A Conflicted Individual


We’ve been tracking the doings of Fullerton City Council member Pam Keller lately, with particular interest in her job as Executive Director of something called the Fullerton Collaborative, an outfit with fairly fuzzy goals whose biggest expense in 2007 was Pam Keller herself.

We’ve gotten a little bit of blow back from some Keller supporters who just don’t seem to understand the problem we’re having with a City Council member who might just be voting on projects whose applicants are also contributors to her Collaborative, and hence, pay for her services.

To help illustrate our point we helpfully provide an example. On their website, the Collaborative lists St. Jude’s Medical Center as a member here . Well, members pay dues, and those dues go to the revenue that pays for an Executive Director. Now let’s say (for the sake of argument) that St. Jude’s had some important business before the City of Fullerton. Oh. Wait. No need to suppose.

In December of 2007 the Fullerton City Council voted to approve a general plan amendment, a zone change, permits, and associated CEQA documents that permitted St. Jude’s to expand on the west side of Harbor Blvd – adding a massive new medical building and a gargantuan parking structure here . The vote was 5-0 (check out pages 5 & 6) – meaning that Keller voted to approve a huge project in an already heavily congested area proposed by a key member of her Collaborative, a member whose contributions that year went into the kitty that paid Keller’s salary. We see that as a huge conflict of interest – even if her relationship might somehow be legalized by the fact that she was really an FSD employee in disguise. The fact that the approval didn’t hang upon Keller’s vote offers us little comfort. What if it had – as in the case of the recent Redevelopment expansion?

If this same type of behavior had taken place with private developers, well, you can see the problems that would arise. Oh. Wait. St. Jude’s is a private developer.

What? Me worry?
What, me worry?

14 Replies to “A Conflicted Individual”

  1. pam keller, elementary teacher who molds young minds for the fullerton school district, member of fullerton city council, head of social justice fullerton collaborative , supporter of OCCO that wants to make our town a better place for the have-nots, is a liar, a crook, typical sleaze ball politician whose legacy to fullerton will be debt, cronyism and kickback politician. vote her out!

  2. Last year on her campaign literature Keller claimed to be the ONLY council member not to take any donations from developers.

    When she says, “I don’t take donations, but you can make one to the collaborative,” or when she personally calls a developer (as she has done) for a $1,000 buck hit for a pet Collaborative project, then she’s taking one indirectly.

    There is no kind way to say this: she’s lying. Worse, she doesn’t realize that she’s lying.
    If her supporters don’t have a problem with her lying, and don’t have the guts to bring it to her attention, then they are showing themselves to be made of the same stock as those flimsy buildings on the corner of Harbor and Commonwealth.

    In a sense she has created a new “Old boys network.” This is the same one she was so critical of when she ran for office. The new-old boys network might be gussied up in fake Hippy icons, but when she asks for money either directly or indirectly, all you are getting is more of the same.

    1. That’s a good question, Hollis. I assumed so, based on what our good buddy Minard Duncan had to say:

      “Her salary is paid for with grants, donations and membership fees.”

      Since Duncan is listed on the Facebook as a Board member I would have to assume that he knows that the Collaboratives members pay “fees” or dues.

  3. Oh come on everybody she is “just a silly girl”
    Let’s overlook all of the corruption and destruction she has inflicted upon our fine city?
    Councilman “Boss Hogg” Jones can just kiss her hand and make it all better! NOT, let’s give her a one way greyhound bus ticket straight to Chicago (I’ll buy it with some of that smoky back room cash she dropped in the alley behind Heroes as she was skipping away with her bundle of payola) Get her out of here! She is making a mockery of this town!

  4. Shadow:

    I appreciate what Minard said but the fact that it was he who said it is the reason I asked. I’ve met him several times and I wonder if he knows what day of the week it is. Nice but not that sharp if you know what I mean.

    The follow up question would be : Do they only charge SOME members fees and waive it for others in an attempt to hide from conflict? I personaly think this would be an even greater conflict but I would like to know the answers.

  5. Hollis, great questions. In 2006 the Collaborative asked the City to become a dues-paying member. The annual fee for an “agency membership” was $500 at the time.

  6. pam keller is executive director for fullerton collaborative that gave $26,000 to OCCCO. I looked up OCCCO website. It is a local, faith based social justice warrior talk to garner money organization. Now, this may be coincidence, but Minister Willie Holmes of Christian Majesty Ministries in fullerton who was jailed for lewd conduct in Hillcrest Park, claimed right before his sentencing (February, 2009) that he and his family had been victims of hate crime. One of the first persons to publicly support minister willie holmes was pam keller. My point is did pam keller unwittingly support this pervert by kicking money to OCCCO to get the vote from the oppressed?

  7. I really want Pam to come out on top of this one, but her silence is making me uneasy. Pam, when are you going to address this issue!

  8. I think I’d rather keep the focus on Keller’s claims to having a higher moral ground than the other council members or other candidates, than go after what the Collaborative does.

    What the focus should be is whether or not any of the developers gave to the Collaborative and if in turn Keller voted for their projects.

    Doing a full on investigation of the Collaborative is a slightly different avenue.

    1. #13, you are right, and we are not all that interested in what the Collaborative does except for how that reflects on Keller. Her main mission seems to be fundraising and coordinating stuff with others. The consequences of the fund raising is that the Collaborative can then meet its contract with the FSD – for Keller’s “servicves.” So in effect The Collaborative spends much of its resources (Keller) raising funds to pay the employer (FSD) of it’s Executive Director (Keller). See the problem?

      I think this deserves another post.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *