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.


Thumbs up if you want MaryMalone and typoqueen to bury the hatchet.

Can’t we just “agree to disagree”, ladies?

[I understand if the moderator deletes this but I thought it was worth a try] :)


Oh, for heaven’s sake. I hardly ever respond to her. In fact, you respond to her far more than I do.


LOL ‘can’t we all just get along’.

Won’t happen.


4;20 can’t we all get a bong?


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


This election can’t come soon enough, Mr Hill along with all incumbents have to go. With the condition our State and county are in, If any politician tries to speak highly about their accomplishments it would be clear they are not in touch with the regular working people in their district. Bye bye Mr. Hill, my vote goes to Mr Waage


Gosh…. ‘evil developers, oh my! Break out the tie die shirts and wish everyone a Happy 420!

I haven’t heard that slogan since the 1980’s … do they still exist?? I think the only developer I have heard of nowadays is HABITAT FOR HUMANITY which is thinking about 10 homes or so in the future…

The guy has issues… and he only compounds them by opening his mouth. Actually, I feel bad for him… one bad decision after another doesn’t bring you to a happy place.


It’s humorous to read the comments praising Hill for saving Pismo from the big bad developers and claiming Hill will save the North County aquifer. Hill unashamedly pushed hard for a disgusting ultra high-density development on recreational land in Templeton, completely ignoring the Templeton design plan and minimum lot sizes. The development illegally allows the subdivided parcels to retain riparian water rights after division via an extremely sketchy agreement with the services district. Hill is gleefully packing high density development into what used to be a quaint rural town which is now suffering break ins, theft etc when this latest eyesore has not even yet been built. We’ve even given far more than our share of that burden in a short window of time and Adam is determined to bring more But hey, why pay attention to his record as long as he’s on your side on a development in Pismo?It’s easy to appear open-minded when you believe you’ll be maintaining what you want in your community. Who cares what he does to the rest of us and how he behaves when we take time out of our work day to ask him to be open to our concerns . He doesn’t even give us the courtesy of diplomacy. I supported both he and Patterson. Big mistake.


Whole process is nimbyism.

The county has got to absorb growth.

It’s a win for Hill and his district if he can make the growth occur in Templeton rather than down in his district. North county works to send growth to Oceano.

I don’t like Hill, but he’s just being a politician.


You better have a sh!t load of money for water if you want to build in Templeton, last time I checked a water meter was $24,500 and a sewer connection about $6000 per unit.


“The county has got to absorb growth.” Only if there is the water to support the population increase. No water, no population, period.


In my opinion, when we see a poster praising Hill for saving Pismo from the developers and claims he will save the north-county aquifer, while ignoring the reality of the body of his work. is just lazy sycophantry at work.

There are some people who are natural-born sycophants. If they meet someone with a little bit of power, who tells them what they want to hear, they are the infallible gods in the eyes of the sycophants.

What is really unfortunate is when a sycophant is also uninformed and too lazy to research a subject or politician before they start issuing forth with their huzzahs of praise for the politician.

But when they start attacking CCN for the way in which they report the news, and slam the considerable amount of work and bravery it takes to run and publish for CCN, the sycophants’ laziness and ignorance becomes harmful.


If you are referring to me, I’ve never mentioned any aquifer but you’ve never really been known for honesty or factual information. You fit in perfect with the CCN mob Mary, keep you brain closed and follow blindly, who knows what would happen if you actually thought for yourself. I really don’t know why I respond to you, life is too short so perhaps I shouldn’t bother. You’re simply not worth my time.


Do I care? Almost–ok, not really.


Good answer, I’m checking out of this.


typo…I bet you’ll stay up a bit longer so here’s a neat quote about the “nice guys” you mentioned:

“I never did say that you can’t be a nice guy and win. I said that if I was playing third base and my mother rounded third with the winning run, I’d trip her up.” Leo Durocher

Adam Hill should’ve been tripped up long ago. “Nice guy” or not, Waage has a real chance of defeating Hill.


Great quote. There are nice politicians, not many but a few.

After the first debate Waage is history.


Since Hill was a lecturer, his public speaking abilities bode well for him. Waage is a smart, sincere, guy who hopes to serve the County as he has the city of Pismo Beach. PB is probably the most financially solvent city in the County. This Council has the gumption to stand up to the ridiculous decisions made recently by the Coastal Commission with respect to road repairs and rental property.

Waage respects property rights as well as people’s opinions.


Have you been watching the last few budget meetings? They aren’t doing that well. I believe that the city manager is leaving because he can see the writing on the wall. Pismo is down to two months reserve, despite having a great tourism market. Financially things are in decline in Pismo.

