Arroyo Grande needs new leadership

November 1, 2014
Jim Hill

Jim Hill


Economic development

Arroyo Grande has focused its economic attention on the Village, to the exclusion of most of the city. Arroyo Grande residents are proud of the Village, and economic development there is a good thing, but why doesn’t the rest of the city get to share in these benefits?

Arroyo Grande needs head of household jobs throughout the city. The Village is not and cannot be big enough to provide these. Private business throughout the city is the cornerstone of our economy. Businesses in all areas of the city need to be promoted, supported, and encouraged to expand local employment.

By pushing the proposed city charter with its explicit attack on prevailing wages while simultaneously allowing unregulated deficit spending, the mayor and council have declared they do not care about working people or taxpayers in Arroyo Grande.

We need to assure that balanced budgets are maintained, head of household jobs are paid at the prevailing rate for the benefit given, and businesses are encouraged throughout the city.

Water conservation

Everyone in Arroyo Grande is aware of the drought and the depletion of our Lopez water reserve. Most are aware of the chronic overdraft of our groundwater basin.

The need for water conservation is well known here – yet the city council insists on paying thousands of dollars to friends of the mayor to reiterate these well known facts. The city can and should communicate the need for conservation at council meetings and through bill enclosures, and could expand on this by supporting retrofits and giving recognition for reducing usage.

But additional advertising contracts to well-connected favorites is another waste of tax dollars.

Job creation

Job creation is a function of local business (including agricultural) activity. Most of us were attracted here because of the favorable climate and businesses react similarly. A favorable business climate includes reasonable regulations, taxes that are a good value for the services provided and consistent, fair treatment by the city- not insistence on use of favored contractors or lesser consideration than a well-connected few. The city needs to champion all our businesses, not just those located in the Village

Labor negotiations

Labor negotiations need to be based on knowledge of the services needed combined with mutual respect and trust. The mayor and city manager have failed in this area to the detriment of residents and city employees alike.

Good management facilitates pride in employment that is the cornerstone of quality services and value received for taxes and fees paid. Public officials such as the mayor who demand and have come to expect special treatment destroy morale and erode quality of service to residents.

Jim Hill is running as a write in candidate for the mayor of Arroyo Grande seat.

Like CalCoastNews on Facebook.


Citizens of Arroyo Grande, ask not what your city can do for you, ask what you can do for your city. Elect Jim Hill.


I loved this recent statement by Jim Hill. It shows that he has an handle on issues facing the citizens of AG, unlike our current Mayor who has not come out with any statements showing his views on anything that is important.

While we all live in AG, and most of us are making enough money to have time to post on this website, but we do have people in our community who are struggling. Our community has real issues to deal with and create solutions for; we need leadership who will not only recognize these issues, but will work for solutions.

For this reason, and this reason alone, it is time for change in AG’s leadership. WRITE-IN JIM HILL and FILL IN THE BUBBLE. We have the power to make this desperately needed change–please do not let this opportunity pass you by—we can be a model for other cities on the central coast.

Vote on Tuesday. WRITE-IN JIM HILL and FILL IN THE BUBBLE. We can make election history!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


You don’t mean to say that the two council meetings at which the Mayor explained his tree trauma in extensive detail wasn’t important, do you?


If the Mayor called the Council for a decision to initiate the investigation, then he has created a “serial meeting” which is a Brown Act violation.

But hold your horses…. There is NO teeth in any Brown Act violation and the City regularly violates this Act and seems to have no intention to change their ways.

Mike, let’s see what comes out in this investigation.

If the truth comes out and we have verification the CITY MANAGER not only blamed the AGPOA, but also LIED, it will be Fascinating to watch how the Council substantiates their actions of keeping Adams employed when he LIED TO THE POLICE.

This is. NOT over on Election Day folks, we will have the sequel soon.


The latest “investigation” was conceived and inacted in a totally nontransparent manner, using conflict-of-interest-laden tactics. Therefore, the investigation itself is tainted, unsound, and cannot be assumed to be able to produce any thing but untainted results.

We should refuse to accept the results from this sham of an “investigation,” and demand a transparent process to design protocols for a real investigation.


Arroyo Grande Ordinance 2.08.080, administrative relationships:

The council and its members shall deal with the administrative service of the city only through the city manager, except for the purposes of inquiry, and neither the council, nor any member thereof, shall give orders to any officer or employee of the city under the supervision of the city manager. The city manager shall take his or her orders and instructions only from the council as a body, and no individual member of the council shall give any order or instruction to the city manager. Any subordinate officer or employee receiving orders or instructions contrary to the provisions of this section shall report the same in writing immediately thereafter to the city manager, and the city manager shall promptly forward a copy or summary of such report to each member of the council. He or she shall likewise promptly advise each member of the council of any order or instruction received by him or her contrary to the provisions of this section. It is not intended by the provisions of this section to restrict unduly the privileges of a member of the council to request the city manager, but not any other officer or employee under his or her supervision, to prepare a report dealing with any matter of city business, or municipal affairs generally, if such report can be compiled without the undue dislocation of city activities and without the expenditure of considerable quantities of time by city personnel.

Mike Byrd

So the million dollar question is, who ordered the city attorney to investigate? We know at least one councilmember first heard of the incident on July 4 when he was called by the city attorney. We also heard another councilmember state on the radio last week that the attorney’s report was given to the council when they met a few days later.

This means that someone orderd the investigation on or about July 4. If the mayor did so that would seem to be a clear violation of the code cited above. If three or more councilmembers agreed to order it that would seem to be a clear violation of the Brown Act. So which was it? Maybe this new investigator will let us know?

Which all raises another interesting question. If the investigation was not ordered properly or legally, is the city liable for the $1,200 the attorney billed the city? Or should the city attorney who should have known if he received an improper order eat that cost? Or should whomever ordered it be responsible?

At this moment I don’t know any of the answers but I do have an awful lot of questions.


Thank you Jim, for providing us with more information on your positions.

I am amazed at the umber of folks, willing and committed to vote for you with scant knowledge, they say all they need to know is “he’s got my vote, he’s not Tony”.

As time goes by that becomes more apparent, and those who want a change in leadership in AG won’t be disappointed when they get the opportunity to see the stark contrasts between you and Mr Ferrara.

I believe you are exactly what this city needs now in order to bring us back together and moving in a positive direction.

So many merchants who operate outside the village are fed up with being treated like second class citizens, the favoritism lavished on some is so blatant it’s appalling.

The fact that our city manager acknowledges he failed to maintain a positive relationship with the POA and then blames them for the hot water he finds himself in is shameful. We should be very disappointed that our Mayor and council have aligned themselves with Adams, the members of the POA are OUR OFFICERS.

Very much looking forward to the spirit of cooperation and integrity you will bring to AG.

It will go a long way towards uniting the citizens and we welcome the change.


My elderly neighbor received the flyer with the photos of Ferraro and Costello.

She came to me for answers.

She is savy and on the computer. I directed her to the CCN site.

She returned and said:

“The City Manager lied to the POLICE. He lied and is blaming others.

No one believes that ridiculous tea story. Now I know what you are working for.”

She put it two words. HE LIED.


That could be considered elder abuse.


The photo’s should have been of Abbott & Costello.


I’m going to vote early, I vote not to respond to AGDon,

who reminds me an awful lot of the council member who keeps harassing the police about signs from one particular camp while conveniently ignoring all others.

I say this because I just became aware of Hill signs that have been intentionally moved to public right of ways, not placed there by any supporters of Mr Hill.

AGDon can insinuate all he wants about the misdeeds of those helping Jim, my focus will be in a more positive direction and…he…is…not…it!


agag1, Im not sure about what this council member has done and frankly it sounds pretty stupid to call the police about signs. That’s a city of AG issue and something that a council member would theoretically have some influence on, so the accusation is dubious at best.

moving signs, really? Nobody cares about signs except for a small group. Why would someone move a sign. If you were going to tamper, then just get rid of it. I think this sounds like a wishful spin also.

No insults, just pointing out less than helpful behavior for a group claiming to support healing


No more stupid than calling public works to remove a tree from your yard.



If you read the policy.

The only way a council person should be in communication about any complaint or directive is through the City Manager.

When the Mayor or Council people “pop in” to City Hall for extended periods of time, they are making the employees be uncomfortable.

But, most of the council members are clueless how this makes people feel.

I’m sure the employees at the yard and Park and Rec are thrilled not to be at City Hall


“Theoretically have some influence on”

NO this is EXACTLY what I am talking about.

A Council member or Mayor should NOT receive preferential treatment

In fact our mayor has worked hard the last 2 council meetings to prove he is a regular Joe.

The only way a council member should influence ANYTHING is with 3 votes!


Healing is to be lead by a Council that has taken 10 weeks to do NOTHING!

I’m guessing they think the election will solve the problems of the City.

This is not just a problem for the relationship with the AGPOA, look around, your Mayor has a credibility problem.People do not like him. He is not friendly.

He is a BULLY in many peoples eyes.

Then there is also the problem of the City Manager having an inappropriate personal relationship with a subordinate employee out side of work and to TOP it OFF LIE to the POLICE, KSBY and other news outlets.


I, too, am not stooping to the level of mud-slinging that AGDon throws around. My focus is to bring a new group of people on board of our city council, so that we will have a group that is welcoming, bringing the community together, and not intimidate or favor one over the other.

16 years is TOO long for anyone to be in office. He has forgotten that he represents ALL the people, not just his buddies in the organizations that preserve the village.

Time for a change…time for JIM HILL as the new AG Mayor.

Good bye AGDon.




One vote makes you larger

And one vote makes you small

And the ones that Tony want’s from you

Don’t do anything at all

Go ask Jim, when he wins this fall

And if Tony goes chasing voters

And he knows he’s going to fall

Tell ’em a hookah smoking city manager

Has given him the call

To meet with him about city hall

When the Mayor in the chambers

Gets up and tells you where to go

And you’ve just had some kind of meeting

And their minds are moving slow

Go ask Jim, I think he’ll know

When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead

And the Mayor is talking backwards

And the council is out of their head

Remember what the council mouse said

Vote your head,

Vote your head.


Clap, clap, clap!



You bust me up!

Way to go.


AGDon, I understand your tactic of trying dispel the values of Jim Hill, but in this case, you really should have done your homework first.

From what I heard, an empolyee on the Mangano property reached out and requested to their committee to put up the signs. He stated that he was going to trash the signs that were up there (Caren Ray and Tony Ferrara) and asked that a Jim Hill sign go up. The fence was blank when the sign committee put up the Jim Hill sign. If the foreman and the property owner can’t communicate…well, that is not the committee’s problem.

Jim Hill is not part of the write in Jim Hill for AG Mayor committee. He is not involved in the actions that group takes. They do their best to maintain the same ethical behavior that will represent Jim. That site was given permission, so please check back with your sources.

As for Kevin Rice and IntegritySLO, they are also not affiliated with the Write In campaign here in Arroyo Grande. They move independently from any committee. Last time I heard, people were allowed to support and voice support candidates of their choosing, right?

We are now finding Jim Hill signs torn down or being removed….now who is getting excessive?


Stakeholder, I mentioned that case specifically because I know the people involved and you description is 100% false. Why would Mangano, who is a known Ray supported, agree to her signs coming down. Nice try, but Jim Hills committee is covered in mud on that one.

As for an independent committee that runs rouge, that is of great concern. First, that Jim Hill either cant manage his people, or that he will be beholden to some independent group, or worse yet, he is as has appeared so far, simply an absentee figure put up to splinter Arroyo Grande’s vote as part of a larger plan.

Rive is a whole other issue. He was paid by the campaign as a matter of record. So the connection is established. The game of using him his organization and his tactics then disavowing them as some independent act is completely empty and dishonest. Again, not the character of a leader to heal Arroyo Grande.

Mike Byrd

Mr. AGDon, please ask Mr. Mangano what happened. He’s a reputable man and I believe he will tell you the truth and set you straight. Or ask Kristin Barnich, the mayor’s biggest supporter. I also believe she will tell you the truth. I can’t tell you what to do after that but whenever I’ve been mistaken I’ve gone back and apologized.

As for Mr. Rice, he has a telephoning system set up and was paid approximately $140 to send out some calls. Now, if you have a problem with who we pay for services, here’s another one for you. Our mailer was printed by the company that stopped receiving city business after the mayor became angry with something she printed for another paying customer. Apparently in some circles it’s okay to criticize others for how and where they spend their money and even to try to hurt certain businesses financially. On my side of the fence, though, that is inappropriate and unwarranted.

If you have a problem with any Jim Hill position on any issue, just say so. That’s fair. But spreading misinformation and harping about where 140 bucks was spent isn’t even worth the time it took me to answer you. So goodbye.


