District 3 supervisor’s race: 5 questions for the candidates

The two candidates running for 3rd District San Luis Obispo County supervisor have made it clear over the course of the campaign that they don’t like each other, and much of the campaign has been over style as much as ideas.

Dan Carpenter, San Luis Obispo City Council member, launched his campaign to end what he calls his opponent’s “bullying” from the dais. Incumbent Adam Hill, who is seeking a third, four-year term, says his style is “passionate and heartfelt” and that he’s come through on a number of issues for his constituents.

The Tribune asked the candidates five questions on issues the Board of Supervisors will be facing, and a fifth on the subject of civility during public meetings. These are their responses:

Q: What would be your primary goal for the first six months of your term?

Carpenter: (1) Restore the highest level of respect and civility to the Board of Supervisors, which has been lacking from our 3rd District supervisor. The level of discourse has deteriorated and made it virtually impossible to have meaningful deliberation among board members. (2) I would focus on real solutions to the extended drought we are in by advocating for additional surface storage and reclaimed water opportunities. (3) Make transportation infrastructure a priority for the next fiscal budget.

Hill: Continuing work to open the Pismo Preserve as well as putting into action some management of Pirate’s Cove, and also continuing conservation discussions regarding Wild Cherry Canyon.

Q: How seriously do you think the closure of Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant in 2025 will impact the county? What should the Board of Supervisors do to address that impact?

Carpenter: The closure of Diablo Canyon is very serious, having an annual economic impact of $1 billion. The board should adopt policies reducing onerous and obstructive regulations that discourage business growth in our county. To replace this economic loss, we must partner in reducing the risk to investors who will bring quality jobs to our county. Streamlining the regulatory and review process would contribute to job growth and reverse the pervasive culture of project approval delays.

Hill: It will no doubt have a serious impact. The county budget can absorb the loss of revenue, but the broader community needs us to aggressively increase our economic development efforts to create more quality jobs in our tech sector and in specialized manufacturing. No one has been more engaged in this than me, and I look forward to more opportunities, including public-private partnerships. Our relationship with Cal Poly’s Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship is excellent and will continue to be a focal point.

Q: Do you support Measure J, the half-cent sales tax increase on the Nov. 8 ballot that would fund local transportation projects, and if so, why? If not, how should local transportation infrastructure projects be paid for?

Carpenter: I did not support putting the half-cent sales tax measure on the ballot as I felt the $300,000 marketing cost of taxpayer resources was not appropriate. The plan also lacked a backup strategy should the tax initiative fail. We should be laterally supporting local candidates who will commit to prioritizing local resources for transportation infrastructure and improvement, while continuing to advocate that the state return the gasoline tax dollars to our local community.

Hill: Yes, this is critical. If people don’t like current congestion and traffic, this will not improve without this funding. There is no argument against it other than an ideological opposition to taxes. There is no other funding source, and with 84 percent of the state’s residents already living in a self-help county, it is ludicrous to think opposing this will “change” Sacramento. This means fixing roads, and it also means jobs for local companies. We should all support it and see that the road and trail projects get done.

Q: An urgency ordinance that prohibits the removal of oak trees in unincorporated inland areas (with some exemptions for diseased or dead trees; farmers and ranchers are allowed to take out 5 percent of their total oak canopy without a permit) expires in April 2017. Would you support a permanent ordinance?

Carpenter: I would only support a permanent ordinance that would allow property owners who responsibly manage their normal tree maintenance to continue without burdensome tree assessment and evaluation. This will take valuable staff time to manage and is not an appropriate use of tax dollars when the abuse has been limited to a few irresponsible landowners. Any impediment to normal maintenance will have an adverse effect on the property owner and risk the continuance of successful agriculture operations.

Hill: I do indeed support a permanent ordinance because we’re not dealing with a few trees, we’re talking about woodlands that are critical habitats. The wanton destruction of these habitats, which we’ve seen, causes enormous consequences for living creatures, for soil, for water and for the climate. There are simply too many outside corporate interests to think we can simply rely on self-regulation for this important resource.

Q: What would you do to personally improve civility and the level of discourse between board members as well as with members of the public?

Carpenter: In July 2015, the Board of Supervisors unanimously passed a resolution committing to building a civil political community in which each person is respected and spirited public and political debate is aimed at the betterment of San Luis Obispo County. The primary source of incivility and discourse on the board today is cultivated by the current 3rd District supervisor. I would personally replace him by securing the confidence of the voters and winning the election in November.

Hill: It’s true that certain interest groups have disruption and personal attacks at the center of their agenda — COLAB (Coalition of Labor, Agriculture and Business), hate radio, hate blogs. And that has caused some despicable and hypocritical behavior. (Free speech only for commenters? That’s odd and wrong.) But the record reflects that this issue is more smoke than fire — we have passed incredibly important policies on everything from land use to mental health to homelessness to economic development with unanimous votes. It’s what gets done on behalf of the community that matters.

This story was originally published October 1, 2016 at 7:04 PM with the headline "District 3 supervisor’s race: 5 questions for the candidates."