Waage doesn’t respect property rights. He’s trying to change the zoning for the developers. The developers have a right to build on their property as zoned, most of us would agree with that but we shouldn’t expect politicians to come in and change things around so the developers can make more money at the expense of the rest of us. If Waage respected property rights then he would respect the property owners that already own property that is near these purposed developments. Current property owners purchased their property under the rules that there would low density and ag around them. He doesn’t respect the rights of the people in the city that he represents or else he would be against the fact that their property values will go down and we will run out of water if Waage gets his way.


Last time I checked, most other cities are in the hole. PB brings in alot of money, but that also necessitates spending alot. So, you’re not for smart growth, but want low density? I think Hill is a big smart growth fan. What developments has Waage voted yes on? I don’t think there’s been a vote on Price Canyon’s EIR and it soundls like Robles was given the green light by past Councils.


This is a list of some of the projects that Mr. Waage has given the green light to. With some of these developments there are still more reports that need to be done but the city is eager to see these proceed. Keep in mind when reading this that our population has decreased by almost 1000 residents over the last 10 years, for a little city that’s quite a substantial decline. Also keep in mind that Pismo has enough vacant or buildable land within it’s limits that it shouldn’t reach it’s build out for at least the next 20 years. So why would Mr. Waage be so eager to build more? (there is a draft EIR regarding PC approved by ALL of the council)

In this PDF it mentions that the 68 lots (that destroyed some beautiful habitat) now has 3 homes (two built one in the process). None of those lots have sold including the 3 homes in over 5 years (project approved by Mr. Waage). That developement is right next to the Price Canyon mess and the developer is one of the same developers of the PC mess. Of course that same developer also owns a huge hotel in Pismo and also hosted a victory party in that huge hotel when some of our current council members won their elections. What is the purpose of Mr. Waage wanting to build almost 1000 more homes? We have 3 golf courses in this county that are losing money. Why does Mr. Waage want to build another? These things just don’t make sense. The only conclusion that many of us see is that he some type of special ‘$connection$’ with these developers. If you have a better explanation then please let me know. BTW at the last LAFCO meeting regarding the LRDM annexation, there was standing room only, not ONE person other than Pismo staff spoke in favor of that developement. Who is Mr. Waage supposed to serve, the developers or the residents?

LRDM and Price Canyon were given the green light by other councils. Our councils have a history of being over developer friendly.


Thank you for the list. I noticed most were infill and commercial or mixed use. Of the residential, incl. PC and Los Robles, I would agree with you that less is better. Was the hotel owner you reference King? If so, I believe he sponsored a gathering for Hill. If King, who’s supporting Hill last I heard, he wins either way. I think we agree on the OCSD.


@Disgusted, no, it was one of King’s PC partners Rick Loughead’s hotel, that’s the guy that also has the 68 unsold lots. But King covers all of his bases, he schmoozes all of them, I don’t fault him for that, I would do the same thing. I don’t believe that King sponsored Hill’s last gathering but maybe he did throw in something. As with a lot of politicians I believe that Hill has multiple sponsors at all of his gatherings, I know he did at his last one but I didn’t see King’s name. Hill has been very open about being friends with King, but he’s also open with King about how he feels regarding So. county developement and So County water concerns. IMO King is a likable guy (but I’ll pass). As much as some don’t believe this, water is a valid issue up and down the entire coast and I do believe that Hill has a grasp of this and that Waage doesn’t. So rather than focusing on his personal demeanor I feel that we should be focused on the issues and what they mean to us and Hill IMO seems to have a better understanding of So. Co. issues. Nipomo and Paso are next but like Los Osos the Nipomo residents don’t want to read the studies or learn the details to see what the facts are, they’ll end up like Cambria. Nipomo is going to run out of water in the 20 years or so or at least be on water rationing but Trexiera only cares about developers and votes so he won’t do anything about it. My point is that I appreciate that Hill is willing to tell these guys ‘no, you are wrong’.

I always find it disturbing how the politicians go giddy over wealthy or high profile people at gatherings but Hill doesn’t do that. I’ve seen Hill at these things, he will say hi and be sociable but not like so many of the other politicians that stand next to them and give their fake laughs and atta boys at every word the that person says.

There’s going to be a candidates forum at the SLO library next Friday. If you want to go then you need to reserve a seat through the Chamber. You should go and see what I mean about understanding so. co, issues. See in person who has a better grasp on things. I think that you are open minded enough to make a fair judgement. IMO it makes a big. difference seeing them all together live.

