Adam Hill is not sorry, and blames the media

April 19, 2012

Adam Hill

Controversial San Luis Obispo County Supervisor Adam Hill moans about media coverage of his personal life and public outbursts during board meetings in Thursday’s New Times’ cover story.

Hill starts his interview  by lamenting the negative coverage he has received in CalCoastNews and the New Times and said discussing it  would sound like a “bunch of whining,” but then goes on to repeatedly chastise CalCoastNews.

For example, he blames CalCoastNews for prompting him to illicitly turn off a speaker’s microphone during public comment before having the Los Osos activist escorted from the podium. Hill justified his action by claiming Linda Owen was reading from the divorce records of Public Works Director Paavo Ogren, something  he thought she took from a CalCoastNews article.

However, CalCoastNews never posted Ogren’s divorce documents and Owen, at the time Hill cut off her microphone,  was addressing her concerns about what she labeled a lax investigation by the county into allegations of an inappropriate relationship between Ogren and former Los Osos CSD board member Maria Kelly.

When asked by the New Times where the line should be drawn between his personal and professional lives, Hill responded by castigating CalCoastNews for covering his contentious divorce and a crank call he made pretending to be his opponent, Pismo Beach Councilman Ed Waage.

“And I have been offended by, I don’t think you guys necessarily go there, but certainly the Congalton, Cal Coast access has been despicable, quite frankly.

Kevin Rice

NEW TIMES: “Do you think your public persona matches your private persona?”

HILL: “I think that public meetings are very formal. You have your Robert’s Rules of Order and you have this chamber and all this wood and chrome and shit out there, and we’re there in our suits.”

Kevin Rice

I can’t believe all the profanity Hill uses in his New Times interview! What is wrong with this guy? Doesn’t he have any kind of internal regulator??? Keep it to your private parties. You are in the highest elected office in the county, Adam. Try to act like it.


I have to say that for an English instructor, his grammar was surprising in this article.


The good thing about Adam Hill and his thinking is that he is the only one who might act to save the North County aquifer from being drained dry by restricting new vineyards. He isn’t tied to old pals and winery friends in the North County.

Otherwise, he is in this group of BOS leftists who look on the energy audits and requiring homeowners to replace all their windows and taxing people to pay for those who can’t afford energy upgrades, and on and on, and can’t see the unintended consequences on private property rights, home ownership,etc.


re: “Hill responded by castigating CalCoastNews for covering his contentious divorce” – Where in the New Times article is that reported? I’ve read it twice and don’t find any mention of his divorce, only Ogren’s. This appears to be false.

David Broadwater


“Adam lashed out when CCN wrote about his divorce. It is called critical thinking and you should be able to put the pieces together. Point out one thing written by CCN about Adam that is untrue.”

You might call it critical thinking, some of us would call it simple gossip.

“He did admit in court documents to agreeing with his wife to split the bank account, and then left …bla bla bla.”

Why does all of this matter and who knows what happens in a private situation like this? You were not there and neither was CCN, there could be much more to this. It’s none of our business. We have not heard both sides of this story and nor should we. Such gossip, I’m embarrassed for you.

“He did make the phoney call pretending to be someone else.”

It was a personal call and a joke that was meant between two friends.

“He did turn off the mic during public comment because he did not like what was being said., ”

If I remember correctly, according to the Brown Act, speakers aren’t allowed to personally verbally attack people. The chair person has a duty to stop people from this type of behavior. I would think that if I got up and started personally attacking say supe Mechem or other staff members with personal jabs that I would get cut off as well. That’s how it’s supposed to work

Kevin Rice

INCORRECT. The Brown Act specifically protects criticism. There is NO prohibition against personal attacks. Even if there were, the comments about Ogren are the People’s business because of the nexus between Ogren’s official duty as public works director and his relationship with a Los Osos CSD director which is a conflict.

54954.3 (c) The legislative body of a local agency shall not prohibit

public criticism of the policies, procedures, programs, or services

of the agency, or of the acts or omissions of the legislative body.

Adam Hill acted as a tyrant in censoring the right of the public to speak. Hauling them away by the Sheriff goes even further.


I was re-reading this message board on a past article about Hill and noticed that you really changed your opinion on Hill, Typo. I’m curious as to what he has done since then that put you back in his camp. You were quite critical before and even insinuated that he might have a drinking problem.


I will admit that I used to get caught up in this gossip rumor mill on this website. Then I realized what I was doing, I was judging people by gossip and rumors. I also remembered that this has happened to me as well, I’ve been in the position of hearing things about me that weren’t true so I have taken a step back and gotten back to my true sense of morals, the morals that I was raised with. I have had terrible rumors spread about me so I have chosen to not make that same mistake. It is easy to get caught up in this trash talk though, perhaps that is why I have become so vocal to try and stop these vicious rumors and try and point out to people that it’s so easy to fall into this.


Fair enough…..


When Hill can only attack the messenger, he shows he cannot counter what the message the messenger has delivered.

Grow up, Mr. Hill. You’ve been a royal a$$hat since your first day in office. You have zero respect for the people you are supposed to govern, and then gripe because they criticize you.

Kevin Rice

“Waage is running because of two agendas. One would be for developers. He caves to every developer…”

THAT’S A FLAT OUT LIE. I just talked to a “developer” this afternoon whose project was turned down by ONE VOTE… Waage.

You are ignorant on this one, typo. See 6/21/11 Item 7.B.


That’s not a lie. The new updated project/land use change hasn’t come back before the board yet, the planning commission is still working on it with staff. Lets see how he votes on that. Lets see if votes for that paticular developer’s ‘permanent open space’ land to be changed as to add more developement. I’ll bet you $10.00 that he votes in favor of the developer. By your own admission he did say something to the effect that he wanted more in it for the city so he’s just waiting for a better deal with the devil, like a used car salesman he’s upping the anti.

Kevin Rice

He voted it down. He was the key NO vote.

You hung your hat on the line that ‘he caves to every developer.’ It’s false.

Now you’re pinning the tail on a donkey that hasn’t ridden yet.


You are the one pinning the tail on a donkey that hasn’t ridden because it’s not over yet. Stay tuned. I’ll up that bet to $20.00 that he votes to change the land use so that developer can build. Do you want to take that bet. If he approves this land use change to the general plan then you will be wrong.

Reality Check

Multiple sources have said that the developer in question has been accusing Waage of being anti-property rights because of Waage’s opposition to compromising open space. Typo bashes Waage because she thinks he’s pro-growth and the hopeful developer bashes Waage because he thinks Waage impedes his development. Ironic that polar opposites both bash Waage and try to undermine his character.

Am I the only one who deduces that Waage is being fair minded in both situations?


Oh sure, I’m sure the developers of, behind OSH, PC Villas, LRDM and PC are bashing Mr. Waage,,,get real. I’m sorry but I’ve been following this too long and those like me will get a few giggles from your statement. Regarding Spangler, time will tell. That one is still up in the air. I can’t wait to see how he votes on the LU regarding ‘permanent’ open space. Betcha that he votes to change the LU. Although on second thought if this comes to the council before the election then he might cast the one vote to deny this LU change (knowing it will still pass and that it might gain votes). But if it comes after the election when Mr. Waage loses the election then I have no doubt he’ll follow the crowd and vote for the change.


Y’know, I ‘ve been of the mindset that the guy’s a kook, but that was because I was getting most of my information about him on CCN. But after reading his unfiltered responses to New Time questions and then reading this article, I have to agree with Typoqueen…. CCN has it in for the guy. Karen stopped being objective on Hill long ago.

I love reading CCN, but objectivity left this train station long ago….


