Race for open SLO council seat set

April 1, 2013

city sloFive candidates are running for San Luis Obispo City Council in a special election to fill the seat vacated by Andrew Carter who left to become the city administrator of Guadalupe.

The filing period for the vote by mail special election concluded March 22. The city of San Luis Obispo will begin mailing ballots on May 20, and voters will have until June 18 to return their ballots.

The five candidates include a former councilman, a county planning commissioner, a welder, a firefighter and an attorney.

Former councilman and current Guadalupe police officer Paul Brown is trying to reclaim a seat on the council after a more than four-year absence. Brown, the founder and longtime owner and operator of Mother’s Tavern in downtown San Luis Obispo, narrowly lost the 2010 mayoral election to Jan Marx.

Carlyn Christianson is the current San Luis Obispo County Planning Commissioner for Supervisor Adam Hill. Christianson is also a current member of the city land use task force, as well as a former city planning commissioner.

Don Hedrick, a three-time mayoral candidate is running for the position of councilmember for the first time. Hedrick is a local welder, who has lived in San Luis Obispo since 1964.

Kevin Rice is a Los Angeles County firefighter, yet a 20-year resident of San Luis Obispo. Rice ran unsuccessfully for a council seat in November.

John Spatafore is a local attorney who operates a San Luis Obispo law firm. Spatafore previously served as a board member of the San Luis Coastal Unified School District.

The third place finisher in the November council election, Jeff Aranguena, filed a statement of intent to run, but dropped out of the race last month. Aranguena issued a press release saying he withdrew from the race because Cal Poly had accepted him into a graduate program, but school officials said they had yet to accept anyone into the program.

Owner of Spikes Pub Andrea Miller also filed a statement of intent, but did not enter the race.

A fifth member of the council will join the current four by no later than July 16.


Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I’m voting for Kevin Rice. Not only is he highly intelligent but he’s the only one that will call them on their BS and get the job done.

If anyone is seriously considering supporting Kevin Rice for SLO City Council, it might be a good idea to review his history of comments on this site and on the Trib site of the last few years, under all of his aliases. If after reviewing his comments, actions and behavior people still want to support him, more power to them. Thankfully I live in the South County and have a different set of irrational people to deal with than what has been happening in SLO.

Just seeing the dirty campaign that K-Rice ran for Ed Waage and himself made up my mind that he will not be getting my vote.

He tried to pull stunts like setting up a bogus website in the name of a political opponent and then made hundreds of unsolicited robo-calls directing people to the fake site. Although, I think the worst was when he staged the theft of a campaign sign by a Cal Poly co-ed in front of his house and then filmed himself harassing her and reported it as news of a conspiracy against him to CCN. I’m sure we can expect more of these types of hijinx from K-Rice in the upcoming city council campaign.

He didn’t set up any bogus website. He exposed an existing website.

Really sloslo, The misinformation and ignorance that you spout never ceases.

Oh really Cindy? Better be ready to eat those words. A quick check of the ownership records of the website “adamhillsupervisor.com” reveals the following public information:


Created on: 14-Apr-12

Expires on: 14-Apr-13

Last Updated on: 05-Jun-12


Kevin Rice

PO BOX 14107

SAN LUIS OBISPO, California 93406-4107

You really expect us to believe your lie that he never set it up? Not only is it registered to him, he admitted to doing so in the comment section of the Tribune article that exposed this fraud. Which, by the way, is an article that you yourself commented on, so please don’t play dumb and pretend you didn’t know he was behind it.

You are posing as a sleuth when all you’ve done is access the Internet equivalent of the public phone book (the ICANN WHOIS database). If I wanted to hide anonymously (as you are now) then I would have paid an additional $7.99 for private domain registration.

ADAMHILLSUPERVISOR.COM provided accurate First Amendment speech informing voters about Supervisor Hill’s chicanery (posing as the Republican choice next to Abel Maldonado in a bogus slate mailer entitled “Republican Voter Guide”). Indeed, any fraud here lies with Hill.

You are free to hold differing political views, but now is an especially dubious time to defend Supervisor Hill with his ever-growing record of irrational behavior. Anonymity also undermines the credibility of your mis-truths. As PaulJones wrote, I’m calling you on it.

I never said it was hard info to get, in fact, the opposite. I clearly said it was public information. Yes, everyone knows about whois except apparently your defender Cindy, so if you want to lecture someone about how easy it is, tell her, because she is claiming you did not set up that site.

And I am not defending Hill by any means. He has his own issues and if he was running for City Council, I definitely would not vote for him either! However, your mistake was stooping to his level and below. It is misleading and shady for you to set up a negative attack website under your opponents name to slam them. If you have a problem with Hill, post your viewpoints on your own website, or set up a site called “adamhillsucks.com” and clearly put your name on the front page, instead of hiding in in the whois information where the average person won’t take the time to look.

It is the kind of dirty politics that voters are sick of and have no place in a local election. If you had dealt with your beef with Hill in an open and honest manner, I might have considered giving you my vote. However, seeing this example of how you operate does not bode well for how you would act as a councilman and representative of our city. Will you be setting up slam attack websites in the names of your fellow councilmen and any constituents that do things you dislike?


Did you set up the website as sloslo says?