Ed Waage

There are several inaccurate statements made by Typoqueen. I never participated in a vote on the 68 lots she talks about since either I was not on the council at the time or I recused myself because I live close to the project. The Draft EIR for Price Canyon has not even been considered yet by the Council. I have never had a victory party in a hotel owned by Price Canyon developers. (Mine was at the Mission Inn and we paid for the party.)

I have never stated whether I would vote for the Price Canyon project. I will decide after reading the DEIR and listening to public comment.

Our city has a projected $2.3 million budget surplus this year in addition to our 20% reserve and like all cities we are dealing with employee benefits issues which affect our long term cash flow. We have a five year street pavement plan to completely resurface all streets that need it. We are replacing the aging Pismo Heights water pipes, improving our ocean water quality and dealing with ocean bluff erosion which affects our critical infrastructure.

Elsewhere she falsely states that our city manager is leaving because of the poor financial situation. He is leaving because he wants to retire and he is leaving the city in good shape.

The city is doing well but we need to continue to watch costs.

Reality Check

Dear Typo,

How sad that you are relying on Adam Hill, a former lecturer of literature, for understanding and assessing water issues.

Ed Waage has a PhD in Chemistry and has extensive experience in developing and implementing measures to protect the safety of the public. I trust Waage’s scientific and analytical skills far more than I would ever trust Hill on matters so important as water resources planning and development.

Sometime, watch Adam Hill during a Board meeting. [I see a rude, arrogant person who says to New Times that he doesn’t like being at the board meetings]. Look at his votes on regulations and other business crippling actions. He tells business owners that he won’t close the dunes. Yet he votes for regulations that will most likely put such pressure and fear of onerous fines on State Parks that the dunes will be closed. Good bye $170 million annual income to the county. Those business owners who believe him will see how they were duped. The Energy Wise or is it Smart Growth? Hill voted during a recession and struggling economy to implement that plan that insidiously erodes personal freedoms and property rights. Not yet implemented, but proposed, is a measure to REQUIRE retro fitting of homes by the seller prior to sale. Those costs could be huge! That is something that will really decrease property values and hurt the already crippled real estate market.

Look at the money Hill has taken from developers and PG&E and other special interests. The campaign 460 financial report is available at the County Clerk’s office. Make any excuse you want, Typo, but Hill seems to be either pandering to developers or he’s lying to both Big corps, developers and the sadly duped residents like you.

After that, watch city council meetings and observe Waage’s respectful and reasonable demeanor.. Look at his votes to set policies in place to benefit the residents and support a business friendly climate which translates into job growth and financial stability for the city. Look at Waage’s 460. He hasn’t taken money from developers or PG&E or other special interests. Waage looks to me like he’s maintaining his independence from all sides of issues that may come to the City Council for a vote.

Waage’s an honest man who wants to make the City and the County a better place for all of us to thrive.


@ Reality,

I have never had an in depth conversation with Hill regarding the water, I don’t need to. I have read every study and been to or watched every public meeting. You might need some explanation on the water issue but I understand it completely because I’ve done the research not because anyone has told me what to think. Hill doesn’t even have a vote on this anyway so you are just finding a way to promote Waage. But the fact is that Mr. Waage supports the over developement of the 5 cites area. If you want to compare degrees, Mr. Gibson is one of the deciding votes on this developement issue, do you want to compare who’s more qualified to understand water concerns. But this really irrelevant as if you simply read the reports they are pretty easy to understand. But it’s not just the water that many of us object. It’s not just the water that will cost Mr. Waage his race for supe.

I have watched almost all of the CC meetings and Mr. Waage is very respectful, as I’ve said he’s a very nice man, I can’t argue that. Actually I would like to see him have a little emotion instead of just following what the the rest of the council does. On a few occasions I’ve seen him disagree with some proposals or something brought before the council but when it’s time to vote he will aways vote the way the majority of the council votes, even though he seemed to disagree with them. I’m not making this up, it’s all on video. I don’t want a follower, I want a leader and Mr. Waage is not a leader.

PG&E, are you kidding, Kris Vardis has done what so many local council members are doing. PG&E is hedging it’s bets, they have now hired Vardis and his wife, I believe as PR people. They are attempting to get people from all local govt.,,,wonder why.

As I have said, I don’t want to say anything rude against Waage, he is a nice man but I haven’t seen a developer that doesn’t love him and it’s not because he’s a nice guy. BTW Hill’s not receiving big bucks from local developers.

