Hill’s reelection, what were the voters thinking?

November 5, 2017

Supervisor Adam Hill, photo by Daniel Blackburn

OPINION by T. KEITH GURNEE

Next Tuesday, Nov. 7, marks the one-year anniversary of a decision some San Luis Obispo County voters have come to lament.

No, it wasn’t the election of President Donald Trump, although many seem to regret that fact. Rather It was the decision by San Luis Obispo County District 3 voters to reelect Supervisor Adam Hill to another undeserved term of office.

Having endured the first year of his latest term, Hill’s year has been one of constant tantrums, misogynistic rants, misplaced blames, and his deliberate alienation of the board majority. As a result, Hill has relegated himself a political eunuch and an ineffective representative of his constituents.

Before Hill’s reelection, we were warned this would happen. His opponent, former San Luis Obispo City Councilman Dan Carpenter, predicted it and did his best to get the word out. But Hill’s developer-funded war chest and his pay-to-play schemes carried the day. And now the voters of District 3 have three more years to endure his ineffectiveness.

And then there are the positions he’s taken over this past year:

  • He tried to get the board to dramatically increase the inclusionary housing fees that would’ve driven housing costs higher in the middle of a housing crisis and he’s still trying!
  • He criticized Supervisor Lynn Compton for the $1.5 million budget appropriation for South County Parks, but only after he and Bruce Gibson had plundered nearly $10 million in development impact fees generated in Compton’s district for projects in their own districts.
  • He continues to rant about appropriating funds to the Flood Control District to support groundwater basin management plans while favoring state intervention to manage our groundwater resources and the increased regulations and challenges that would accompany it.
  • Then Hill blamed the board majority for the $8 million budgetary error, politicizing the issue rather than what he should have done: request an investigation into why it happened and how it happened.
  • While the majority wanted to bring in an interim CAO from outside Hill and Gibson’s political circle, Hill and Gibson steadfastly refused such a notion and insisted on the appointment of Assistant County Administrator Guy Savage. And under whose watch did that error occur? Guy Savage, Hill and Gibson’s hand-picked choice.

Hill, having erected a wall between himself and the majority, has taken himself out of the running for the position he covets most: chairman of the Board of Supervisors. He has made that his will “impossible dream” all by himself.

Now he’s spending more of his time trying to get someone elected in Compton’s district than representing his own.

And the first year of this term draws to a close, Hill’s antics and behavior during what should be his last term has been nothing more than shameful. His constituents and those who voted for him should be furious at his ineffectiveness and asking themselves “What was I thinking?

The answer: they weren’t thinking!







Loading...

16 Comments

  1. don the beachcomber says:

    Hill won because he faced the wrong opponent. Debbie Peterson, as a woman and a Democrat from South County, could have defeated him as she could have lured environmentalist Dems away from Hill over his pro-development positions. Dan Carpenter couldn’t do that. That seat can not be won by just winning conservative Republicans.

    (0) 0 Total Votes - 0 up - 0 down

Leave a Comment