May 28, 2026May 28, 2026A Manfro All Seasons

More Monkey Business With the Budget?

If as is being claimed by “Erik” at Fullerton City News is unequivocally stating that Fullerton City staff has been unilaterally backfilling departmental funds without approval by the City Council. This would be unethical and illegal.

Elected officials have to approve these sorts of transfers from the General Fund as well as periodic budget adjustments. Period. Erik claims this has been going on for at least seven years and the amounts are substantial.

Erik uses this situation to suggest a City sales tax bailout is the wrong way to reward the bureaucrats who perpetrated this possibly criminal hairball.

Here is his post:

I’ve Got 24,816,001 Reasons To Not Support A Sales Tax

City Hall Spent $24.8 Million Without Council Approval And Now Wants A Tax Increase

Erik

May 21, 2026

Budgets are estimates, it’s an unpredictable world, and not getting it perfect is understandable. Fullerton City Hall staff and the city council are supposed to work together to determine how much money should go to each fund / department but ultimately it is the city council who, being elected, gets the final say on how we prioritize and spend that money. When council does this properly the residents are happy and councilmembers get re-elected, run for higher office, etc. When they don’t get it right they lose elections, get recalled, and/or face public scorn. The city council is our control mechanism over how our money is spent.

When a council appropriation ends up being more than what was needed, the remaining money can return to the General Fund without issue. When a council appropriation is not enough, the correct action is to request an increase from the city council. Again, city council is our control mechanism over how our money is spent. Staff does not have the legal authority to increase spending, only council does.

This is spelled out in City Municipal Code 2.68.030:

Prior to June fifth of each year, the City Administrator shall submit a budget for the coming fiscal year to the City Council for adoption.

And the restrictions given in City Municipal Code 2.68.050 which states:

C. Transfers of appropriations between departments and funds, or use of salary and accounts, other than those exceptions authorized herein, may be made only by authority of the City Council.

D. Expenditures in excess of the budgeted amounts are prohibited. (Ord. 1485 § 5, 1967).

This should be clear and simple. Need more money? Go ask council for it. However, it appears City Hall chose not to follow this practice (or the law).

During a conference call with a municipal finance expert, I was directed to the ‘Budgetary Compliance’ Section of the City’s 2025 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). They summarized that when that section is present in the report it means that something has gone wrong and in this case it’s by a lot. The ‘Excess’ column of this section lists money that city staff spent in excess of the council-approved budget and for 2025 it totals $11,148,422.

Consider for a moment what this means. Our only way of having a say over how our taxpayer money is spent is through the city council. They are elected to represent us and our interests. The municipal code confirms this is their decision to make. Yet in FY25 unelected bureaucrats at City Hall simply ignored the city council and the voters they represent and went and spent whatever they wanted.

Police couldn’t manage on their budgeted $61.3M? They spent $63.9M.
Fire couldn’t operate on $34.6M? They spent $36.2M.
‘Capital Outlays’ went over by $6M. This one is especially troubling because there’s no clear explanation of what those funds were actually spent on.

Put another way, the city council budgeted a total of $132.9M to the General Fund but staff spent $144.1M … $11,148,422 of which was without council approval. You might notice on the Revenue side that we brought in $8.9M more than anticipated and should have had a $5.4M surplus. But staff’s $11,148,422 unauthorized spending pushed us from a large surplus to a $5.7M deficit.

This is a complete disregard of good financial practice by City Hall. While some overspending covers legitimate needs, the lack of prior approval violates the process residents rely on, a process that does not include staff spending whatever they want and stashing it on page 105 of next year’s ACFR. Their actions were in direct violation of the city municipal code and are a slap in our faces.

But wait… it gets worse. Much worse. If this were a one-time thing I could almost understand. But, Dear Readers, City Hall staff has disregarded city council approved budgets every single year for the past decade. See for yourself:

gdfgdfgd — 2023: $455,176. And they were nice enough to put in a reminder that this was not legal spending.

Prior to 2021 accounting used a different format for the annual financial report known as the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and the format is a little different, but the pattern of spending beyond authorization continues.

