Who is SLO County supervisor candidate Geoff Auslen?

March 4, 2022

Geoff Auslen“


Is San Luis Obispo County District 2 supervisor candidate Geoff Auslin a liberal, a moderate or a conservative? It all depends on his audience or what day it is.  Before deciding to run for office in a primarily Republican district, Auslen was a Democrat.

Today he’s a Republican, when asked about his political views he first said he was a moderate, but wait, two days later he declared he was a conservative during his failed attempt to get the Republican Party endorsement. He lost by a landslide. The next time he spoke, he changed back to being a moderate again. You just can’t make this stuff up!

When questioned about why he considers himself a moderate and not a conservative, he said, “Because I care about the homeless,” wrongly insinuating only Democrats care about the homeless. Maybe he’s really confused because Geoff has been a Democrat most of his life. He switched his party affiliation purposely to run for office in a mostly conservative north county. His wife is a progressive Democrat.

Geoff’s largest single donor, Tom Jones, is a progressive Democrat.

Tom Jones, who was best friends with the late supervisor Adam Hill, donated $2,500 to Geoff’s campaign. Let’s connect the dots, shall we?

Tom is married to Jamie Jones of Kirk Consulting. She’s an expert who pushes projects through the county for rich people, like Helios Dayspring, who pled guilty to bribing Adam Hill. As a planner for the city of Atascadero, she helped Kelly Gearhart, who ripped off seniors in our community of millions of dollars while somehow skirting city inspection requirements.

Take note:  Jamie Jones is a member of A Better Atascadero, a political action committee, referred to as a PAC. Former Atascadero mayor Tom O’Malley, also a member of the PAC and Jamie Jones both support Auslen. Many in this group supported Kelly Gearhart and Grigger Jones and are tied to past corruption in Atascadero and other corruption in the county, which is still under investigation. Tom O’Malley’s reputation is stained so badly he cannot run for county supervisor himself.  These are the people supporting Geoff Auslen.

Without a doubt, Geoff is not who he portrays himself to be. He’s not sure if he’s a moderate or a conservative. He doesn’t understand the issues. Is Auslen a wolf in sheep’s clothing?

We desperately need to clean up the corruption in SLO County. We can’t afford to have a candidate tied to corruption or backed by people with ties to Adam Hill and Kelly Gearhart when this county is still under investigation by the FBI.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

I surely appreciate the article, being a voter in District 2, gives pause for thought!

Information is key for decision making, definitely worth looking into.

If the post is correct, almost seems like a progressive Trojan horse, if there’s a oust Bruce at any cost movement, then they can try and sneak in a progressive wolf in sheep’s clothes!!!

During Dave Congalton’s interview with Eric Gorham, North County businessman and Chair of the SLO County Republican Party, where he expressed deep concerns about Auslen, a question was texted in that Gorham easily identified as coming from Auslen’s campaign manager. Auslen is a weasel.

Don’t waste your vote on this liberal masquerading as a Republican. Tom O’Malley is a Rino at best and will sale out his party to get what he wants. As for the rest mentioned in this article, they’re corrupt deceitful and untrustworthy.

Geoff Auslen is the North County’s Adam Hill. Pay to play. You hire the “planning consultant” of my choice or your project goes nowhere. Bruce Jones is the only anti-corruption candidate, and SLO County corruption is endemic at this time. I’d actually take Bruce Gibson over Auslen.

Why not discuss the facts not attack the writer. Explain why you disagree unless you cannot.

Who is Cynthia Muir? And why does CCN publish her Opinion without identifying her?

Does one have to show papers and a curriculum vitae to exercise their First Amendment rights? CCN did identify her! She is Cynthia Muir.

Turns out that Cynthia Muir is a “massage practitioner” who lives in Morro Bay. So she doesn’t even live in the new District 2.

Who cares who she is. Everything she wrote was dead-on and quite succinct.

I asked myself the same question Eyes. Now I don’t know Geoff’s political ideologies, nor do I care, but I do know him to be an honest, and friendly businessman as I have patronized his business in A-Town for years.

And no, I don’t have a dog in this race.

He sounds like a peach. Probably will win too with the average low IQ of this area.

I would be careful with your language disparaging this man’s wife. You more than imply corrupt behavior on her part without a bit of evidence to back it up.

Candidates subject themselves to public hyperbolic scrutiny. Which is fair. You are given a wide berth to criticize, a public figure, before it becomes libelous.

You are not entitled the same freedoms with their spouse or their child. You just may get sued along the way.

Short of crossing a legal threshold; your rhetoric is distasteful and a prime example of what is wrong with our political discourse today. Lots of ugly labels and innuendo, and not much else. It is tiresome.

Why don’t you put the same effort into telling us about a candidate you believe in and why we should vote for them? There is a bright side to politics and a dark side.

We need to choose to live in the light.

Interesting comment MrYan

It is public knowledge the statement about Goeff’s wife.

Are you Tom Fulks?

Public knowledge is a euphemism for “rumor has it”, is it not?

I didn’t question that this information was in the public sphere, but rather the value it brings by airing it here-at CCN.

The simple point was our political discourse is better served leaving such things, rumors and innuendo, out of it.

MrYan is MrYan. Sorry.

So what is the falsehood?

Freedom of speech includes things that are “short of crossing a legal threshold,” and that you might find “distasteful,” “disparaging,” “critical,” “tiresome,” etc.. As to libel, that is a different story as it is a legal matter which needs all of these things: a false statement, that it involves unpriviliged information, that this false statement is intentionally published, that the statement was written intentionally/negligently/recklessly, and that the statement causes damage to one’s reputation. So unless ALL these criteria are met……..


Sounds like Ms Muir hit on all the points of who’s who here, her effort this time was for someone that doesn’t seem to be fit for the job, because of tie ins with other people, pretty simple.

Oh my. This is getting interesting.