I am not going to vote on who is the nicer guy, I’m going to vote on the issues. One of the main issues for me is the over developement of the south county,,,Waage supports that and Hill doesn’t, that’s pretty basic. BTW, Waage has orgs like COLAB supporting him, which is worse, COLAB or PG&E? I don’t care who’s backing them. I support Obama but I hate the big corp contributors that back him. I must support a candidate based on the issues.

Waage might be smart but he’s not more versed on the water situation then the people hired to study it. I’ve seen what they are counting on for water, it doesn’t take a degree in chemistry to see that the city is wrong and that is why the LAFCO rejected LRDM. When are they going to get that recycled water program on line? Why did they stop pumping ground water? Why so much developement when the population of Pismo has decreased by almost a 1000 people? Why over look the fact that if these developments go through that the 101 according to Pismo’s traffic studies will be a LOS of F, and that the city has made it clear that they will try to raise our taxes to mitigate the traffic issues? What is our gain by these developments? Please tell us why we need this because many of us want to know and can’t get an answer to that.

In one post you said something about the citizens should have known when they purchased their property that they were next to these purposed developments. How would they know. For example, the way LRDM is currently zoned the builder can build about 27 homes. How can one know that the city is fighting to get that annexed so the developer can build 312 homes? That isn’t what its currently zoned for. But what about the people that have small ranches and property on the other side of these projects. Some of these people have been fighting LRDM for 20 years, it’s not fair to them. Mr. Mankins has been fighting LRDM for 20 years, is it fair to him to have go through this to protect his ranch? You obviously work for the city or you’re on Waage’s campaign staff as I have not met ONE person other than city staff and one woman that support these developments.


Wow, typo. You really have no idea how Adam Hill votes on high density projects, do you? If you think he cares one bit what zoning was in place when we bought our property, you are blissfully mistaken. I will not be in the slightest surprised if he ends up voting much differently than you expect even on the Pismo development. He’s slippery.


” I will not be in the slightest surprised if he ends up voting much differently than you expect even on the Pismo development.”

I would be surprised and stunned as Adam doesn’t have a vote nor any say on these developments in Pismo.


Haha. Mea Culpa. But as I blush, I giggle a bit because it suddenly all makes sense. Of course he can pander to both sides in this case. He’ll never have to play his hand.

It’s funny because incompletely agree with you on zone changes and development that is fair to the existing, established community. How you can see Adam Hill as supportive of that is completely beyond me.


Some people really have no idea how Adam Hill votes on high density projects. If you think he cares one bit what zoning was in place when we bought our property, you are blissfully mistaken. I will not be in the slightest surprised if he ends up voting much differently than some expect on the Pismo development. He’s slippery.

Reality Check

Get a grip, Typo! Budget: To the contrary, PB projects a $2.3 million surplus! To say nothing of the 20% RESERVE. No other City in this County has such a sterling record for fiscal management. Waage stands firm for fiscal accountability and for efficient and effective use of funds. The City thrives because Waage and the Council provide a business friendly climate that provides opportunity to new businesses and supports existing businesses. Waage deserves praise for his steadfast adherence to pragmatic and reasonable fiscal policies.


I will admit that the economic down turn is not due to Mr. Waage or the council. They a have done a good job in the respect. According to the last budget reports that I’ve watched there does seem reason to worry but I’m not going to put that on them, they’ve done a good job,,,but so has Mr. Hill. On that issue I believe we have tie. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t hate Mr. Waage, there’s only one person on that board that I really don’t like but I hate that they don’t care about the communities around them and that they don’t care what the citizens of Pismo want. I don’t want to get into that (surrounding communities) as my posts are getting too long. I also hate their pro developer stance but other than that I feel that they do a good job, one of the best councils in the county and definitely better than what we used to have. But when it comes to what I feel are the most important issues that effect my childrens future and our home values, many of us feel that they have their priorities mixed up. IMO If Mr. Waage loses this race it will be due to these developments.

Reality Check

Typo said “Waage doesn’t respect property rights. He’s trying to change the zoning for the developers.”

NONSENSE: Ed Waage respects the property rights of everyone. To truly respect property rights, one must give all property owners an opportunity to make the highest and best use of their property. That includes Ms Typo as well as owners of one lot all the way to owners of large parcels. Typo makes it sound as though only her preferences must be blindly adhered to.

One of the issues that may be confusing Typo is the difference between voting for development to begin and voting to protect the City’s interests by asserting a claim of “sphere of influence”. Both the City and County voted unanimously to declare that PB has a vital interest in any project in Price Canyon. That vote was a vote to PROTECT the interests of the City and its residents. The City Council allowed the EIR process to move forward. What is the purpose of an EIR ~~~ to learn what impacts development will have on traffic; infrastructure; potential costs to the City / County and recommended mitigation. By the way, I have heard talk of that PC project since the mid 1980s during the RUDAT process of long range planning for the City.