Starting in 2019 to present, staff has helped themselves to $24,816,001 of our taxpayer dollars beyond what our duly-elected council representatives legally allocated them. This money was taken without permission, outside of our established legal process, repeated every single year in recent history. This is an outrage.

Our current unrestricted cash reserves are $19.8M which, with a general fund of $144.1M gives us the current 14% reserve level. This is well below the council target of 17% and translates to 1-1/2 months. Had staff followed the budget all these years, our reserves could be as high as $44.6M which comes out to a 31% reserve level or 3-1/2 months. Or some of that could have gone to paving more streets.

But alas, it is already spent and gone and those who spent it are telling you to just give them more money via a sales tax increase. You should ask your councilmember how they feel about this, do they still trust City Hall, and what are they going to do about it?

We are being robbed.

Back to Harpoonville. This sounds pretty serious and I sure hope the crack accountants we have hired to check the books to explore a few facts:

How were these transactions booked and who authorized them.
Were the transactions simply glossed over in annual CAFRs and budgets without saying who approved them?
When, if ever did the Fullerton City Council approve these transfers? Were any of them ratified after the transfers ere made.

We have already seen the City play fast and loose with Redevelopment Successor Agency funds as well as other non-discretionary funds to pad the invalid General Fund. That was bad. And in retrospect, maybe those transfers were just part of an overall scheme.

May 17, 2026May 17, 2026About Us

Ad Hoc Tuah Part…Aw, Who Cares?

by The Fullerton Harpoon8 Comments

Fullerton’s so-called Ad Hoc Fiscal Sustainability Committee met again, and probably for the last time last Thursday. Like its predecessor, the meeting expended hours of lots of peoples’ time and accomplished nothing. Not very little. Nothing.

Hours and hours of already familiar Power Point readings.

Three things worth mentioning happened.

First, Daisy Perez, the Assistant City Manager reminded the committee that if the City were to get a dedicated “infrastructure” half-cent sales tax increase, that money could be diverted to pay for “maintenance” of police and fire department facilities. She said nothing about a commensurate reduction in the “public safety” budgets and naturally nobody on the committee asked her.

Later, when pressed, the City Manger had to explain that he needed some sort of City Attorney blessing before he could share polling questions asked by the City’s quality of life/pro tax consultant. Huh? The only people who get to know the questions are the ones who got phone solicitations? What bullshit is this? Fortunately, Joshua Ferguson was on hand to share the nature of the questions his wife got; of course they were directed to promoting a sales tax increase of some kind.

Later still, when everyone was fatigued, Perez tried to get the committee to vote on a laundry list of options, all of which would be passed on to the council. This is the precise swindle that occurred during the redistricting process courtesy of City Clerk Lucinda Williams – when Fullerton Booohoo was trying real hard to keep Jesus Quirk-Silva in a political job.

Chris Norby, our former City Councilman, County Supervisor and Assemblyman showed up to save the day. He shared the value of vacant properties the City owns, and threw in the airport. These collectively are worth half a billion he asserted. He didn’t remind committee members that these properties would be declared surplus, and that “affordable” housing developers would get first shot at them. He reminded the committee that sales taxes are inherently regressive, perhaps thinking anybody cared about that.

In the end a completely improper process of trying to vote on something, anything, occurred. Without following any order except prompting by staff, the committee voted 3-2 against a Tony Bushala suggestion of a 1/2 cent sales tax dedicate to infrastructure, and keeping in place an existing ordinance guaranteeing a certain percentage of funding for infrastructure.

Peace. No, piece. Another piece of your money. You have it. We want it.

Then the appointees of the liberals Shana Charles and Ahamad Zahra, Derek Smith and Jennifer Duong proposed their own idea: a one cent general sales tax. This failed 3-2, also with Bushala, Wehn and Wozab voting no.

Finally a legitimate motion was made by Eric Wehn and seconded by Bushala: investigate the possible sale of the water function to an independent water company. That proposal was finally passed 3-2 again with the liberal appointees voting no. This idea really has no place to go, except that an exploration of the Water Department’s vacant property should be definitely considered for offloading.

There seemed to be confusion about whether the committee could meet again to keep kicking the can around. No decision was made on that as far as I can tell, but I’ve seen so many Fullerton meetings dissolve into incoherence at their end that I really can’t say.

