Front Page  »  

Waage announces supervisor bid against Hill

November 10, 2011

Ed Waage

By KAREN VELIE

Pismo Beach City Councilman Ed Waage said he will challenge incumbent District 3 San Luis Obispo County Supervisor Adam Hill in 2012.

District 3 includes a large portion of San Luis Obispo, Avila Beach, Pismo Beach, and Grover Beach. Hill, a former Cal Poly English instructor, defeated incumbent Jerry Lenthall in 2008 to claim the seat.

Waage and Hill are on separate sides of a controversy regarding a Phase II study by the county Air Pollution Control District (APCD).  Both supervisor candidates set on the board of the APCD.

The APCD created the study that shows a link between off-road vehicle use on the dunes and unhealthy air pollution levels downwind from the dunes on the Nipomo Mesa. If the APCD Board approves the rule, the district would have the ability to fine the state up to $1,000 a day when air testing downwind from the vehicle recreation area does not meet the APCD’s air quality standards. The funds would then be primarily used to cover salaries for APCD staff.

Hill, a former English professor at Cal Poly, contends allegations that the study is inaccurate are based on misinformation. He supports the study and allowing the APCD to fine the state.

Waage, a graduate of the University of Washington with a Ph.D. in chemistry, contends the study is flawed and wants the inaccuracies corrected. In addition, Waage would like to see the adoption of best management practices at the dunes and a program of cooperation between state parks and the APCD.

Waage taught chemistry at Illinois State University and later headed up the State of Illinois Hazardous Materials Emergency Preparedness program and the Nuclear Power Plant Emergency Response program.

In 1981, he joined PG&E to support emergency preparedness efforts at Diablo Canyon Power Plant. Waage retired from PG&E in 2000.

For one year, he came out of retirement to work at the International Atomic Energy Agency (a United Nations agency based in Vienna, Austria) in 2005 which is the year the IAEA received the Nobel Peace Prize.

Waage served four years on the Pismo Beach Planning Commission before being elected to the Pismo Beach City Council in 2008.


Loading...
Subjects:                     
Related:


28 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Ed Waage has had a moderate reputation on Pismo Planning Commission and on the City Council, crossing party lines to support candidates who protect our local environment. So suggesting that there is a wide difference between Hill and Waage on environmental concerns would be a very apparent falsehood. It might be sensible to take Waage at his word when he says he wants to see flaws in the studies accepted by the Air Pollution Control District Board corrected before the studies are used to make policy decisions.


But there are many more issues with which the Board of Supervisors grapple, many of which affect the availability of private and public employment, community health care, and whether the County collaborates with the incorporated Cities or imposes on them. It will be interesting to see what differentiates Waage from Hill on these broader issues. Of course, Hill’s history of displaying his hair trigger temper with friends and opponents alike may be the biggest thing that differentiates these two candidates between now and the June election.


0

I agree with almost everything you say in this post. But what are you referring to regarding crossing party lines and supporting our local environment. I’m not sure yet who I’m going to vote for but the one issue holding me up on Waage that he doesn’t seem to care about our local environment. I would appreciate any examples as I’m truly on the fence and that is a deal buster with me. He never ever bucks what the other city council members say. I have seen him seem to start to disagree with them on a few issues or question the council but when it comes to voting he always ALWAYS goes with the rest of the board. Waage is very conservative I have never seen this middle of the road thing with him. But with that said I do like that he’s methodical and he’s a pretty bright guy. He’s very polite and doesn’t fly off fly off the handle so those are a plus but then again I just described Teixeira. Just not sure yet.


0

Waage is an idiot. he has a hard time following what is going on during the city council meetings, and has to be told what was just said many times. he seems to be in his own little world of make believe, and has done nothing in the way of accomplishing anything worthwhile on the council in any of the meetings i have sat in on. he sits up there with a blank look on his face and reads prepared comments and responses from a piece of paper, which he has to be told when to read from it.


0

Ed Waage at least listens to the people he represents, Adam Hill is a self absorbed person who obviously doesn’t have to listen ,to anyone if he doesn”t want to………he just shuts off their microphone! I mean why listen when you already know what it is you want. Mean spirited and self centered is not how I want the people I vote for to behave. How we ever thought this pompous individucal whould look after anyone but himself…….we were fooled by his teaching cridetials that he would actdually behave intellegently and not like a spoiled little brat that has to have it all his way! I say any warm bady over Hill!….no way to go wrong except to re-elect Hill.


