The Strange Case of the Ambulance Bonds

Back in March 2025 the Fullerton City Council decided to fire the City’s ambulance contractor and take the responsibility in-house. Why? Well, naturally there’s the official story, which is that there will be some sort of saving, which is nonsense, since it means adding 20 new public employees on the payroll, and was all based on wishful thinking. So instead of shopping out the paramedic business like Placentia did, Fullerton did the opposite, requiring acquisition of ambulance rolling stock and the various other appurtenances like gurneys, etc.

On this Tuesday’s Council meeting Agenda Item #10 proposes a payment plan for this nonsense. Guess what? It looks desperate. City staff is still proposing to finance the acquisition of all the ambulance stuff through acquiring debt, via a master agreement with Bank of America to buy City bonds at a coupon rate of 3.5%, and then use the proceeds to lease ambulances.

Well, there she goes. Don’t worry. There’s more where that came from…

Yes, you read that right. We’re paying for Fire Department empire creation with $2,000,000 credit. The capital repayment and interest on the bonds would amount to $2,175,000 by the time the last bond matures in November 2031. And let’s not forget the dough paid to bond counsel and financial consultants (UFI) who are selling this deal. And oh, yeah, let’s consider there’s now insurance, maintenance, fuel, etc., of vehicles owned by the lessor (BofA), which was all glossed over last April 1st, as was the cost of financing which is over $200,000.

The single Agenda Item #10 staff report sentence justifying the financing is laconic, and notable for what it doesn’t say; that the City still plans to finance the purchase orders for this equipment supposedly issued in April. Here’s all we are told:

Urban Futures, Inc. (UFI), the City financial advisor, and staff determined private placement financing offers the most beneficial and cost-effective solution for the City.

But there is no explanation why. None at all. Zip. Is the City borrowing $2,000,000 at a lower interest rate that it is making in an investment pool? Who knows? The City Council and the public aren’t informed, just as they weren’t informed when financing was proposed back in April.

The fun aspect of this is that the lease of these ambulances would be rent-to-own, a little con – making the credit-risk-uninformed think they are getting something great. I mean, who doesn’t want to own stuff, right? What good is a owning a six year old old ambulance? I don’t know, but my guess is they depreciate really fast. Maybe even faster than rent-to-own toasters.

He’s on it…

I really don’t know what to say about this completely unnecessary move. If the Council had just voted no on the unsolicited plan from the FFD we wouldn’t be looking at having to cover any loan vig at all. Neither the Councilmembers who voted for this – Zahra, Charles, Jung and Valencia had much if anything to say about this bond/lease back in April.

This is how I bought my first car, a 1991 Yugo!

Of course Zahra and Charles don’t give a rat’s ass about wasting money, especially when they script some sort of feel-good performance. Hopefully, Jung and Valencia will change their minds about this resistible offer, but I’m not optimistic. Maybe Dunlap can talk some sense into them.

With Fullerton tottering on the edge of financial meltdown the Council’s behavior towards the fire department (and its union employees) has been highly irresponsible. In October they accepted a one-time FEMA grant to hire a platoon of new “fire fighters” that we will become completely responsible for in 3 three short years, pensions and all.

No, I’m not optimistic at all. The financial leveraging is bound to be used as a pretext to pass a sales tax increase next year. And what if that fails?

Ad Hoc Tuah Part Five-ah. And No Laughing Matter

Right after the City Council votes to ban nitrous oxide in Fullerton, they will discuss the creation of an ad hoc (that’s Latin, darlin’) committee of two councilmembers to work with staff to develop sales tax ballot measure language. It’s item #20 on your scorecard.

Well, there she goes

The tax idea was floated by an earlier ad hoc committee, the so-called Sustainable Budget Committee, or something suchlike. That committee ultimately decided to recommend to limit the parameters of the tax to two different special half-cent sales taxes, one for infrastructure and one for our old friend “public safety.” It was probably reasoned that they would get more support than a general sales tax, but they need a two-thirds vote of approval for a special tax – a tough nut to crack.

Of course, a General Tax increase only needs a 50%+1 threshold to pass. But you need a council super- majority – 4 votes – for that to get on a ballot, and that seems highly unlikely.

You will be taxed…sooner or later!

It’s been painful to watch this drawn out Kabuki and it seems as it if will go on at least until the deadline for getting on next year’s ballot. Fortunately there is little chance that Mayor Fred Jung will let the obnoxious and incompetent spendthrift “doctors” Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles anywhere near this language-developing process.

We have all seen the way that these government-written ballot measures twist language and logic to try to fool the public to approve them. The examples are so plentiful they hardly need enumerating. Remember the ill-fated Measure S in Fullerton? Hoo Boy was that some seriously misleading bullshit. Hopefully, Jung can require a simple and honest text without the usual treacle.

My cynical side wonders how much of the infrastructure tax language will actually include funding for the cops and financial bailout for the idiotic firefighter-union-members-as-ambulance-drivers decision, or FEMA FFD expansion grant nonsense. Anyway you cut it you want those well-funded unions on board for the inevitable campaign PR campaign.

Cry harder…

Fullerton Boohoo and the Kennedy Sisters will be crying out loudly that the fix is in by their new bogeyman – the evil Bushala Bloc – and that any ballot measure language will be crafted to fail without the steady guidance of our in-house council “intellectuals.” Tender young sprout Elijah will demand TRANSPARENCY. They may even still squawk about the need for a General Sales Tax increase, after all. But I think that Good Ship Lollipop has sailed.

Has that ship sailed? I wonder.

Young Elijah Misses Nap, Throws Tantrum

I get cranky this time of day…

Sweet flower Elijah Manassero has just lost his temper. Did he miss his midday nap? Does he have a full diaper? Who can say? What I do know is that he has scribbled another of his diatribes for the Fullerton Observer Sisters, piling on their desperate narrative that the owners of Les Amis are victims of some sort of conspiracy in City Hall.

Les Amis sans meubles…

The City finally removed Les Amis stuff from City property a few weeks ago after the aforesaid business spent a decade and a half dodging rent, stalling, trying to weasel out of signed agreements and of course, encroaching onto public space without permit or agreement on several occasions.

The defenders of the indefensible are trying to ignore all the facts of the Les Amis history of scofflawry, and pretend that the substantial 2022 rent increases by the City were insufferable, and hence non-payment justified. And anything that happened before this gossamer pretext is wished into Fullerton Boohoo’s collective cornfield.

Off you go. We’ll hear nothing of the kind…

Tender fleur Elijah calls his article a “history,” but conveniently omits most of Les Amis‘ real histoire, and like a typical Observer reporter shares unsubstantiated conversations related to him by Ms. Jinan Montecristo – the alleged victim in all this – as gospel. Young pup Elijah mentions nothing before 2022, of course, and even Les Amis recent spotty history of non-payment goes unmentioned.

Young Elijah pops up in the garden…

Fragile and fresh Elijah has tried to speak with nobody inside of City Hall to get the true litany of Les Amis bad behavior. That would be uncomfortable. He accepts as true what he has been told by the noaccounts of Montecristo without reservation. Did he get any facts from Mayor Fred Jung about the removal of the Les Amis detritus? Nope. Might he have been told that the upcoming discussion of lease rates in the future has nothing to do with lease obligations in the past and due now? Of course. Did he he inquire about the fact that maybe the removal of the stuff happened at 6:30 am so as not to block the adjacent alleyway during business hours? No. That would interfere with the conspiracy narrative.

Found another victim! Of me!

Since the young fleur Manassero visits and cites this blog all the time, he knows very well that his mentor and manipulator, Ahmad Zahra, voted to implement the 2022 rates; and he knows that the Montecristo clan said nothing about it at the June 21, 2022 public hearing. He has obviously decided that these facts aren’t necessary to convey his nonsensical narrative. Why clutter up your prosaic propaganda with embarrassing information?

And why should Fullerton expect anything resembling honesty, integrity, or basic journalistic ethics from The Fullerton Observers and its proprietors – the Kennedy Sister, Sharon and Sitka.

I pity the poor immigrant

On Tuesday the City Council was presented with an agenda item that opened discussion about a City response to the recent ICE operations and provide some sort of assistance to people being harassed by the masked bandits formally known as Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

How dare you question my origin narrative!

Naturally this bit of boohooing was agendized by Ahmad Zahra, who reminded us he is an immigrant without sharing the fact that he got a Green Card and ultimately citizenship, via immigration fraud, and his pal, Shana Charles who can’t find anything so stupid she won’t go for it. Plus we learned that she has an ex-husband, and this gentleman’s Guatemalan family is under some sort of duress.