May 6, 2026May 8, 2026About Us

F-U to North Fullerton, Almost

by The Fullerton Harpoon26 Comments

I really think that’s what a lot of last night’s council meeting regarding a proposed development at the northwest corner of Harbor Blvd. and Hermosa Drive was about.

The appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial was the issue and to their credit Dunlap, Jung and Valencia pushed back on the appeal. But the real show was put on by Ahmad Zahra and his stablemate Shana Charles.

First a little about the project. It would cram 32 dinky “townhomes” on a parcel that the City claims is 1.3 acres (it looks smaller); the zoning for the site is R-1-20 which is typical in the old horsey part of town – a minimum 20,000 square foot lot, or about half an acre. But the developer applied for permits during a period when Fullerton’s “Housing Element” was not in compliance with the State regulations; therefore he could rely on “Builder’s Remedy” a harebrained scheme by the State Legislature whereby somebody can cram a whole bunch of units on to a site and fuck you, neighbors. There just has to be mandated and restricted “low income housing” of which our friendly builder was to produce the bare minimum.

Such is our government that the project still needed to be approved by the Planning Commission, and City planning staff recommended approval lest there be spooky lawsuits. The PC bravely said nay, exercising their authority as a discretionary body. The Council did the same.

But it was a fight. Zahra and Charles did their best to defend what can only be described as an out of scale, mini-monstrosity. Five stuccoed buildings with crappy plastic windows; three stories each jammed onto the site with only way in and out. And because of, ya know, low income housing, the developer doesn’t even have to bring power to the site underground!

Zahra tried mightily to show that the PC had no objective basis for their decision given staff’s assurances; but this begs the question of how much due-diligence staff actually put into this to make a balanced presentation in the first place. Apparently there was no traffic study required and because of our wonderful Legislature, “in-fill” projects are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. Staff said there was no basis for a claim of public safety endangerment, a finding, if made, that could be used to reject the project. Zahra tried to undermine the neighbors and the Planning Commission’s conclusions as mere opinion, not fact.

Charles was just as bad with her usual dumb grin, condescending routine. We have to abide by the State’s diktats and there was nothing else that could be done. And although public opinion is just great we have no choice, yadda, yadda. The ridiculousness of voting on something about which you have no choice seems to have escaped the otiose public health professor. How come you dropped the low income level from 20% to 13%, asked the smiling academic of the developer. Higher interest rates the fellow claimed; both were play-acting. The Legislature previously reduced that requirement over a year ago and of course they both know it.

A few of Fullerton Boohooers got up to present pre-coordinated statements: the need for housing uber alles. Fresh and fragile Elijah Manassero gloated that there was no way to reject this; and we need places for people like him to live, he tenderly beseeched! Of course these folks mentioned the horrible lawsuits coming Fullerton’s way – as if that had ever concerned readers of the Fullerton Observer. The “pastor” who can’t figure out how to button his shirt was there, on cue to preach to us that a city’s character” is more than just scale and density.

Sitkia Kennedy could be seen in the fifth row applauding these speakers, presumably before she returned to her role of objective journalist.

Our old friend Elizabeth Hansberg showed up via Zoom to advocate for the project. We recall her “advocacy group” that advertises her willingness to advocate for a project; developer donations to her non-profit always welcome. She betrayed her affiliation with the comment: “we are providing the opportunity for people to move up…” Of course she gleefully entertained the council with the threat of lawsuits from her legal pals.

In typical Fullerton fashion, the end the issue was punted to May 19th, I guess.

The net result of this proposal, if approved, is only 32 out of the 13,000 new housing units demanded by the SCAG and Sacramento crowd. Only 5 would be deed restricted to low income. The units are meant to be sold at this point so the positive impact for poor renters like Zahra and Charles is virtually nil.

I’m trying to figure out why the Fullerton liberal claque was so het up on this project. I couldn’t think of a good reason except that they thought this was something that would annoy northern Fullertonions – those folks that Zahra is always complaining get all the municipal goodies while his underserved constituents get the short end of the stick.