“Supervisor Adam Hill moans about media coverage”

“moans”,,, more of this unprofessional reporting. Was he moaning? What kind of news reporter would start off an article stating such a thing? Are you or Dave friends with his ex, is that why you hate him?

It’s so obvious that CCN has it out for him, he was spot on and the story only verifies that. You failed to mention the part in the story where he said “I understand why Cal Coast News does what they do..[The site’s Karen Velie] was a student of mine. And for a couple of years, I would talk to her, and I would hear her say things that I knew were fabrications or, you know, the axes being grinded for somebody who had a some problems whoever it was she trying to write a story…” I have heard this from quite a few people BTW.

Before you delete me, this is about CCN. But I know, we can’t criticise CCN so I guess I’ll probably get taken off. I was at a meeting today and one well known local activist describe CCN as ‘gotcha reporting aimed at people that they have personal issues with. CCN doesn’t put much value in accuracy’. But I know that you love this, negative publicity is still publicity. But you can’t last long with too much neg. publicity.

Hill had a bone to pick with New Times but he still did this interview. I wonder how many sitting supes would do an interview with CCN?


Probably only the ones who don’t have skeletons in their closet that they don’t want the media to out. That’s because CNN isn’t known for its “hand-job” journalism, where they give the powerful a free ride, don’t inform the citizens, and the citizens are the ones who end up paying for it.

No, that’s the purview of the Tribune and, to some extent, the NewTimes.

So what about CCN’s coverage of Hill has been inaccurate. References, please. Also, if you think you get credit for name-dropping dimestore “political activists,” without dropping their name, you are wrong. I just assume you are lying.


Typoqueen, Fair enough,

usually I delete comments that deflect from the topic and make this website the news, that is not the case today.

first rule of comment moderation : don’t talk about comment moderation.

disagree without being disagreeable

If you have said something already don’t make someone read it again and …thank you.



says: ” I was at a meeting today and one well known local activist describe CCN as ‘gotcha reporting aimed at people that they have personal issues with. CCN doesn’t put much value in accuracy’. But I know that you love this, negative publicity is still publicity. But you can’t last long with too much neg. publicity.”

So what you are really saying is you are now part of the rumor mill that started this whole thing between Hill and Karen. Did you go to the Democrat picnic and listen to Hill talk shit about people behind there backs?

You have no grasp of the history involved or the water that has passed under the bridge.

Done picking your bone typo? or do you seek to cause more division?


I’ve never heard Hill talk ‘shit’ about people behind their backs but I don’t speak with him that often. How have I started this whole thing between Hill and Karen?

I’m causing division!? Is that because you don’t agree with me? Am I just supposed to go with CCN crowd and say yea he’s dirtbag? Sorry, I won’t march in step just to be part of the ‘in crowd’. How am I causing ‘division’?

You don’t even make sense.


TQ, I was also attending a meeting today with several local activists (perhaps the same one you attended) and CCN certainly came into conversation. Unlike your experience, the “activists” I spoke with all represented they are pleased with CCN being the media source to bring the hard truth to light. CCN was praised.

Not all people in power should have a favorable light shined in their faces. Adam Hill, IMO, is in this category.


Must not have been the same meeting. I don’t want to keep harping on this but in all honesty I have not heard anyone speak favorably about CCN. If your meeting had anything to do with Paso politics then I could see that CCN would be popular. For that matter I wouldn’t be surprised if one or more of the writers were there offering tips and making suggestions for your website.


The meeting was in SLO and nothing about “Paso politics”. If you have not heard anyone speak favorably about CCN, you obviously are not listening.


I could say the same thing to you, if you haven’t heard anyone speak negatively about CCN then you aren’t listening. I must say that CCN is not the major topic of gatherings that I go to but when local media is brought up it’s usually Trib, New Times, Congelton, CCN and KSBY. The ONLY one of those that constantly inspires negative comments is CCN and KVEC. I’m sure that A. Hill would disagree but other than here I never hear negative comments about New Times.