What you see depends on where you stand

As usual, Fullerton Boohoo turned out in force to apply pressure to give public assistance to people without legal status in the country. Ahmad Zahra was clear: the broke City can find $200,000 in the municipal sofa cushions to do something for somebody: at least $100,000 for legal defense and at least $100,000 for some undefined daily living/rent assistance. There was no mention of who would administer such funds, who would get them, or any other practical detail. Rome wasn’t built in a day, you know.

I have no problem providing help for indigent citizens who have been wrongfully detained/legally harassed by the ICE goon squad. Citizens who can’t afford legal representation have recourse to public defense in the criminal justice system. But making local taxpayers pay for the legal cases of non-citizens is absurd. There is no question among the intelligent that everybody in America deserves due process. Why this should extend to Fullerton handing out monetary relief for illegal aliens escapes me.

The staff report on the matter, as usual, was equivocation personified, and useless. Halfway through, the staff report jumped ship completely and began describing a residential tenant registry to gather data about housing stability. What the everlasting fuck? It’s almost like somebody in the City Manager’s office cut and pasted something from a whole other agenda item.

Valencia is smiling on it…

In the end a Council majority voted 3-2 for the staff to cook up some sort of resolution to affirm (their) community values and prepare for the necessary budget actions. Zahra and Charles, of course voted to do so; and somehow Jamie Valencia was bamboozled into going along, although she later stated that her vote only meant that the City should act as a facilitator to some extent, for non-profits, churches, and anybody else who wants to help the newly discovered clientele. Hopefully she directs the City Manager to dump the whole idea of public funding.

Look What I Can Do!

Says the 4 year old as he spins around and waves his arms frantically for attention.

Transparency, uber alles!

And so our new acquaintance, lively young fleur Elijah Manassero presented himself after the last city council meeting in another of those pre-written emails to the Fullerton City Council.

Earlier that evening the Council passed a new ordinance making bar owners responsible for the cacophony that emanates from their establishments. At the meeting, tender Elijah, pretending to be a big supporter of small businesses, claimed that the majority of the bar owners were already in non-compliance with the new regulations.

Of course they are are. They’re in non-compliance with the old regulations, too. That’s whole point of putting a stop to the amplified music free-for-all. Sweet Elijah’s conclusion to his “argument” is that bar owners shouldn’t be held responsible because of their…irresponsibility.

Think harder…

But back to the fragile sprig Manassero’s email. The comfy chair he was sitting in in the council chambers was still warm when he hit the send button for his missive to the council. Get a load of this:

Dear City Council,

What I witnessed tonight was deeply disheartening. The decision made by this Council Majority disregarded both the data presented and the overwhelming public opposition. For those who campaigned on transparency and accountability, this vote reflected neither.

Councilmember Valencia – I encourage you to review information before meetings, not during them. The claim that Los Angeles and Orange County maintain 45-55 dBA limits is demonstrably inaccurate. These are residential limits, not commercial. Fullerton’s own consultant, Dudek, explicitly found such limits incompatible with downtown conditions.

Mayor Jung – you dismissed data in favor of personal anecdotes about your visits downtown. The code enforcement logs, which I provided, contained the evidence you seemed to be missing. Instead of engaging with facts, you deferred all reasoning to a donor and then immediately adopted his requested carve-outs. That was not impartial governance.

You also stated that you wish to be “pro-resident” rather than “pro-business.” But when the vast majority of residents who spoke opposed these limits, that justification rings hollow. Outside of one of your donor’s former bloggers, no one living downtown spoke in support. If this vote was truly about residents, then which residents are being represented?

Councilmember Dunlap – I understand the pressures of coalition politics, but I also believe you know when something is wrong. If you continue to vote with those driven by donor loyalty rather than the public good, those distinctions won’t protect you in the court of public opinion.

To Mayor Pro Tem Charles and Councilmember Zahra, thank you for your thoughtfulness and consistency. You demonstrated what it means to listen to the community and think critically about policy rather than reflexively defending it.

For weeks I’ve raised awareness about this issue through my platform. That advocacy led to coverage by Voice of OC and then KTLA, which broadcasted your decision tonight. The public is paying attention, and what they see is a Council majority choosing special interests over small businesses, culture, and common sense.