Is this really about a perceived class distinction of north versus south? I really don’t think there’s anything more involved than that. One of the speakers said it: “The entire city needs to do their (sic) part…”

May 5, 2026May 5, 2026A Manfro All Seasons

The Party Pooper

by The Fullerton Harpoon8 Comments

At the last Fullerton City Council meeting Ahmad Zahra, the ersatz damascene doctor, brought up the subject of the annual State of the City event. It’s a big lunch affair with lots and lots of people attending. His intent was to try to embarrass Mayor Fred Jung since the Mayor is the one gives the address, and Jung does it often whereas Zahra has never done it and never will.

Zahra called the event a publicity stunt that, given the bad state of Fullerton’s roads and finances should be scrapped. It’s all about transparency and public involvement, and other such nonsense. He still wanted an accounting and naturally so did his associate Shana Charles.

But then, lo and behold. When the two sanctimonious boobs were done, Mayor Jung, asked the City Manager how much last year’s event cost the City. The latter announced that last year’s event didn’t cost the City anything. In fact it made money!

Oops.

Anyway, ther unnecessary review of this event is on tonight’s council meeting agenda where Zahra can whine about the council as a whole having no input; and the usual Fullerton Boohoo and Fullerton Angry nuts can stomp and shout.

You might think that a conscientious public servant like Zahra would forgo wasting staff time putting together and delivering a report on this event; and wasting his colleagues’ and the public’s time in listening to it. If you did you would be wrong. This is going nowhere. Here’s the lead in on the actual agenda:

An update on the City of Fullerton annual State of the City event, including a financial
summary of the 2025 State of the City and considerations for the 2026 event. Staff
anticipates utilizing a sponsorship and ticket-supported approach similar to the successful
2025 event for the 2026 State of the City and seeks City Council direction.

When staff describes the Mayor’s speechifying event as “successful” you’re not going to be able to use it to embarrass the Mayor.

Maybe Shana Charles will show up and then galumph out in a high dudgeon protest – like she did in 2023. But then she’d have to pass on a free lunch.

May 1, 2026May 1, 2026Ahmad Zahra

Derek Smith and the Anaheim Cabal

by The Fullerton Harpoon11 Comments

Backscratching is fun – with other people’s money…

This blog has introduced Mr. Derek Smith to our friends. He is the appointee of “Doctor” Ahmad Zahra to the so-called Budget Sustainability Committee. His qualifications? Well, none are apparent. But we do know that Smith is (or was) the political lobbyist for the union that organizes cannabis store employees.

We already knew that Smith’s union was bankrolling a PAC for the benefit of Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo’s scampaign in 2024 to the tune of $60,000, $4000 of which went to The Councilwoman Shana Charles Self-improvement Fund.

And now thanks to detailed reporting by Mr. Duane J. Roberts, a true citizen journalist, we know that the union in question, UFCW Local 324, was up to it’s neck in schemes to bring legal cannabis to Anaheim. Roberts’ post is a must-read, for it details the close alliance between Anaheim’s crooked cabal and the union. For several years Smith and his union worked closely with disgraced Anaheim Chamber of Commerce head Todd Ament, Anaheim fixer Jeff Flint, and the Mayor, Harry Sidhu.

Ament, Flint, and Sidhu (graphic by Duane J. Roberts)

For the cabal the dope incentive was money, and lots of it. Money that would go to the cabal leaders, the Chamber of Commerce, and campaign funds of the later-convicted Mayor. For Derek Smith’s union, the promise of a Labor Peace Agreement (LPA) that would eventually cover even part-time workers was the goal.

First this association of strange bedfellows tried to get the City Council to go along. Then they began the process to put the issue on the ballot, with proposals written by the cabal, and then by the lobbyist for the Long Beach dope cartel; they were submitted by a UFCW Local 324 employee, and then a local realtor and insurance salesman, Belal Dalati, respectively. Both were eventually retracted, but not without threats, according to Roberts.

Left unreported by Roberts was the role of Melahat Rafiei, the acknowledged queen bee of OC dope lobbying, and a player deeply involved with Anaheim’s cabal. She later went to jail after she was busted by the FBI for wire fraud; Harry Sidhu did a prison stint, too for destroying evidence; Todd Ament pleaded guilty to fraud and his buddy Jeff Flint left town – for a while. Nice people, right?