0

I don’t have a clue about Waage. Someone should publish Cliff Notes on these politicians.


0

Hill: Hot-head, self-absorbed, narcissistic and bad.


Waage: Not Hill.


0

My guess, and hope, is that Waage is concerned with much more than the Dunes Issue.


That touchstone issue will cause people to line up behind the candidate most closely aligned with their views. Which is to be expected, but I hope that in the heat of *that* debate, voters don’t lose sight of all else that is going on in the county that requires thoughtful and reflective representation.


0

The main problem that I have with Waage is that he’s for these very destructive building developments going in off of Price Canyon and Old Oak Park Rd.. I am just puzzled at how such a methodical man can’t see that these developments will ruin this area and that they are financially irresponsible. All of the facts point to this and yet he just seems to follow what the rest of the board says. He reminds me of Texieria, he just rolls with the flow. If he would stand up to the rest of the Pismo council once in awhile and if he said no to this development then he’d have my support. I’m not really sure at this point who I will vote fore, six of one.


Who ever speaks out against these two developments will win this race, no doubt about it. The majority of people in the So. county don’t want this massive sprawl.


0

Typo, I hear that you are bias about this development in the Price Canyon area because you have a good friend that enjoys riding her horses on that land and doesn’t want her view and even her use of her neighbors property tampered with. Do you have a good friend who has land that abuts this development?


0

Ummm..maybe its just a simple case of stop building your damn houses,Targets,Walmarts and big city chain stores everywhere. Perhaps its a little late to say stop ruining SLO county with development, but this place is no longer what most of us ever hoped for.


0

Not building houses is more exclusive than building houses. Even if you don’t build new ones, the L.A. money will keep moving up, and driving up the price of “regular” houses like you and I live in. Which, I guess, is good for us, until we can’t afford to live here anymore.


0

This developement will actually drive the prices down. People aren’t moving to Pismo. It will be a ghost town and we will run out of water. If by an chance they do happen to sell these places the traffic will be terrible. Bad bad idea. So many posters here don’t like me here, perhaps I should use reverse psychology and say that it is a good idea.


0

“So many posters here don’t like me here”


I don’t think that’s true at all. Maybe disagree with some of your positions or comments about their leaning to the right, but that’s part of the beauty of posting.


0

That’s exactly how they got the “Federal Reserve Act” passed! Get ready Typo, the next “up” economy, this area is just going to explode. I bet it will eventually rival Orange County!


0

No, I have a lot of friends that this (Price Canyon) will effect. I have a few friends with horses but I don’t know that they ride there. But it’s an amazing place, absolutely beautiful. But that’s not the main reason that I’m against all this developement. I’m against it because it doesn’t make sense, there is no demand. A golf course when the golf courses that we have now are losing money. Almost 1000 homes at a time when people can’t get financed. The last census showed Pismo’s population is in decline and they can’t sell what they have. There are water shortages up and down the coast and the water is real dodgy regarding these developments. All those homes, golf course, convention center, spa, wine tasting facility, hotel and we already have the worse traffic in the county (according to Cal Trans). It makes no sense and that is why I’m not sure about voting for Waage, I think this is a very foolish move that can ruin our area, not just Pismo but the entire 5 cities. They’ve already started this developement. One of the developers has leveled 68 lots, he’s put in electricity, plumbing, streets in and street lights all off of Price Canyon but hasn’t been able to sell one lot in 5 years and the city wants to add almost a 1000 more! The more I type about it the more it makes me not want to vote for Waage.


0

I’m a Waage fan, but am curious as to why he, or the other Council members, support this project. Maybe you can enlighten me with their stated reasoning. Is it zoned for this and therefore is legal? It sounds like you watch or attend the meetings and I can’t/don’t. Thanks, Typo…..


0

Knowing how wordy I am, it will be difficult to make this short but I’ll do my best.