I will check that out. I believe you understand the story to be as you present it.

The $140 telephone deal only proves coordination. The $3000 mailer by Rice is far more significant. The suggestion that this is the work of some independent group is a thin smoke screen and the payment to Rice tips it clearly into close association. I never said anything about who printed the mailer, just whose names are on it, Kevin Rice and Jim Hill.

I stated my concerns about his positions.

Mike Byrd

The first we knew of the Integrity SLO mailer was when a 497 form was emailed to us. As required by law we filed it with the city clerk. Until it arrived in our mailboxes we didn’t know what it comprised.

Believe it or not, there are people in this city who respect the law and follow it. And that’s what this campaign is all about. I’m really sorry you’re on the other side. I’d love to talk with you about our differences but nobody knows who you are. That makes getting together and resolving differences difficult.


Why don’t you go look at the Blue watch tapes that will clear up who took the signs down, it was not the Jim Hill campaign.


StakeHolder– you are correct.

AGDon has clearly been drinking the city hall tea.

It’s like Steve’s tea party story, if he tells it enough times he thinks people will actually believe him!


Jim, Thank you for coming forward with real tangible positions. While you could have spared the unsubstantiated rhetoric, there was real content here. I think you are naïve in your perception of negotiations with labor unions. The union supporting you has been unwilling to work with the city during hard times and has been antagonistic in its technique. This will most likely continue, but it is not for one man to do anyway.

What you do have control over is who you associate with in your campaign. There is a very divisive bunch in your inner circle. While the hand made signs are nice, the placement on public and private property without permission has become excessive. For instance, the other candidate signs on the Mangano property in the village were torn down one night and yours were put up. Then a supporter listed that property as a supporter of the campaign in a post on this forum. That is an insider doing this deceptive stuff. Additionally, you have tangled your self up with Kevin Rice, a controversial and divisive character at best. This is not the road to healing a town.

Mike Byrd

That was NOT the sequence of events regarding the signs on the fence in the village. The Ferrara sign was taken down by someone working on site and the Hill sign was posted with permission of someone on site working for the property owner. The property owner overruled his employee and the Ferrara sign was reinstalled. The Hill sign was never returned.

As for signs in rights-of-way, the police department has been inundated by sign complaints by one city councilmember, the majority of which were incorrect. Where we have become aware of misplaced signs they have been promptly removed. Even though there are several Ferrara signs that appear to be illegally placed in rights-of-way to my knowledge there hasn’t been asingle complaint about those. Funny how that works.

And those are the facts. Everything works out better if we all stick to them.


So then what is the answer with the other two candidates signs being torn down along with Ferra at the same time. The story does not hold up.

As for signs posted in the right of way and private property without consent. Hmm, Rancho Grande HOA owned property, Cherry Creek HOA owned property, city owned property at traffic way on ramp, city or cal trans property at rancho parkway and branch, posted on the old photobooth kiosk on Grand, it goes on and on and that is off the top of my head. Add to that the signs promoting a private for profit operation as campaign signs and it just gets worse.

SIr, the facts are the facts, not the ones that serve your end, but the complete truth.


You sir, are incorrect, and the fact that you persist with trying to make your point using false information is yet another example of the desperation oozing from the Ferrara campaign.

The signs in the village were removed by someone on the job site–fact.

Someone contacted the Hill workers to place a sign–fact.

Then the Hill signs were placed later in the afternoon there were NO signs present–fact.

The original signs were replaced, there was no evil intent–fact.


AGA1 That is not how I have understood it to be and we can leave it at that. I accept that you understand differently and those things happen in either case.

Mike Byrd

AGDon, just ask Mr. Mangano or Ms. Barnich. They both helped to figure out what actually happened and I don’t believe either would tell you anything but the truth. You’re throwing around accusations and innuendo like cow patties. If you’re really sincere help set the record straight. Just ask and report back who told you what.


Why was Ms Barniech involved with a missing sign?As I understand it from the powers to be, she is the one calling in numerous complaints about the signs.

As someone else mentioned, look at the cameras in the village, that will clear this up. I find it laughable at best all the comments about a few signs. It just appears that someone does not want Mr. Hill to get in office for whatever reason.






Can someone please clarify “clearly audible?”


Wow! Could have used AGDon on the Hill campaign. It sounds like she has the inside scoop to properties in AG. What the hell is an HOA?