While none of the Anaheim MJ activities were illegal, at least as far as can be discerned, the whole episode gives off a real bad smell; and in the middle of it was Derek Smith’s union.

Anybody who thinks Ahmad Zahra was ignorant of what was going on in Anaheim and with Rafiei (whom he recommended to at least one Fullerton businessman as a necessary contact) is pretty credulous. And his appointment of Derek Smith to the budget committee comes into sharper focus.

All that transparency can give a lad a headache…

The fact that the self-righteous clamorers who have decried the appointment of Tony Bushala to this committee have diligently ignored the appointment of Smith is telling. Bushala’s political involvement is a disqualification; Smith’s political history is assiduously ignored – just like the Fullerton Observer Sisters relentlessly ignored the Scott Markowitz conspiracy and the massive contribution by Derek Smith’s union to a pro-Jaramillo political action committee.

Both Zahra and Charles are beholden to the dope lobby, but they still need another vote to revive the 2020 marijuana ordinance approved by Jan Flory, Jesus Quirk-Silva, and Ahmad Zahra. They won’t get it this year.

April 22, 2026April 26, 2026A Manfro All Seasons

When is An Audit Not An Audit?

by The Fullerton Harpoon24 Comments

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

When a misleading City of Fullerton agenda proclaims: “Introduction of Special Fiscal Audit – Grant Thornton Risk Advisory Services.”

I assumed, wrongly, that somebody had already been hired to look into the misdirection of funds into the General Fund Reserves that should have gone some place else, a fact that has caused considerable embarrassment to our severely and habitually underinformed City Council. I also figured this firm was going to talk about what they found.

But no.

In fact, the firm of Grant Thornton Risk Advisory Services were brought before the council by the City Manager, Eddie Manfro, simply to make a sales pitch for their services. And what services.

Step one is to be some sort of forensic accounting exercise, a fishing expedition to explore the world of Fullerton’s accounting regime to see what, if anything, is amiss. Nobody said anything, but there must have surely been some internal squirming when the company rep kept using the word “fraud.” And that included our Finance Director and recently anointed City Treasure, Steven Avalos who was sitting in the pit.

The second phase of GTRAS’s endeavor was to explore how the City might improve efficiencies, save money, and help address Fullerton’s grim fiscal situation. Why this all-purpose company was suggested for this task seems odd, the two tasks having nothing to do with one another.

I’ll address the first project first. Why is it necessary at all to delve into Fullerton’s accounting with an audit? We have been told that there were seemingly honest bookkeeping errors – embarrassing, sure and it did alter the already dire projection of General Fund reserve draw downs, but fear not, all was well. The councilmembers kept talking about transparency and public trust, but what does that really mean? Is this serious or just a political pantomime?

Consider the following facts. GTRAS was picked by the City Manager under his own authority and just brought to the council to give them a chance to ratify the decision. That’s a sole source contract, and the public has no idea how much they will be paid, and won’t without a PRA request. Will added scope to the $100,000 contract be reviewed by anybody except the City Manager and Steven Avalos? If some sort malfeasance were actually discovered – purely by accident, of course – would offender(s) names be published? Is any of this going to discussed in Closed Session because it touches on employee issues? Who knows? The Council approved the deal, without knowing whatever it is or might be.

As for the second part of GTRAS offer, the City Manager announced that would be returned to the Council for approval of a $130,000 deal. At least someone might get the chance to ask some pertinent questions, such as why is this “economic development” effort needed, given that Fullerton has highly paid staff who enjoy employment as economic developers. What have these people been doing and why do they need outside help. These people have been on the payroll for years. What have they accomplished?

Sunaya Thomas, in charge of economic development, was in attendance. Her presence at the meeting was an almost begging of the question about her own success in this endeavor, the effort of bureaucrats that never even pays for itself.

I wonder if GTRAS will actually suggest something that might help, outside of taxes. Personally, I doubt if their suggestions would even pay for their own service. That we will probably never know because no one will talk about it. This will be an agreement with no metrics for success or failure, just more electronic billboards and hotel occupancy taxes. Staff reductions? Getting rid of all our brand new “firefighters” and ambulance drivers? Don’t be ridiculous.