I said this before and it remains true: there’s still time to change course, but that window is closing. This was the wrong decision, and I guarantee the majority of Fullertonians agree.

I’m disappointed in tonight’s vote, but encouraged that accountability is finally catching up. Please reconsider the path you’re on before it’s too late.

Respectfully,
Elijah Manassero

Where to start picking apart this nonsense? You choose. But do linger over the part where the precious rosebud claims credit for media coverage of the issue thanks to his “platform,” whatever that may be.

A Potential Solution for Fullerton’s Homeless Crisis

Did you lay these eggs?

Sometimes stuff pops up that you couldn’t possibly make up. The latest Fullerton Observer includes a piece co-authored by Curtis Gamble and Sankia Kennedy and features the headline I used, above.

Why write about news when you can try to make your own! (Photo by Julie Leopo/Voice of OC)

To start off with I have to say I can’t think of two people less likely to come up with a potential solution for anything.

Representing bus drivers, homeless, students and all the little people…

Poor Curtis Gamble is just a perpetually discombobulated fellow who takes an opportunity a couple times a month to polish his sense of self-importance at city council meetings, generally offering comments on things he knows nothing about. He presumes to advocate for the homeless, bus drivers, seniors, students, etc., etc.; people who would probably just as soon forgo his representation. Co-author Saska Kennedy is thoroughly annoying too, although she, like her older sister, Sharon, is propelled by the ideological dogma of the self-righteous and sanctimonious left.

Rancho La Paz

Their “article” presumes there is a homeless crisis in Fullerton. And it offers that homeless seniors represent 20% of this crisis. Their potential solution? Use the Rancho La Paz senior mobile home park as some sort of permanent housing for the homeless, moving them into trailers as they are vacated.

I can’t conceive of a worse idea: a village of homeless people assigned property, not their own, to live in and presumably maintain. Somehow the pathologies of homelessness – schizophrenia, drug abuse, living in filth would be rectified by mobile home park living. Cooking, cleaning, job hunting, health maintenance all self-performed by the newly housed, one concludes. Of course professional do gooders from Illumination Foundation (as a for instance) will be on hand to dispense “behavioral” admonitions and the necessary modalities.

The friendly coin collector…

The biggest unstated obstacle, and one that Curtis and Skansia work really hard to ignore is the fact that the mobile home park has an owner. When last I heard, that fellow is a real estate and numismatist named John Saunders who has been villainized by Fullerton Boohoo for raising rents on his ground leases and who, I believe, is highly unlikely to go along with Homeless Village. Well, maybe he would if the City were to reimburse him for rents and maintenance costs and policing of the village. That would cost a fortune.

The article fails to mention that typically land, not the mobile homes are owned by a guy like Saunders. A trailer wouldn’t be available unless purchased by somebody for the homeless purpose, or just abandoned by the owner.

Then there’s the issue of joint sovereignty. The south half of Rancho La Paz is in Anaheim, not Fullerton, so there’s that.

When I was done reading this nonsense I was left wondering its purpose. Is it just gratuitous virtue signaling? A Big Idea hatched by the disoriented Curtis Gamble and advertised by the Kennedy Sisters? Hard to say. But one thing is certain. The piece projects the typical lack of pragmatism that is the hallmark of the Homeless Industrial Complex, so maybe it has a chance – if politicians can be seen to be throwing money at a problem absent results.

Tuesday’s City Council Meeting

The August 19th Fullerton City Council meeting has a few sort of interesting items.

First, we have the Closed Session topic of Fullerton joining the class action lawsuit against ICE behavior on our streets.

This is interesting because it aligns with the “transparency” protest cooked up by the Kennedy Sisters long before the agenda was even published. Obviously Zahra and Charles leaked confidential attorney-client information from the City Attorney as to why this should be discussed first behind a closed door, as Harpoon insinuated in the linked post, above.

Anyhow, whatever happens behind this closed door will soon be leaked by Zahra and Charles to Fullerton Boohoo, some of whom will show up to blow three minutes (each) of everybody’s time with the usual rhetoric. But now the rhetoric will be about the lack of transparency of Jung, Valencia, and Dunlap.