Rather than panicking and accusing Waage of bias before he has even seen the EIR and studied the impacts, let the process unfold. I suspect that Typo will make her opinion known to all. By all means Typo, as well the rest of us must take an interest and be part of the vetting process.


” Ed Waage respects the property rights of everyone. To truly respect property rights, one must give all property owners an opportunity to make the highest and best use of their property. That includes Ms Typo as well as owners of one lot all the way to owners of large parcels.”

He should respect the rights of his constituents first and common sense second and he’s doing neither.

From what you are saying, if a developer wants to come in and change the zoning next to your house so he can build and airport then that right should be respected. If it’s not zoned for an airport then your rights come first. I disagree with you.

I’m not confused. You are trying to down play these developments and the process that they are currently going through. That might work for some of the readers here but it won’t work for the majority of the voters. It’s black and white, Mr. Waage is 100 percent for almost 1000 new homes, a golf course, a hotel, wine tasting facility, spa, convention center and more while our population is decreasing, the traffic is getting worse and water is becoming more sparse. That’s what it all amounts to, no matter how much you try to down play this issue that’s what it is and that is what he supports.

Reality Check

Typo said “Current property owners purchased their property under the rules that there would low density and ag around them.”

Let’s test that misconception: The only developed areas of PB back in the 1960s, 70s and much of the 1980s were Pismo Heights (Merced St and lower), downtown PB and Shell Beach. All of us living in homes in other areas of the City are living in homes developed to meet the housing needs of people moving to this Beautiful area. It’s rather disingenuous to complain about building on un-developed land. None of us has the right to deny others the privilege of living here, a privilege that we all enjoy.

If Typo refers to Los Robles Del Mar, that project has been in the works for probably 30 years +. I recall fundraisers out there to help the Christian School’s capital campaign to build a school there. The long process of producing and gaining approval of plans happened prior to Waage joining the City Council. LAFCo denied that approval based on their assessment of insufficient water.. LRDM sued the City. In a unanimous vote, to settle the $50 million law suit that would have cost the City residents in litigation fees as well as potential $50 million liability, the Council sent the project back to LAFCo. The council allotted State Water to the project BUT protected existing residents by setting up a separate water rate for LRDM.

The residents that abut LRDM should have been on notice that the property behind them was going through the development process.

Reality Check

Typo said “He doesn’t respect the rights of the people in the city that he represents or else he would be against the pact that their property values will go down and we will run out of water if Waage gets his way.

Apparently, I could write volumes addressing the flaws in every sentence offered by Typo. Here goes for another reality check:

Simple math: The City Council is comprised of 5 members. A majority of 3 is required to pass any item. Typo is projecting a lot of erroneous assumption about Waage’s position(s). Waage is ONE vote on the City council. ” …if Waage gets his way.” Typo sounds desperate to blame Waage, for all that she fears.

Property Values: Last I heard, property values dropped because of the mad cap era of making loans to purchase homes for 100% of the appraised value based on the borrower’s statement (without documentation) of income and assets to repay the loan.

The past few years have seen foreclosures and the market value of homes has decreased. Property value comes from what a willing buyer will pay a willing seller.

Typo, think about this: Will a developer of a large project like LRDM get a loan to develop the property? Will a developer ignore the real estate market and the uncertain chances of selling lots / homes in a foreclosure laden depressed housing market?

Waage has shown himself to be an analytical council member. His decisions have been pragmatic and well thought out. I don’t always agree with his decisions, but I do watch the council meetings on channel 20 and see his methodical, sensible approach. He is serving Pismo Beach very well and will serve the County well when he’s elected.


“Waage is ONE vote on the City council. ” …if Waage gets his way.”

I am commenting on Waage because he the one running for Supe, if the others were then I’d be commenting on them. This is about Waage vs Hill not the city council vs Hill.

“Property Values: Last I heard, property values dropped because of the mad cap era of making loans to purchase homes for 100% of the appraised value based on the borrower’s statement (without documentation) of income and assets to repay the loan.”

Very good but let me help you out a bit here. It’s not just that and it’s not that simple. Property values also decrease when the market is saturated with homes on the market. Check out Arizona, they’ve had a terrible problem with decreasing home values due to over building. Pismo has enough approved developments and buildable lots at it’s current selling rates to last for at least 20 years. If you put too many homes (as there already are) on the market then that will also drive the cost down even more. Many of the homes/estates in the LRDM project were priced at $800.00, these expensive homes are even harder to sell then less expesive homes. BTW have seen Driveways Del Mar lately?