Anyhow our brave Council voted unanimously to proceed down this dark corridor, protesting their sincere desire to pursue those most elusive prey: transparency and public trust. No one said much about accountability. They never do.

April 20, 2026April 20, 2026Ahmad Zahra

An Audit Report

by The Fullerton Harpoon16 Comments

At tomorrow’s Fullerton City Council meeting, agenda item #1 features a report by the firm of Grant Thornton Risk Advisory Services. They will present what the City is calling a “special fiscal audit.”

What does that mean, and what are the results? Unknown because there is no staff report – not even a little introductory prose. This is in keeping with former City communications regarding the recently revealed erroneous assignments of millions into General Fund reserves – money that was supposed to go elsewhere. The last post FFFF did on this subject in March pointed out the condescending gobbledygook press release that emanated from City Hall. I believe this “audit” was commissioned to address the big errors and allay fears that some sort of malfeasance took place.

I hope that Messrs. Shawn Stewart and Charles Mayes (CPA) of Grant Thornton will present something real simple. Like maybe a diagram, or a flow chart to explain how these bogus transactions took place. Where did the money come from, where did it go, and when was it fixed? One hopes there will be no verbal or logical gymnastics to dodge assignment of responsibility. Does one hope in vain? And of course please let us know:

What are the true balances in General Fund and Capital Improvement Reserves.

Item #12 on the agenda is a report on staff vacancies and retention recruitment efforts required, as usual, by a nosey and intrusive State legislature. I’m not sure what the purpose of the law is, but the information contained in the report is worth considering. According to staff there are currently 65 vacancies, two thirds of which are non sworn, general public employees. 65 vacancies is about 10% of the total labor force.

In past years the vacancy rate has done as high as 25% in Fiscal Year 21/22.

Here’s the issue. How many of these vacant positions are included in the current 25/26 budget deliberations? All of them? Some cities use a “vacancy factor” in their budgeting – an estimate of how many vacancies will be unfilled in the fiscal year. Does Fullerton do this? They should if they don’t.

I also note that the labor force in Fullerton is up 7% since 22/23 even as dire predictions of the structural deficit were publicized. Why did this happen? The architect of past city budgets, City Manager Eric Levitt quit and took a higher paying job in San Bernardino last year so no answer will be forthcoming from him.

As an example of a recruitment the staff report includes this graphic from last fall:

An Associate Planner goes for $84K to $108K per annum – not counting benefits and pension costs, of course. If those are generally calculated at a modest 25% we can assume this Associate Planner will cost the taxpayers around $120,000 a year, which I think is fairly reasonable.

If we assume the average total cost of those 65 vacant positions is, say, a conservative $100,000, then we are looking at an annual cost of $6,500,000. That closes a lot of budget deficit, right there.

Pro sales tax advocates will claim there is a vital quality-of-life issue at stake, as if the number of public employees in City Halls guarantees such a concept; these vacant jobs are key to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in Fullerton. The same alliance of cops, “firefighters” and local City Hall camp followers who pushed Measure S in 2020 will claim it to be so. These are the same folks who get guaranteed defined benefit pensions, step pay increases, etc. They make no sacrifices and are rarely asked to do so. That task falls upon the citizenry.

April 16, 2026April 16, 2026About Us

Taking Out The Trash Thursday

by The Fullerton Harpoon23 Comments

On Tuesday the Fullerton City Council voted 3-2 to expand the finalists for the trash hauling contract from three to six. Staff had recommended solely negotiating with EDCO of Signal Hill and points south, even though the difference in scoring between the top three was de minimis, as they say. As a back-up recommendation staff requested the City work with the top three as finalists.

Councilmembers Jung, Valencia, and Dunlap voted to include three more for continued negotiations, including Valley Vista, and our current hauler, the giant Republic Services. For Mayor Jung the critical qualification was cost. Naturally, the obstructionists “Dr.” Zahra and the absent Shana Charles voted no.

