SLO County District Attorney Dow is a warrior for justice, Tribune rebuttal

November 6, 2022

District Attorney Dan Dow

Opinion by San Luis Obispo County District Attorney Dan Dow

Sadly, over the last decade issues of community safety have increasingly exposed the stark differences of world view between political conservatives and political “progressives.”

Progressive politics have brought us initiatives like Proposition 47 and 57 and have created the undeniable crime surge in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and across the state. The failed policies in those regions implemented by Los Angeles district attorney George Gascon and recently recalled San Francisco district attorney Chesa Boudin are now being rejected by a majority of California voters.

As your San Luis Obispo County district attorney, I care deeply about our safety and about the support and care of victims of crime across our county.  And I care deeply enough to stand up and speak out when I believe I should.

Sadly, the national trend of decriminalization and reducing accountability for offenders has crept into our county board of supervisors. Supervisor Bruce Gibson tries to appear as supporting public safety, although in reality he has shown he is more interested in using public safety as a political weapon against other supervisors who are in the conservative camp that he disdains.

Here are two specific examples:

In Jan. 2017,* Supervisor Gibson voted with Adam Hill to oppose the creation of a new sheriff’s substation in Nipomo that would decrease response times to assist citizens in south county. The “progressive” supervisors voted against the substation because they were political opponents of Supervisor Lynn Compton and didn’t want her to succeed politically in advocating for her district.

Similarly, in June of 2017,* Supervisor Gibson again opposed and voted against the addition of two sheriff’s deputies to serve rural north county communities of Shandon and San Miguel. The deputies were clearly needed to reduce the lengthy response times.

Yet again, Gibson and Hill played politics and voted no because they were politically opposed to the newly elected Supervisor John Peschong who represented that area. They couldn’t stand to see a newly elected conservative supervisor succeed in advocating for his constituents.

Each of these votes display supervisor Gibson’s partisan approach to public safety: if it helps my political opponents on the board, then community safety be damned.

Since I was elected in 2014, I have invited Supervisor Gibson to meet and tour the District Attorney’s Office. Gibson has refused repeatedly.

He stated, “I saw it under your predecessor, I don’t need to see it again.”

I have invited him to meet and discuss safety issues and he has refused. Instead, he has repeatedly attacked me publicly. Recently, he cited my “extreme” views on the First Amendment of the United States Constitution because I refused to prosecute people for singing in church. He apparently supports government interference with how one practices their faith in a house of worship. (By the way, the United States Supreme Court agreed that California’s order restricting worship during the pandemic was unconstitutional.)*

Finally, at times over the past eight years, Gibson has taken personal potshots against both Sheriff  Ian Parkinson and me at public Board of Supervisors meetings. He has tried to embarrass us and has attempted to lecture us with his ‘progressive’ ideas.

Gibson can’t wait to get a progressive majority on the board so that he can continue his fight as a warrior for the progressive left.

I’m proud to be a warrior for justice and truth and law enforcement. If I stood by and did nothing in this election, if I didn’t stand up for what I believe in, then I would have myself to blame for being a political coward.

I strongly endorse and urge District 2 voters to vote for Dr. Bruce Jones.


Leave a Reply

Please Login to comment
Jorge Estrada

Thank you Dan Dow for not being a fence sitter and publicly citing your position. I’m very impressed that you walk your talk, while knowingly put your future livelihood in the hands of the readers. Also, understand that differences can be good for a refined result. My refined vote is for you in the future and Dr. Jones on tomorrow’s election day.


Dan Dow is a great D A


Kind of off the subject but does anyone know when we will see the FBI report on Adam Hill? He’s dead now so who are they protecting?


It just does not seem ethical to have a DA weigh in so heavily on a local election. This is another reason that outsiders must see our county government as having serious problems with ethics. This issue transcends notions liberal vs. conservative.


Really? Did you read the post by Dow? Gibson has criticized him and Parkinson. He has opposed improving our communities with increased presence of LO. Why shouldn’t the DA support the candidates for Supervisor that will better support their department?


I’m not in district two. I don’t know Gibson or Dow. I do think Mr. Dow is a man of principal for voicing his concerns. What we really need and can easily be put on the next ballot is term limits for supervisors. Probably a good idea for city councils too. 8 years and your out!


Too bad your warrior philosophy doesn’t apply when looking at the criminal acts at the IWMA and SCSD.

Mitch C

From what I read of the Tribune’s editorial, Dan Dow is correct and is approaching citizens safety as a priority. I support Mr. Dow 100% he is working for us, the honest, taxpaying, law following citizens.


Thanks, Mr. Dow, for pointing out Mr. Gibson’s and the Late Adam Hill’s failure to fund law enforcement multiple times over the years due to their politics. To put their party ahead of the safety of the county residents is outrageously unacceptable. Anyone who has paid attention know these facts. Just go back and review their comments and votes.

In a way, Adam Hill sealed his fate in many ways. Sad to watch it happen and end the way it did.

Bruce Gibson is a different situation. While Hill was compromised by his addictions and greed for money, Gibson may have very well sealed his fate politically in a different way. His greed is for power and control. He has constantly led with mean-spirited words, intimidations, and threats to fellow supervisors and constituents for years in all areas of the county.

He has used his position for his favor in projects and fellow party members on cozy deals and approval of funds to county agency that are ran by his friends.

It’s time for him to go. Look for the attacks to come from guys like Tom Fulkes, the failed Tribune, Gibson and his supporters. It will be the same as always.

No worry. Good always wins over evil. No matter what the outcome on November 8th, Gibson is, and always will be identified as a corrupt, angry, bitter individual not worthy of his position.

May he be sent packing and looking for a new job come January 2023.

Thanks again for pointing out the truth and facts Mr. Dow.


Wow, a self proclaimed warrior for justice! How humble. You sound like that fruitcake Bill Cunningham on the radio who proclaims himself a great American.

Your slavish proclamations to the religious far right and denigration of the progressive left are inappropriate for a supposedly non partisan position of power. You are supposed to prosecute law breakers and ought to stay out of politics with your radical right attitudes. We need fair and balanced law enforcement.

Mitch C

Mr. Dow is fulfilling the duties for which he was elected. However, he is only part of the equation. He needs a team of like minded people that help him fulfill his duties. When he comes across a destructive nut like Gibson who supports defunding the police, elimination of bail, and seeing dangerous individuals walking our streets after numerous arrests, Dan Dow needs to say something. He did and I support him for it.


Pete, we have been trying the non-partisan route for the past 6 years or so, but every time I turn around, a D politician is telling me I’m a racist for wanting crime prosecuted, and D district attorneys failing to charge criminals with the crimes they’ve committed.

When the reasonable D citizens take control back from the D party, away from the activists, we can get back to fair and balanced law enforcement. But until then, it’ll be R politicians (and Michael Shellenberger) as the only ones willing to talk about solutions