid supportive argument of The Rothman Group by honest tactics, perhaps you should reconsider The Rothman Group’s worthiness of your support.


**********

QUOTING DARWIN: “Just because a company is successful doesnt mean they did anything illegal or immoral to get there….”


RED HERRING. Who, besides yourself, connected “successful” with “illegal and immoral” actions?


**********


QUOTING DARWIN: “You assume that that they are not capable of being victims, when in fact they are little different than your neighbors or friends who lost their houses.”


FAULTY COMPARISON. Oh, COME ON. There are a multitude of huge differences between indiviidual homeowners who lost their homes and a huge project investor advisor and development group. Therefore, the comparison is a logical fallacy.


**********


QUOTING DARWIN: ” Can you imagine buying a piece of property with the hope and dream of building a project that you can be proud of so that you can be jerked around for years by a city full of corrupt self serving criminals and a “partner” that expertly uses a bait and switch, just to have the property repossessed because you cant keep paying the thousands of dollars a month for vacant property.”


There are several logical fallacies in this one sentence, and and all of which negate the credibility of the statement.


1. APPEAL TO EMOTIONS This is a blatant appeal to emotions. How Cindy would feel in a hypothetical, dissimilar situation has zero to do with whether or not The Rottman Group has committed fraud.


2. FALSE ANOLOGYThis is also an embarassingly obvious false anology. A large investor advisor development corporation (The Rottman Group) is far too different than Cindy (one individual) for an anology about the feelings of the two. Therefore, the analogy is invalid.


3. FAULTY COMPARISONThe Rottman Group is a large investor advisor development corporation. It does not have emotions or feelings. Cindy is one individual person. She has emotions and feelings. Therefore, the comparison is invalid.


4. SUPPRESSED EVIDENCE You misrepresent the reality of Rottman’s problems when you conveniently ignore several allegations of malfeasance. Had you truthfully included those allegations, your attempted pity-party for The Rottman Group would have been shown to be obviously and hilariously ridiculous.


These allegations (quoting from the article, above) include:


“…the Rottman Group is in default for $6.2 million in interest, fees, a line of credit and several loans taken on the Atascadero projects,”


“”Montecito Bank & Trust contends the Rottman Group deceived them by using some of the same assets to secure loans for the Atascadero projects the group used as collateral for a $15.3 million loan from City National Bank, for a project called Oak Canyon Ranch in Calaveras County,”


…”City National Bank foreclosed on the property further diminishing the Rottman Group’s creditworthiness…,” AND


“…Montecito Bank & Trust contends the Rottman Group deceived them by using some of the same assets to secure loans for the Atascadero projects the group used as collateral for a $15.3 million loan from City National Bank, for a project called Oak Canyon Ranch in Calaveras County.”


darwin_is_rolling_over

Very academic of you. I am impressed. (Sarcasm).


Your use of text book definitions shows that you lack the knowledge to actually understand the mechanics of the situation. It is a common technique of those in the academic world to use term like Red Herring to try to reset a moral compass to the direction they want to head. Rottman has been measured as successful on many levels, by many people, including the bank that loaned them money. Kelly has been measured as illegal and immoral by many people, including those he hurt as well as those who enforce our laws. You can seek to disconnect yourself from the reality by pulling out your notes from a 200 level college class, but it doesnt change what is actually happening around you.


This is not a logic and semantics class as Cuesta. This is real life. People were not theoretically hurt by Kelly, they suffered actual financial damages that will have physical tangible impact on their lives. Likewise, pulling quotes from a lawsuit (actually quotes from a website quoting one side of a lawsuit that has not even been in front of a judge) and using them to slander a reputable company has physical tangible effects on those that are part of or have invested in that company. And you accuse others of logical fallacy? Please.


That being said, think about this:


1. Appeal to emotions: When using terms such as White wash you are correct in applying this term to Kelly. He borrowed millions of dollars on property that never had that value (in other words he made the property look like it was worth more than it was with the help of his Title company). Rottman did no such thing. Rottman used a reputable third party appraisal and took out a loan for part of the value of the property. They did not inflate the value, nor did they borrow 100% of the value at the time they got the loan. By throwing out terms like White wash you are appealing to the emotions of those that were actual victims of Kelly’s white washing, when in reality it is an embarrassing and comical false comparison.


2. False Analogy: Comparing Rottman to Kelly. Comparing a reputable company that is willing to finish what they started with an good reputation, to a thief that ran away from his responsibilities.


3. Faulty Comparison: The Rottman group is comprised of owners, partners that invest and live in our community. They are not just “a large investor advisor development corporation”. Their family members live among us, in our community. They own homes and have children and work . The root of your error is lack of personal knowledge of the Rottman Group. You make a false comparison when you erases the faces of a company and apply a label.


4. Suppressed Evidence: You have mistaken personal knowledge for suppressed evidence. First of all, there is no pity party for Rottman. If their investment fails, they will get what they deserve. What you have lost track of is that my original comments stemmed from an ill thought, baseless comment (false comparison if you will) from Cindy. You, and she, have mistakenly accepted text from a lawsuit as the truth before it has been proven in a court of law. The actual suppressed evidence, neither you nor I can gleam from a CalCoast article.


MaryMalone

QUOTING DARWIN: “God forbid anyone invest in our community and try to bring back some lost tax dollars from Paso or SLO.You know what would be great …another movie theater or maybe another Tattoo parlor, or even better a new Mexican restaurant


1. FALSE CHOICE By implication, you provide the false choice of either:


a. Choosing The Rothman Group’s WallMart project, including the alleged fraud and defaulting on $$$millions in loans (see “ALLEGATIONS,” below) as a cost of getting “some lost tax dollars” back into the community, or,


b. Choosing a tattoo parlor or Mexican restaurant to get some lost tax dollars back into the community.


