The 2024 elections in San Luis Obispo County served as a fascinating case study in how voters respond to candidates who champion disruption over constructive governance. While local politics often take on unique nuances, the results of these elections highlighted a broad trend: voters are increasingly rejecting candidates whose platforms are rooted in performative outrage against government institutions without offering substantive, well-thought-out solutions.
A Shift in Voter Priorities
This year’s elections underscored a growing demand for candidates who prioritize accountability and efficiency without resorting to divisive or inflammatory rhetoric. Across the county, candidates who focused on collaborative, solution-oriented leadership fared better than those who leaned heavily on anger and disruption as campaign strategies.
Several key races brought this trend into sharp focus, including the mayoral contests in Grover Beach and Arroyo Grande, as well as the Oceano Community Services District election.
Grover Beach: A Missed Opportunity for Debbie Peterson
Debbie Peterson, a former mayor of Grover Beach, ran her campaign on a platform that heavily criticized existing government structures and processes that were already addressed. Peterson and her supporters alleged the Grover Beach City Council was essentially corrupt for approving water/sewer rate hikes to address costs associated with Central Coast Blue, a controversial local water sustainability project for the Five Cities communities that later proved to be financially unsustainable for most municipalities that initially agreed to participate. And so the City of Grover Beach decided to withdraw from the Central Coast Blue partnership and roll back the water/sewer rate hikes that voters had already approved pursuant to California Proposition 218. Peterson and her organization Grover H2O moved forward with attempts to recall councilmembers who voted to approve the legally obtained rate hikes as a punitive gesture more than a legitimate cause for concern about city government.
Peterson’s rhetoric often framed local governance as fundamentally broken, rife with inefficiencies, and in desperate need of an overhaul. However, Peterson’s campaign lacked clarity on how she would fix these alleged issues. Her combative style, while energizing to a subset of voters, alienated a broader constituency seeking pragmatic solutions rather than performative outrage.
Grover Beach voters decisively rejected Peterson’s approach, instead opting for Kassi Dee, a candidate whose focus was on building upon the city’s progress rather than tearing it down. This outcome sent a clear message: while voters value accountability, they are not willing to entrust leadership to candidates who offer disruption without a clear path forward.
Arroyo Grande: Gaea Powell’s Campaign of Chaos
In Arroyo Grande, Gaea Powell attempted to ride a wave of discontent, presenting herself as a disruptor ready to challenge the status quo and uphold the California Constitution, which was never under threat in the City of Arroyo Grande. Her campaign often centered on broad, inflammatory claims about corruption and inefficiency in local government. But her platform veered off course into homophobic and oftentimes graphic discussions about “pornography and vulgar content,” which mayors don’t have the authority to curtail. She also ran on a platform against “local woke extremism,” child exploitation, and “local and state dictationship.”
However, much like Peterson, Powell failed to present specific, actionable plans to address these issues. Her campaign leaned heavily on emotional appeals and conspiracy theories based on a thorny foundation of hate speech, but lacked the depth necessary to instill confidence in voters.
Powell’s loss was another example of how voters are moving away from candidates who prioritize rhetoric over results. The electorate in Arroyo Grande demonstrated that they value candidates who focus on practical solutions and community collaboration over those who sow discord. Arroyo Grande mayor and incumbent Caren Ray Russom easily defeated Powell simply by being the calm and reasonable adult in the room.
Oceano: Charles Varni’s Uncivil, Disruptive Ambitions
Charles Varni’s candidacy for the Oceano Community Services District (OCSD) in the 2024 elections was overshadowed by his contentious leadership history. His behavior and decision-making as an OCSD director raised serious concerns among voters, contributing to his electoral defeat. He was the lead proponent of the district surrendering control over their fire and emergency services, and deferring that responsibility to county government. Varni also sought district’s expenditure of its funds to pursue fundraising for the local school district, which the utilities district is not responsible for.
Varni’s tenure on the OCSD board was marked by a series of incidents that put the district in legal and reputational jeopardy. One of the most notable controversies involved his public feud with the district’s legal counsel, former general manager Will Clemens, and his own board colleagues. Varni disparaged them publicly, waging a campaign of personal attacks that undermined trust in district leadership. This behavior was not only unprofessional but also resulted in alleged violations of the California Brown Act, which mandates transparency in governmental decision-making. These actions exposed the OCSD to potential legal challenges and diminished its ability to function cohesively.
When confronted with criticism about his conduct from behind the dais, Varni frequently lashed out against his critics in a series of heavily sanctimonious, self-serving and self-victimizing commentaries. Rather than addressing concerns constructively, he escalated tensions by targeting local businesses owned by his detractors. This retaliatory behavior further alienated members of the community and underscored his inability to engage in respectful, solution-oriented leadership.
The cumulative effect of Varni’s behavior — legal missteps, public disparagement, fundamental misunderstandings of district operations, and retaliatory actions — painted a troubling picture of his leadership style. Oceano voters decisively rejected this approach, opting instead for a candidate who demonstrated a commitment to collaboration and professionalism.
The Ineffectiveness of Performative Rage
The common thread among these candidates was their reliance on performative outrage as a central campaign strategy. While anger at perceived inefficiencies or corruption can be a powerful motivator, it is not enough to sustain a successful campaign. Voters in San Luis Obispo County made it clear that they are looking for leaders who not only identify problems but also articulate thoughtful, actionable solutions.
Performative rage often alienates voters who value stability, professionalism, and constructive dialogue. Instead of inspiring confidence, it can create an image of a candidate who is more interested in causing chaos than in governing effectively. This year’s election results showed that such tactics are categorically ineffective in earning the trust of the electorate.
A Roadmap for Future Candidates
The 2024 elections in San Luis Obispo County should serve as a wake-up call for future candidates. The path to electoral success lies in offering a clear, compelling vision for governance—one that prioritizes transparency, accountability, and community-focused solutions over sensationalist rhetoric.
Candidates who wish to succeed must take the time to deeply understand the needs and concerns of their constituents, then present plans that address those needs in a constructive and collaborative manner. Disruption for the sake of disruption is not a winning strategy. Voters are demanding leaders who can bring people together, not tear them apart.
San Luis Obispo County voters have spoken, and their message is unequivocal: performative rage against government institutions is not enough to win their trust or their votes. The 2024 elections served as a referendum on leadership styles, reaffirming the importance of calm, thoughtful, and solution-driven approaches in local politics.
As the county looks to the future, it is clear that the electorate values leaders who can bridge divides, inspire collaboration, and work diligently to make government more effective and transparent. For candidates who aim to run in future elections, the lesson is clear: focus on building, not tearing down.
For more political analysis and insights, visit my website or read my columns in the New Times.