You’re doing a great job at campaigning for Mr. Waage, he needs someone like you because in all due respect we certainly can’t get any real answers from him.

Reality Check

Typo, you made my point. Developers are usually people who have business and practical experience to guide them. The long list of approved projects that you pointed out in one of your posts were mostly projects approved some time ago and go unbuilt because the economy doesn’t support the development.

Let the the process of the market place unfold.

You are sadly mistaken if you think that I am the only one supporting Waage. I think you know that or you would not be making such poisonous, distorted posts about Waage. You’d conserve your energy for the occasions when you could speak to the Council, make your points and if your points are valid, I trust Waage and the City Council to make reasonable fact based decisions.

In this anonymous forum, Waage doesn’t owe you any explanations. Speak to him personally, if you want to understand his position.

Reality Check

Typo said “… we will run out of water if Waage get his way.”

The ABCs of water: The City of PB has three robust sources of water: Lopez Dam; well water and State water. In addition during a drought, the City can claim a share of the State Water assigned to the County.

Over the years that I have watched the parade of council members making decisions and setting policy. One of the areas where this City has gotten it right in the past is the long range planning for reliable and robust water supply. City Councils have currently and historically sought to provide diverse and abundant water supplies.

In addition, the improvements to the sewer treatment plant a few years ago provided for a future ability to treat water to a level acceptable for use in irrigation by residents. Its sometimes referred to as the “purple pipe system” because purple pipe is used to distinguish which is potable water and which is irrigation water.

I recently learned that the water required for irrigation of our lawns, gardens, etc is the biggest water usage. Converting water to use for irrigation rather than drained into the ocean will help maintain / enhance the City’s water solvency

Typo, please rest easy: Waage .and the rest of the City Council have maintained and improved policies and practices that sustain and protect the City’s water supply.


Holding all the power of the moment and making a great speech is easy. All you need is a good speechwriter and practice.

What will be Adam Hill’s downfall is that he won’t have the power to turn off the microphone of his opponent. He won’t have the power to use county funds to bring in paid security to haul out his opponent in the debate.

His only “advantage” will be that he is a sitting supervisor. Unfortunately for Hill, in his case that is not necessarily a good thing because he has shown an unbridled zeal in his abuse of his power as supervisor, and his sneering and insulting behavior towards the residents he is supposed to serve will be evident to all.

Adam Hill is unsuitable to be a representative of the residents of SLO County. His lack of ethics is appalling, and I shudder to think of the dirty campaign tricks he will use.

Hill, and his sycophants, are trying to poison the well now by whining–and, yes, when a supervisor does nothing but attack local publications without giving one snippet of evidence to back up his complaints, it is whining–about the news publications that don’t “do a Tribune” and bend-and-spread-’em for dimestore politicians.

We will need CCN during this election, mainly because of Adam Hill. He’s already shown his true colors while he’s been in office–including the phone call where he pretended to be Waage. We can’t expect any better than that coming from Hill in his campaign, but we can expect far, far worse.


OMG, the sycophantry and clueless worship of a dimestore fraud of a politician really has no bounds, does it?


OMG! I see the writing on the wall. Thanks alot CCN and new times! Now us County folks are gonna be on the hook for $250,000 in shush money plus a cushy retirement deal for Hill. He is gonna get stressed out. You guys have to stop reporting the truth so as to not upset all these important, ignorant, arrogant, narcissistic Public Officials.


Lisa got shush money because she’s a woman. She knew too much & would’ve TOLD too much. Also she could’ve sued for gender discrimination or some sort of nonsense. Why Paso taxpayers are responsible for her “reputation being damaged” is just beyond explanation.

Poor thing. She’s playing the victim card excellently and is laughing all the way to the bank.

And let me ad to your list of adjectives: corrupt, greedy, unethical and dishonest.


Adam has always milked every thing possible out of every situation. Give him a week and his ex eill be the whole problem


I have never heard him speak about his ex.


LOL. And that means, what? It means nothing but you are uninformed and don’t bother to research something before you spew out an opinion.


Really, how about a quote regarding his ex? You are all talk, you can’t provide a quote because as usual you are simply riding the crazy gossip train. As usual you are full of hate and lies, you have no shame. I won’t hold my breath waiting for that quote.


How about stopping to take a breath?

Kevin Rice

So you are saying that Ed would allow people to get up and personally attack other people,,hmm okay. He probably would, the Ed Waage that I’ve seen isn’t assertive or strong enough to stop people from personal attacks. I prefer some with a little strength but he is a nice guy. You know what they say about nice guys.