The council’s public take on this seems to be that it will generate income for the city through added taxes, TOT and $$ through permits. Plus they feel that a convention center and golf course will bring more $$. Some feel that the city is enamoured with the developers. I feel it’s a bit of all of those things. There are certain council members that are enamoured with the developers but I don’t feel they all are. I feel that the Mayor is looking at this as a money maker. Waage seems to just follow with what the rest of them want, I don’t feel he’s the type to be impressed with the schmoozing by the developers like some of the others are as for the other three, well I’ll just leave that as I don’t really have anything positive to say about their motives. I watch almost all of the meetings and have to come to find out that there is a short list of developers and architects that if they come to the city for any favors that they will surely get what the want. It’s usually the same people, Loughead, King, Spangler, Grant and Puglisi (sp ?). Anything they want, it’s theirs and that goes for the Planning Com. and the City Council. They will change city codes, lobby the Coastal Commish, what ever it takes to help out those particular people and that even includes deceiving the public. I would like to see list of campaign contributors to see if any of these guys are on there, I haven’t looked yet.


We also have a very influential planning commish (Burns), who has vested interest in all this. He is a commercial realtor and has financial dealings with all of those guys and he will strong arm (sort of say) the others to get what he wants. We have another planning commish that is in real estate and also handles some of the cities real estate dealings.


In reality, the numbers don’t add up. There are some very bright people including attorneys fighting this can’t believe that city is pushing for this. There is not one thing about this purposed urban sprawl that makes sense. The water is an entire different can of worms. There isn’t enough water. They are presently counting on state water that the develops. are purchasing from one of their past partners. The property that they are buying the state water from is in foreclosure and is going on the auction block so that is a pretty dodgy deal. Plus state water isn’t considered a reliable source.


I tried to make this short but I’m just not good at that. If you want more info you can go to savepricecanyon.com. We have a lot of supporters, including the City of AG.


Many of us want the property kept in the county. The county has the property zoned for ag rural, 1 home per 20 acres on much of it and 1 residence per 5 acres on other parts of these properties.


0

Thanks, Typo….very interesting. I do know that King co-sponsored a fundraiser for Hill and that the Burns individual supports him as well, I’ve heard.


0

Adam Hill seems to vote for what serves his agenda and to hell with the people and what is good for the whole. Ed Waage seems like an intellegent fellow…..more than I can say for someone who turns the microphone off for someone with an opposing point of view. We have seen how Mr. Hill handles people who disagree with him………don’t let him turn your micriophone off…….vote this one out!!!!! Ed Waage makes all the sense in the world, let’s check the facts and make sure before we decide to take out an entire industry (the only one floating this area right now) over twisted details to further some persons lame agenda!


0

Waage is intelligent, well-informed and a respectful person who listens to others. On Congalton, it was clear that he can work with others to find solutions, rather than treat those badly that disagree with him. I’m sick of arrogant, know-it-all public servants that disregard public input, and do so rudely.


0

I think there are a LOT of people who would be better than Hill. Let’s hope Waage is one of them.


0

California has a thousand miles of coastline and people can drive on about 2 of them, isn’t 998 miles enough.

There have been several deaths at he beaches from people being buried in the sand at least that is easy to solve, if we ban all people from beach areas with sand we can save several lives a year, please protect us and ban people from the beach.

Has any one done a study of the farms below the mesa they farm in sand and the plowing causes dust if we ban farming it could help the problem of the sand polution and also stop the use of that dirty diesel fuel and chemicals it would be a boom for the polution problems.

Sally


0

has anyone done a study on the amount of pollution produced by the santa maria speedway the night of the races and the morning afterwards? they say that the reason the particles of sand stick is because of carbon monoxide, and that speedway is right upwind from the nipomo mesa. I discovered this one night right after the races were ending, i was on highway 101 and saw this huge toxic cloud hovering over and moving toward the mesa. it glowed blue and purple in the moonlight. it looked like a sci-fi movie.


0

A purple haze you say?


0

That’s not stridulation. It’s the sound of the well-informed chirping with delight.


Where’s my sign?


0

What’s the noise that crickets make?


0

The scientific name is stridulation and it is only emitted by males. One purpose is to repel other males.


0

LOL leave it to you to have the scientific term!


I guess that no discussion is good? Must say that Waage’s dune report to Pismo was pretty good.


0