Having read the New Times article earlier in the day, I was surprised that a County Supervisor would use the kind of language he did when being interviewed. It seemed like he was trying to be cool and maybe appeal to a young crowd. His whining included his opinion that Waage is running because of ambition. I can tell Adam Hill that Ed Waage doesn’t need to be ambitious as his life accomplishments speak for themselves. Hill may be on a power trip, but he needs to remember that he works for us. His insults toward members of the community in this article were embarrassing.

I hope he’ll be defeated in June.


No, in all due respect Waage is running because of two agendas. One would be for developers. He caves to every developer ($$) that comes around and if that’s what you want then Waage is the way to go. Hey, I will admit that Mr. Waage is a nice guy and that Hill is a bit rough around the edges but Waage’s agenda is damaging to this county. No matter what you think about his personality Hill has done a good job. Waage has never met a developer that he didn’t like. His pushing for these massive developments in Pismo simply doesn’t make sense. There is not one good reason to destroy our area with these large developments and when asked, Waage has no explanation as to why he’s pushing them. But those of us that know him and live here know why. For the first time at the last city council meeting one of the other council members said that there’s not enough local employment to support all of these new proposed homes. Mr. Waage would have us run out of water to appease the developers then do the right thing.

I’m not going to rub Waage in the mud, as I said, he’s a nice man, but we need more than a nice man. There have been a few times that he raised objections to what the council might be purposing on certain issues but when it comes to the vote he always votes with them, he’s a ‘yes man’. He won’t stand up for his beliefs, he’ll follow the crowd.


With Hill, we don’t even have a “nice man.” We have an a$$hat who is rude to the public, who had a woman dragged out of a supervisors’ meeting, and who practices the most despicable dirty politics.

I can see why YOU like him.


LOL, I can picture your arm over your forehead in a look of distress as you say “dragged out of the supervisors’ meeting”. I don’t know what you saw but there’s never been anyone ‘dragged’ out of a meeting. Over dramatize much? The only dirty politics is the gossip spread by the mob.

Reality Check

Waage is one of the few people that I would believe is truly running for office to improve the County and for no other reason. He has led a successful life filled with accomplishment. He is the epitome of the best kind of pubic servant. He is giving of himself to improve the community. People may disagree with him on issues and desired outcomes. But Waage is one of those people of genuine integrity.

Waage studies issues and analyzes all the facts, data and potential consequences. His financial form 460 doesn’t show donations from developers or big business. Accusing Waage of caving to developers for $$$ is out of line.

The accusation that “…Waage would have us run out of water …” is ridiculous on its face. Waage lives in the City and has just as much interest in the well being of the City as anyone. Also look for my previous comments about the City’s water supply. PB is in better shape as far as water is concerned than almost any other City in the County.

Typo, you are rubbing Waage in the mud every time you accuse him unfairly. Perhaps you would benefit by meeting Waage and discussing your fears and beliefs with him and hearing what he has to say on these matters rather than speculating and mis-characterizing.


I thought that I responded to this but I don’t see the response. Let me clear this up, I am not rubbing Waage in mud. I am not mischaracterizing him. I disagree with his stance on developement and to many of us that’s a very important issue. I would not rub Mr. Waage in the mud, I feel he’s a good man. I would like to have friends like him, he’s a great guy and in some ways he’s done a good job. I agree that other then when it comes to developement that he has integrity. But he’s lacking the two things that we need in the so. co., the strength to vote and debate those that he disagrees with. For example, on our city council we needed Waage to stand up the council and tell them why they are wrong on these developments, that would be representing what the majority of his constituents want. We need someone that will not back down from the developers. Hill might not have the most refined demeanor, he might come off as crass at times but he fights for his constituents and he listens to what the majority want and despite what you and the mob think he is also an intelligent man. I would rather have someone aggressive representing me, that’s a main difference between us.

I will not attack Ed’s personality or his integrity, he’s a good man and I actually like him on a personal level.

1 2 3