Kevin Rice

Not allow First Amendment speech protected by the Brown Act? Ed darn well better allow it or I’ll be all over him.

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 broke the law. He exposed the taxpayers to litigation.

54960.5. A court may award court costs and reasonable attorney fees

to the plaintiff in an action brought pursuant to Section 54960 or

54960.1 where it is found that a legislative body of the local agency

has violated this chapter.

What other speech will he censor?


Deja vu all over again, we’ve had this same discussion before. I was wrong before as I am now, it’s not a Brown act violation it’s against the boards own policy: “Public comment remarks should be directed to the chairperson and the board as a whole and not to any individual therefore. No person will be permitted to make slanderous or profane remarks against any individual.”

Every govt. board that I’ve seen has this same policy so perhaps its a Roberts thing, don’t know but it is their policy. Would Mr. Waage have the backbone to abide by this policy? I don’t believe he would.

Kevin Rice

The Board policy is ILLEGAL then, and I certainly hope Dr. Waage would recognize a similar situation.

No agency may pass an ordinance or policy that undoes protections granted by state law:

“The legislative body of a local agency SHALL NOT PROHIBIT public criticism…”

“…meetings shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the legislative body on any item of interest to the public”

EVEN SLANDEROUS AND PROFANE comments cannot be prohibited—at least to the extent that they do not cause a disruption (and there was none). This does not mean individuals are not accountable for slander. The Brown Act explicitly states:

“Nothing in this subdivision shall confer any privilege or protection

for expression beyond that otherwise provided by law.”

What this means is that YOU CAN STILL BE SUED FOR SLANDER. But it does not say that you cannot say it.

Yet, the comments were not slander as the comments entirely pertained to the public’s business and RIGHT to “retain control over the instruments they have created” (Brown Act 54950).

FURTHERMORE, the comments are protected by the State Constitution:

Cal. Const. Art I, Sec 2 (a) “Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or

her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right. A law may not restrain or abridge liberty of speech or press.”

Cal. Const. Art I Sec. 3 “The people have the right to instruct their representatives, petition government for redress of grievances”

FURTHERMORE, the comments are protected by the U.S. Constitution:

“Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech … and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”


Well, I don’t remember seeing a board or commission that didn’t have this same policy. Pismo Beach has this same policy, why hasn’t Waage spoke in opposition to this policy if it’s so wrong? It’s wrong for Hill but not for Waage,,,I get it. BTW the policy dosn’t say anything about not letting people speak their mind they just can’t attack and individual by name. They could say ‘it’s unethical for members of staff to be-bop this person’ or something like that but they can’t say ‘SLORider has been bopping Mary’.

Kevin Rice

These policies exist as a means to state what all boards want and encourage to happen. They are unenforceable in the end, and every politician pretty much knows that. Call up your city attorney and ask for yourself. It takes a real tyrant like Hill to have a sheriff deputy haul off a member of the public.

Just like the iPad thing, Hill is just needlessly embarrassing himself. He would be miles ahead had he just let this speaker say what she wanted to say and then ALL the sentiment would have been directed at her, if we even would have heard about it.

All the red flags are there now BEFORE the election. Now is the time to act. His arrogance will be ten fold if he is elected for another term. NOW is the time to choose integrity over partisanship. Otherwise, we’ll be reading about his gaffes for another four years.


A friend and I were having a discussion on this, he/she had an interesting take on this:

‘The legislative body of a local agency SHALL NOT PROHIBIT public criticism…”

Incomplete sentence. Criticism of whom?

“…meetings shall provide an opportunity for members of the public to directly address the legislative body on any item of interest to the public”

I believe the topic must be under the jurisdiction of the body. You don’t have the right to discuss the condition of crops in Bosnia, the sea life in Brazil, or the sex life of a public citizen if it is not a subject the body has authority over.

FURTHERMORE, the comments are protected by the State Constitution:

Cal. Const. Art I, Sec 2 (a) “Every person may freely speak, write and publish his or

her sentiments on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of this right. A law may not restrain or abridge liberty of speech or press.”

This does not mean speak anywhere, like in the middle of a quiet library, a movie theater, a church, a funeral, or a public meeting held under rules of order.

Cal. Const. Art I Sec. 3 “The people have the right to instruct their representatives, petition government for redress of grievances”

At the proper time or place, not in the representatives’ driveway, place of business etc.

FURTHERMORE, the comments are protected by the U.S. Constitution:

“Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech … and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Congress is making no laws here.

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.

That is criticism of policies, procedures, programs, or services of the agency and legislative body, not the private lives of the members.’