Paul Brown seems like the clear choice here. He served with distinction on the council in the past, so he has the experience and knowledge of how the council works and would not need as much time to get up to speed on things. He also very narrowly lost in his bid for the mayors seat, which shows he has strong popular appeal. He is a successful business owner with strong ties to the local community, he served with honor in the military, and is a current police officer with a local law enforcement agency, so he is not going to be tied up with a public safety job hundreds of miles away. And finally he has gained the full endorsement of the outgoing councilman, Andrew Carter.

Bless Andrew Carter’s heart as he’s still clinging to the days when Paul Brown appeared credible. Or he’s a member of the Old Boy’s Club which explains why he may be forgetting the domestic violence restraining order on Brown’s record. Brown can’t even pass a background check. He makes reckless, irresponsible decisions with firearms and was shamefully forced to step down from his position at the Morro Bay Police Dept. When people show you who they are, we should believe them.

Please no more attorneys in office.


I agree with Spirit, please, please, please do not elect an attorney to City Council. Nothing good, I repeat, nothing good can come from it.

Also, please no more people in city hall who are going to spend half their time down in LA. We already have city manager Katie Lichtig who spends a lot of her days down there. We don’t need a councilman who has a firefighter job down in LA that will demand he regularly spends time over 200 miles away. If there is a major wildfire or other statewide disaster that he gets called up for, is he going to be MIA on the council when they might need him most?

Don’t take this wrong, but it will take far more than the replacement of one council person to bring back transparency and integrity to the City. Way, way too many back room deals going on for one person to combat. Hopefully, it will just be the beginning of some change in SLO,

Very true. But as some wise person said: the journey of 1000 miles begins with a single step…”

Just don’t vote for the candidate with such close ties to Adam Hill! (Carlyn Christianson)

John Spatafore is also listed as a “supporter” of Adam Hill on his 2012 campaign page:


Stop electing any friends of Angry Adam!

I would vote for Kevin Rice, hands down.

I like what this guy was saying when he ran for Mayor.


The welder (Don) would shake things up so dramatically, I bet council meetings would be standing room only! He’s out there, but is the only one who understands Agenda 21, Common Core, Monsanto, etc. – at least he seems to be the only one to publicly speak on these topics.

The firefighter, well, Kevin is so involved in the happenings that he seems the obvious choice. The only possible (and this is TINY TINY TINY) issue I see, is he seems a bit TOO eager. This, historically, doesn’t often work out for the public. Still, given the rest of the candidates, he’s head and shoulders above the rest.

I’d go Kevin or Don; likely Kevin. I like Don, supported him for Mayor (we all figured it would be rigged for Marx, like we thought it was last time, too). However, between Don and Kevin, I’d lean toward Kevin.

Good luck to all candidates (except the downtown guy and Hill’s lackey).

only globalist insiders understand agenda 21 they seize power after we are dead from dental filling GMO vaccines and income tax.

I think every candidate is eager, but point taken. Perhaps your perception is because (besides Don) I am the only candidate who has actually been regularly attending and participating at council meetings for the last three or more years. Here are some excerpts:

– I implored the council to confer with the opposing attorney BEFORE the homeless litigation occurred. The council (and staff) should have tried to do this to avert the 1/2-million dollar litigation. Instead of discussion, the council passed the offending ordinance and we all paid for attorneys.

– When the idea of conducting council votes via open “voice” voting (each council member votes distinctly and openly) was proposed, the council shot down the proposal in an improper (not on the agenda) communication session. My letter to the city pointed out the impropriety, the item was agendized for re-discussion, and now the council votes clearly and openly. Ironically, the actual vote that passed the “voice voting” resolution was mis-counted because the mayor did not hear the sole “no” vote. That problem is now fixed.

– I have always stood for transparency and have spoken up when it appears things have occurred improperly in closed session or in violation of the Brown Act. As a result, our city attorney has been more vigilant and outspoken when the council begins to stray.

– I asked for Wi-Fi Internet in council chambers so the people can access electronic staff reports easily. Wireless Internet is now available.

– Our curfew ordinance originally targeted all minors (under 18), which would have exposed young drivers even over 18 to being potentially stopped by police and questioned. I proposed lowering the curfew age to 15 and under, which allows teenage drivers to freely attend a late movie with their girl/boy friends on Saturday without breaking the law. The council adopted my suggestion.

– I have brought attention to many small issues that have been adopted, including typos and corrections to the Council Policies & Procedures, committee appointments, and various other minor things. Many of these items might be boring, but attention to detail is important.

– I asked the council for this election which is allowing the People to vote for a new council member, instead of four council members picking who they want. A number of citizens (and council members) wanted to appoint a gentleman who has now dropped out of the process. Elections allow candidates to demonstrate their dedication (and eagerness) so the people can choose.

– I have been vocal about the high compensation ($320,000), low interest home loan, moving expenses, 9-month pay severance clause, etc. approved by a prior council for our city manager. I would not have voted for that contract.

– I am very critical of staff “pre-meetings” with council members that occur before the open public council meeting. Such “pre-meetings” can sway the ultimate outcome toward what the staff would like over what the public wants. I will limit my participation in such meetings as I believe the public has the right to hear the entire discussion.

– And, yes, I strongly favored and spoke for and voted for Measures A & B.

Eager to serve you. -Kevin (805) 602-2616