Consent Calendar Item 12 is so poorly written it’s impossible to understand. Are “Downtown Parking Program Funds” just dumped into the General Fund (10) and then doled out to the appropriate downtown projects? The agenda report gives no separate accounting. If those funds are buried in the General Fund, why? Why aren’t they just placed in their own enterprise fund to begin with? Are downtown parking revenues being used to pay General Fund responsibilities? Typical opacity. Don’t expect anybody on the City Council to inquire, and don’t expect Young Elijah Manassero to demand transparency with his special brand of tender earnestness

Consent Calendar Item #14 deals with the usual pea-under-the-walnut shell budgeting for “Phase 2” work on the dismal disaster formally known as the UP Park – The Poison Park in FFFF jargon. The slow and incredibly expensive death march has begun with no mention of why the park was fenced off decades ago. The staff report just says “the park closed approximately 20 years ago” as if the park just decided to close itself. The City closed the park with zero fanfare because it was a complete fiasco from the beginning, a multi-million dollar monument to six-figure bureaucratic failure; a thing something nobody outside City Hall asked for or wanted.

The really bad part about this item is how the Council is being asked to transfer another $300,000 to the project. Why? More mission cost creep, of course.

Item 21 is the start of something big. Fullerton’s trash service contract is coming up in June, 2027 and staff wants to issue a Request for Proposal (RFP). The RFP solicitation document itself remains a mystery to the public because it isn’t attached to the agenda. Sorry.

These contracts with trash haulers involve huge amounts of money over the term of agreements. Hundreds of millions. Republic Services is our current “vendor,” grandfathered in from the old MG Disposal operation, if you go back far enough. Republic’s foot in the door may not help in obtaining future contract. It recently underwent a work stoppage by Teamsters workers in solidarity with Republic employees in…Boston. We were the ones affected.

Another Republic problem, apparently, has been their continued unwillingness to come to terms with the City about stuff required by a state mandate, as described in the staff report.

Oops. Making the City look bad to the pointy heads in Sacramento is no way to endear yourself to city staff. The inclusion of this episode in the staff report can’t be good news for the good folks at Republic.

Republic has, no doubt, been busy greasing the Fullerton council axle recently, and no doubt others will soon follow.

Fullerton is Safe. Part 2

Last week I put up a post based on a realtor’s post about how Fullerton had been declared the safest suburban city in Orange County and Southern California. The guy’s name is Alex Yu, and because he didn’t cite any source except a national survey of some kind, his declarations weren’t taken seriously by me or some of our commenters.

I am now happy to fill in some of the information. How? Because the City of Fullerton put out a self-serving and self-congratulatory press release.

It turns out the “survey” was done by SmartAsset and was based on per capita crime rates, traffic deaths, and reported excessive boozing. The list of cities is so wide and so varied, and missing so many undeniably safe suburbs in OC – Villa Park, Laguna Beach, Laguna Niguel, etc., just to name a few, that we may assume, I think, that getting on the list was not an entirely objective process. Were safe suburbs weeded out solely due to their subjectively chosen proximity to a “major city?”

I notice that SmartAsset is some sort of financial advising operation, not a serious scientific survey company. This is evident by who’s not on the list. The article announcing the survey was written by a certified financial planner, so there’s that.

Here’s the text of the City’s press release:

The City of Fullerton has been recognized in a national study conducted by SmartAsset, which ranked the 360 safest suburbs in America located within 15 to 45 minutes of major cities.

The study evaluated suburbs using five safety-related metrics: violent crime rate, property crime rate (sourced from FBI data), as well as drug poisoning mortality, vehicular mortality, and excessive drinking rates (from County Health Rankings). According to the America’s Safest Suburbs – 2025 report, Fullerton was ranked #49 overall, making it the highest-ranking city in both Orange County and Southern California included in the national list.

“Fullerton is honored to be recognized as one of the safest suburbs in America — a reflection of the unwavering commitment of our public safety teams and the strong partnership we share with our residents and local businesses,” said Mayor Fred Jung. “Public safety is a community effort. This recognition belongs to everyone who contributes to making our neighborhood a welcoming, secure, and thriving place to call home.”

Police Chief Jon Radus added, “Our department is committed to proactive crime prevention and building trust with our residents. This ranking affirms the partnership we have with our community in keeping Fullerton safe.”