The reality is that the voters could choose many other approaches to increasing regional revenue, including finding an investment and development group that won’t commit fraud and won’t default on its loans.


2. NEGATIVE ASSOCIATION Associating NOT embracing the Rottman Group’s project with preferring “another tattoo parlor or….Mexican restaurant.” Tattoo parlors are not seen as a positive influence by the majority of voters, and if an area is already saturated with Mexican restaurants, another Mexican restaurant will not be a welcome addition to the community. The reality is that voters can reject WalMart, The Rothman Group, and all of the fraud, scandals, and welching on deals AND get another anchor for the Annex project.


3. SUPPRESSED EVIDENCE By conveniently neglecting to include the allegations in the article (see “ALLEGATIONS,” below) is the only way you can make this false argument. No one has objected to investing in our community and trying to bring back some lost tax dollars from Paso or SLO. What they are objecting to is the following allegations outlined in the article, above. Had you included the allegations, very few people would have agreed with your support of The Rothman Group.:


ALLEGATIONS:

“…the Rottman Group is in default for $6.2 million in interest, fees, a line of credit and several loans taken on the Atascadero projects,”


“”Montecito Bank & Trust contends the Rottman Group deceived them by using some of the same assets to secure loans for the Atascadero projects the group used as collateral for a $15.3 million loan from City National Bank, for a project called Oak Canyon Ranch in Calaveras County,”


…”City National Bank foreclosed on the property further diminishing the Rottman Group’s creditworthiness…,” AND


“…Montecito Bank & Trust contends the Rottman Group deceived them by using some of the same assets to secure loans for the Atascadero projects the group used as collateral for a $15.3 million loan from City National Bank, for a project called Oak Canyon Ranch in Calaveras County.”


darwin_is_rolling_over

For heavens sake, put away the text book and come back to earth where things are really happening.


And the “WE” mentioned above, are all of “US” making comments that have Cindy LOL’ing. You only attack each comment by supporting it with unproven Allegations and pretentious academic vocabulary.


You are obviously oblivious to how things get built. (Including your glorious IKEA temples and Volvo dealerships.)


MaryMalone

Sorry, I’m not going to let you get away with using logical fallacies to try to convince people that Wal-Mart and its servant, Rottman, walk on water.


Those kinds of discredited tactics are amusing when Sarah Palin and Michelle Bachman use them. When a toady for Rottman and Wal-Mart uses those tactics—not so much.


Being able to see dishonest hucksters for what they are is really not that hard. Logical fallacies are described on many websites. In addition, being able to identify hucksters and their dishonest tactics is something every voter should be able to do, especially since politicians do it continuously these days.


Again, unless you make it a habit to go hither and yon across the internet, ordering all posters to not discuss an article or situation if what is in the article are not “proven facts,” you are simply using your admonitions to stick to “proven facts” as an excuse to attempt to discredit my posts.


Finally, I’m not surprised that someone who is a Rottman toady doesn’t like being taken to task for their dishonest tactics in posting. You know, the ol’ “When you lay down with dogs, you get up with fleas” thingy…


darwin_is_rolling_over

Okay then try these logical fallacies:


1. Argument from Ignorance: Lack of knowledge is not a substitute for fact. Remember, like mom said, assuming makes and ass-out of-u- and-me. You don’t know all of the facts, and you certainly know less than I do about building commercial projects and the financing there of. (Hint: your favorite local coffee shop is in a building that was developed and paid for with money. It didnt just appear on lot one night via a sprinkle of pixie dust. I bet it also was not built with all natural materials by folks on government aid.)


2. Shift the burden of proof: The burden of proof is on the accuser not the accused (remember innocent until … oh never mind).


3. Red Herring: Your rants about Sarah Palin, Walmart ect …. thank you for a) showing us who you really are and b) changing the subject (by the way this also qualifies as an If-by-whiskey or Appeal to poverty fallacy)


4. Cherry Picking: Pulling excerpts of articles and facts to support your position shows your predetermined focus and lack of understanding of the big picture.


5. Ad hominem: And finally we see that you have resorted to name calling when you run out of arguments. Stick and stones Marymalones. You have no idea who I am, where I have been or what I have seen, but I guarantee you it has never been at the behest of the Rottman Group. None the less, I have enjoyed you banter. I feel more strongly than ever about my feelings.


MaryMalone

QUOTING DARWIN: “a citizenry that hated them before they ever had a chance to build. Maybe they are bad guys…”


If there is a silver lining to the cloud that the people of Atascadero have had to live with for years now, where Wal-Mart and its servants (i.e., Rottman) insisted on shoving down the peoples’ throat a store they didn’t want, it’s this: the people did not give up, it looks like the Wal-Mart may very well not be built in Atascadero, and Rottman will pay for its role in trying to force Wal-Mart on an unwilling public.


For too long now, our politicians in Washington have ignored the peoples’ demands and instead forced on them what their big-bucks lobbyists wanted. For too long now, Wal-Mart has waddled it’s giant corporate kiester across the nation, forcing their stores on unwilling taxpayers.


Glad to see Wal-Mart is getting its fat-kiester kicked in Atascadero, and if Rottman goes down, perhaps other contractees will learn a lesson from Rottman’s mistakes.