SLO County supervisors violate campaign disclosure laws

March 28, 2014
Adam Hill

Adam Hill

By KAREN VELIE

Two members of the San Luis Obispo County Board of Supervisors violated the Political Reform Act this year, according to the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC).

Developer Gary Grossman donated $1,000 to Adam Hill  the same week the supervisor attended a groundbreaking for one of Grossman’s Pismo Beach developments. Even so, on Hill’s campaign disclosure form Grossman is listed as retired.

Because of the misstatement, Hill is required to return Grossman’s $1,000 donation.

On Tuesday, the FPPC sent warning letters to Hill and Supervisor Caren Ray. Ray violated campaign disclosure rules by failing to provide addresses for some of her donors, including Grossman who has donated more than $14,000 to Ray’s campaign.

During the last reporting period, Hill received $22,899 in donations, primarily from developers with projects in front of the county and business owners with contracts with the county. Contributors include Grossman — seeking to develop the former Dalidio Ranch, Postcard Properties — which is working to build a hotel in Avila Beach, developer Andy Mangano, Ryan Comerford – has the golf course management contract for several county courses and Frank Kelton who contracts for ambulance services.

…..


Loading...
justchuck

Adam Hill did something wrong? I find that incredibly hard to believe. When is he going to “pay” for all his transgressions?


slowtime

All Campaign Contributions are Bribery at some level. All of these donors want something in return for their $$. It is time to level the playing field and eliminate these “donations”


1inthemiddle

I agree. The campaigns should be very brief and equally funded from public funds.


Eliminate all the super PACs and unlimited corporate donations that Compton’s large donor the Lincoln Club helped to create.


1inthemiddle

I forgot the part about bribery. Seems if that were true then those who donate to incumbents are asking for them to continue on the existing path as these candidates have shown what they will do. The opposite would apply to those who donate to the other candidate. They are saying that they do not like what the incumbent does and are asking their chosen candidate to do something else. The hidden key is what is that something else?


Pelican1

Politics,for all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.

Politicians and diapers should be changed frequently and all for the same reason.

Now is the time!


1inthemiddle

I like the concept but it would appear problematic. In Bryds case he would not be able to vote on something that involves property potentially sold by a realtor. In Comptons case she would be sidelined from voting in many Agriculture, vineyard, and water issues.

I would hate to bind up the 4th district representative that way no matter whom it is.


1inthemiddle

Crap that was a reply to SLOBird


Mike Byrd

No problem on my end. I assist folks buying homes, primarily within cities. I don’t list and I don’t represent buyers of development properties.


blondehare

Carson and Blankenship cannot say the same.. Mike. They cheated and lied to sell builders Gar Young,s cheaply built crap..Which Allan Williams supported along with Steve Adams ,County supervisors are known to OK this.Tone of nondisclosure’s and sold them . Lied and board of realtors all backed up a smear campaign against anyone who were brave enough to confront them.. I did..Roy Ogden and Adan Hill protected all the lies..


1inthemiddle

So your argument is that donors with “obviously different political views” from the candidates donate to them as opposed to people they share views with because why?

The candidate with different views is more likely to vote their way than the one who shares the view? I don’t even know what to say about that.


MaryMalone

The first rule is that you correctly identify your contributors, which is something Ray and Hill failed to do.


Pelican1

And the hits just keep on comin’!


1inthemiddle

Just so we are clear. Ray made the egregious error of reporting a PO Box instead of a physical address for one donor. A error that was corrected by refiling an amended 460 prior to the issuance of this letter which also indicates the case is closed without the requirement of amending the filing.


SLOBIRD

No don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know how to donate. When I donated the other day their is an asterisk which states you must complete the field (address, employer, position). I left one blank by accident and it rejected and made me come back to the field). When I went into a campaign office to donate I have to fill out the form manually but still the same requirements were asked except obviously it didn’t reject.


Easy to donate if you can read and complete the form from my experience,


1inthemiddle

You can look at the filing. It was multiple of the same person. A clerical error early in a campaign. While it may seem basic, most of this stuff is done by volunteers.

I hope the people who felt this was a serious infraction and reported it also comb other the other candidates forms as well, but somehow I suspect not.


Kevin Rice

I’m looking at the filing. I count nine separate persons out of twelve instances. $56,000 of contributions isn’t “early” in a campaign. And sloppiness isn’t a clerical error. Clerical errors include transpositions and missed zeros, not failure to read directions.


Ben Daho

Remember, “Don’t change dicks in the middle of a Screw, Vote for Nixon in 72”


SLOBIRD

She keeps listening and playing Hill’s game she will end up in trouble. Oh, by the way, in case anyone missed it. “developers, developers. developers”.


I firmly believe that if ANY politician accepts an election contribution from anyone in business they should not be allowed to vote on their projects. Projects should be voted on solely on their merits to the community/County. Just saying~


Black_Copter_Pilot

Those two are the best politicians money can buy!


MaryMalone

I don’t think they are the best politicians money can buy. Surely, there are better politicians than Doofus 1 and Doofus 2.


1 2 3 5