The study highlights Fullerton’s exemplary performance in multiple categories related to safety and public health, reinforcing its position as one of the region’s most livable communities.

Everybody wants to live (and sell houses) in a safe city, and nobody can really blame officialdom for taking an opportunity to make themselves look good, but c’mon guys. Let’s lay off the self-lathered soft soap and focus on doing your jobs with efficacy and accountability.

Fullerton Arboretum: Benign Neglect or Deliberate Sabotage?

Don’t look back, something might be gaining…

I am posting a communication from a guy named Dr. Steve Chapin regarding the arboretum over next to the CSUF campus. According to Chapin the Arboretum grounds are suffering from lack of attention and parking, which used to be free, will now cost an astonishing twelve bucks on week-ends.

From the Fullerton Arboretum Advocates  Facebook page:

Dear members of the “Fullerton Arboretum Advocates” Facebook page. I have not posted here since my last post on March 6, 2023. (See below).

I had not visited the Fullerton Arboretum since around that time when CSUF took FULL control and renamed it the CSUF Arboretum and started charging $4 per hour for parking at the Arboretum lot on weekdays. Today, Friday August 8th, I visited the Arboretum for the first time in over 2 years. What I saw saddened me and confirmed the concerns I expressed previously on this page.

There was hardly anyone there on a beautiful sunny Friday afternoon with only 8 cars in the almost empty parking lot. (See Pic) Starting August 25th CSUF will begin charging a $12 parking fee (*now informed it starts at $6 and will increase to $12) on the weekends for all the campus lots including the Arboretum lot. Because of the weekday $4 per hour parking fee at the Arboretum lot that began in 2022 using the Park Mobile app, the Arboretum is now mostly visited on the weekends and is often crowded then.

Earlier this year I spoke with Dr. Shana Charles the Fullerton Councilmember for District 3 about the Arboretum, she happily noted: “Parking is still FREE at the Arboretum on the weekends!” This will no longer be the case starting August 25th. Expect attendance at the Arboretum to continue to fall and its many benefits to the Fullerton community as a commons for people to visit and enjoy free of any fees on the weekend to expire. How sad for the people of Fullerton that this once great civic source of relaxation, recreation, education and family enjoyment will now be monetized and underutilized by its citizens.

The Arboretum was not looking as nice or as well kept as I remember it. Besides a lack of visitors, the extensive lawn next to Dr. Clark’s house was brown and mostly dead. Many of the surrounding citrus trees looked under water stress with curled up leaves. I have 10 citrus trees in my yard, so I know what healthy watered trees look like.

I was told that the Arboretum’s long time director had retired in January and that the position had been posted but then removed by CSUF and had not been filled. This could explain the sad shape of the grounds. I asked if Dr. Clark’s House (Heritage House) had been reopened for visitors or the many schoolchildren field trips I use to see there and was told no. The only good news I have to report is that Arboretum land was not taken for the massive expansion and building of student housing that is being added to the campus. It does tower above the Arboretum grounds though. (See pic).

I just wanted to alert the people here who are still Fullerton Arboretum Advocates to what I saw and learned today after visiting the Fullerton Arboretum after a 2 year absence.

Sincerely,

Dr. Steve Chapin

The plan here seems pretty obvious: let the Arboretum go to the dogs, declare it an unsafe nuisance and build more massive dormitories for the eager young CSUF students. $12 to park on a week-end? That’s tantamount to robbery. The City has no control over the university that can do any damn thing it wants, although I seem to recall an Arboretum Joint Powers Authority with a commission, or some such thing. I don’t know if it even exists anymore.

The candle provided no illumination…

I do love the reference to Shana Charles, happy warrior for public health when it’s not even at stake. This is different. A real open space with trees, plants, water, n’ stuff could very well be at risk from her employer. Let’s see what the good doctor does.

Fullerton is Safe!

FFFF received this social media snippet today and I thought it was worth sharing.

It’s hard to read, but the gist of it is that Fullerton has made a list of 47 safest suburbs in California. Mr. Alex Yu, a realtor, doesn’t name the source of his wonderful news, but refers to a “national safety report.”

Mr. Yu declares that Fullerton is named the the safest city in Orange County, and in fact, all of Southern California!

This is an OPPORTUNITY for someone, presumably Mr. Yu.