Included in the “supplemental agenda” materials were an email to the Council and a written statement from Mr. Jeffrey Otter, Treasurer for the Craig Park East Homeowners Association, and a professional engineer, to boot. Mr. Otter gives his take that the process pursued by the City has inherent risk, legally, cost-wise, and in terms of negotiating weakness.

Otter goes into more detail in a written statement presented to the Council wherein he repeats his email conclusions and requests an independent “Cost of Service Analysis” to identify rate correction factors across various types of properties; in other words comparing oranges and oranges. His own analysis identifies the most overall cost-effective firms: Valley Vista, NASA and EDCO. He thoughtfully provides his own backup materials and data. Of course his diligent efforts will get him nowhere.

Otter also identifies an interesting fact. EDCO’s Marketing Director is a person named Duron. Apparently Fullerton’s Solid Waste and Recycling Specialist is a woman named Michelle Anna Duron. Is this just a curious coincidence or a possible familial conflict of interest? When asked who was on the evaluation committee the Stephen Bise, the City Engineer identified himself, Richard Armendariz, Assistant Director of Public Works Maintenance; Jerome Joaquin, Public Works Administrative Manager; Olivia Martinez, Environmental Services Coordinator; and Kim Chaudry, Senior Management Analyst. No Duron, although Michelle Anne Duron’s contribution to the overall process no doubt have provided influence.

I can’t find a Duron on ECDO’s dismal website, but Octavio Duran is identified in the EDCO proposal thus: Mr. Octavio Duran, Director of Market Development, has 15 years of EDCO industry experience and will oversee direct engagement with the City of Fullerton. His primary office is in Signal Hill. Mr. Duran will spend approximately 30% of his time on the transition and 25% on an ongoing basis.

So go figure.

Anyhow the dance is far from over. Valley View has incurred the wrath of Fullerton Boohoo because they contributed to the Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform PAC who torpedoed the odious Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo in the 2024 election, an act that should bestow honor rather than opprobrium.

Marvelously, Zahra and Charles seem to think that Valley Vista’s political involvement should disqualify Jamie Valencia from participating in the process because the PAC caused her election, even though they didn’t give Valencia a nickel – a species of childing logic not worthy of an adult. I note in passing that Charles got $4000 from the cannabis workers union PAC in 2024 and wonder if that disqualifies her to vote on pot issues.

April 15, 2026May 4, 2026Ahmad Zahra

Yes, He Is A Film Maker!

by The Fullerton Harpoon14 Comments

Some have questioned Dr. Ahmad Zahra’s claim that he quit his life as a man of medicine for a life as a filmmaker. But this claim is no longer in doubt.

A Friend has forwarded this image of the extraordinary Ahmad Zahra that clearly shows the good doctor from Damascus as a big time Hollywood cinematic auteur.

So there you have it. Who are we to argue with our own eyes?

April 13, 2026April 16, 2026Ahmad Zahra

Take Out The Trash Tuesday

by The Fullerton Harpoon10 Comments

Tomorrow evening a special session of the Fullerton City Council will review responses to a Request for Proposals for a new trash hauling contract.

It seems sort of mundane, but the issue is big. Really big. The amounts of money at stake are enormous and the contracts typically run for years and years – as we have seen with our current provider Republic Services.

Won’t look you in the eye while you’re trashing him…

An ad hoc committee of Fred Jung and Jamie Valencia were involved in reviewing this process although their contributions aren’t really known. We do do now that the evaluation of the responses and subsequent interviews resulted in these rankings.

15 scoring categories, somewhat weighted to proposed rates, were the basis of the evaluation.

The winning score was earned by EDCO, based in Lemon Grove, down in San Diego County with an office in Signal Hill. CC&R, based in nearby Stanton placed a close second. Universal Waste, based in Santa Fe Springs was a close third. The lowest score was given to trash giant Republic, with whom the City has been having issues for years both in labor impacts and environmental compliance under SB1383 (organic waste recovery).

I have no idea how much lobbying of councilmembers has been going on, but I assume it’s been significant.

Tomorrow night we should have an interesting show since Fullerton Boohoo is mad at Valley Vista Services for contributing to the PAC that torpedoed the candidacy of Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo. Ahmad Zahra’s followers and the Kennedy Sisters are sure to bring this up.