The last statement wast he point that I was making earlier. Some of it is a matter of how one interprets these things and some of it is black and white. The above statements are very good interpretations of the Constitution and the Brown Act.


I think Owen etal were trying to make a point that Ogren’s relationship with a member of the LOCSD may have influenced his agenda and vice versa. Certainly those concerns deeply affect a large number of the public.

Kevin Rice

Dear typo,

You are on thin ice.

The comments that were censored by Adam Hill had a clear and present nexus to the “policies, procedures, programs, and services” of the county in that the county itself officially investigated and reported on the very same issue. By this very fact, the comments very much pertained to the subject matter jurisdiction of the Board of Supervisors, and cannot be confined to the description of personal attacks.

It is true there are limits, but the Court has always interpreted those limits very broadly in favor of free speech:

“A federal district court in California, for instance, ruled that such content-based restrictions are unconstitutional, invalidating a school district bylaw that prohibited people at school board meetings from criticizing school district employees. During a school board meeting, the plaintiff had attempted to address the job qualifications and performance of the district superintendent. When the plaintiff mentioned the superintendent’s qualifications, the board president interrupted her and stated that the plaintiff “was moving into a personnel issue.” The president told the plaintiff that, pursuant to a bylaw, her criticisms could not be made in a public board meeting. The court reasoned that the bylaw’s prohibition on any criticism, “complaint or charge against an employee of the District” violated the plaintiff’s First Amendment rights. Leventhal v. Vista Unified School District, 973 F. Supp. 951 (S.D. Cal. 1997). Similarly, a federal district court in Virginia struck down a school board bylaw that prohibited personal attacks during public comments at meetings. Bach v. School Board of the City of Virginia Beach, 139 F.Supp. 2d 738 (E.D. Va. 2001).”

Please also consider the TEN YEAR OLD case of Robert Norse v. City of Santa Cruz, where Norse was ejected from a 2002 council meeting after giving a ‘Nazi salute’ to the council. The case has cost the city over $148,000 to date and still has not been settled. The city was denied a hearing by the U.S. Supreme Court after LOSING in the trial court.

You and Adam Hill are on thin ice. Adam could cost the county dearly with his boorish tyranny.


It took more than being a nice guy to vote against the flawed dunes report, and support his viewpoint with facts. If you work with bad information, the outcome will be wrong. That’s just one example of Waage going against the tide.


He didn’t go against the tide, the entire city council along with Pismo’s business community supports him on this.

I really don’t want to say anything mean or nasty about Waage, he really is a nice guy. I also don’t want to go on anymore about this (over kill). I simply don’t feel that he’s a strong enough person for the job, too wishy washy and that he is in two close with developers. We shall see, I don’t think he’ll win.

BTW, you are the only one on this site that I never agree with but actually enjoy discussing these things with. Thanks for being respectful.

Reality Check

Waage is respectful and diplomatic. He questions things, but he doesn’t embarrass City staff, fellow council members or the public from the dais [and my guess is he doesn’t do so behind closed doors either].

Waage may not be dramatic and showy, but he shows a quiet, well bred, demeanor that should not be misunderstood as lack of strength. He strikes me as being well balanced, confident and capable of dealing adeptly with any variety of situations.

Waage has integrity and respects the rights of the public to come before their elected officials to make their views known. Being nice doesn’t mean Waage would meekly sit back, if his action was needed to maintain order.

Hill has been disrespectful to the public. He has removed someone from the board chambers, rather than allowing her to speak, thank her and move on. Its not an attack when facts are spoken and those facts being presented shed light on inappropriate conduct that may have influenced a policy decision.


Mr. Waage hasn’t had to deal with people as Hill has ie the Los Osos crowd so we can’t really measure this. But many of us want someone strong as opposed to a wishy washy nice man. You’re right he is well spoken, very proper, very polite but he hasn’t had a reason not to be. If it comes down to it though does he have the strength that it takes to handle people that are making personal insults to staff? I’m not sure that he has that in him, he won’t even disagree with the council on issues that he believes in. You are aware that people aren’t allowed to get up and make personal insults during public comment? So are saying that if someone were to get up and say ‘Ted E. is having an affair with Shelly H.’ that if Mr. Waage were the mayor that he shouldn’t do anything about that, he should just let speakers say those things? Mr. Waage has had it pretty easy. (sorry Ted and Shelly, I know that’s not true, don’t want to start any rumors, just needed to use public figures to get my point accross). We need someone to shut the mike off in a case like that.


Those 20 cents each items were appreciated, SLORider. ; )

Kevin Rice

You’re welcome. Hundreds more available. Just call. Number is on back.