The Pam Keller Recap

Let a smile be your umbrella.

Some man/woman calling him/herself 4th SD Observer started giving me and this blog a rasher o’ crap on a Pam Keller post yesterday; you know, we’re conspiratorialist wackos, yadda, yadda, yadda.  This technique is common in blog circles: you try to color your political opponents as paranoid, nutsy, weird, tin foil-hatted, cross-dressing Nazis – whatever. And of course their objective is not only to marginalize you, but to divert attention from your point.

In response I was inspired to do a Pam Keller recap.

And just so my “true colors” are not seen to be in anyway unclear, here they are: Pam Keller is a hypocritical, shallow, self-serving, irresponsible public servant (and employee) whose manifest conflicts of interest make her unable to serve her constituents honestly, and who seems to be incapable of demanding accountability on the part of herself or her underlings.

There! I feel ever so much better! A veritable catharsis.

Now let’s take a peek at some of the Keller record; and I’ll keep it short(er) by just looking at stuff that has been written about her on what “admin” likes to call “our humble blog.”

Here are some items for your consideration:

1. When she ran for office in 2006 Keller promised that Fullerton residents would dictate the direction of development in town. And yet within two years Keller had voted to approve the gargantuan, staff/developer driven Amerige Court and Jefferson Commons monstrosities that involved huge get-rich-quick entitlements for their sponsors and that would stick the rest of us with the environmental impacts. Only the recession intervened.

2. When she ran for office for in 2006 Keller promised not to take money from developers. Instead she solicited developer’s contributions to her Collaborative, revenue that supported her employment. And the developers were proposing the  Jefferson Commons and Amerige Court projects. Hypocrisy? Much?

3. In August of 2007, not even in office a year, Keller joined the now infamous Steve Sheldon (Jefferson Commons) $1000 per person drinkies-boat-ride-dinner fundraiser for Sharon Quirk. Also on board were the Pelican/Laing hucksters greasing the axles of their Amerige Court investment. Did Pam pay her way, or was it a gift from an importuning developer? Too easy. No prize for answering correctly.

4. Even though St. Jude’s Medical Center is a member and contributor to the Fullerton Collaborative of which Keller is the Executive director, Keller, as a city councilmember voted in December 2007 to approve their development  entitlements for its massive project west of Harbor Boulevard. Conflict? Much?

5. In August and September of 2008 Keller supported keeping the public in the dark about the fact that she and her council colleagues were negotiating a retroactive pension spike for City employees. She publicly castigated Shawn Nelson for disclosing the fact that the topic was being deliberately concealed from the public.

6. In October 2008 Keller spent over $1200 in public funds for bills run up at a fancy hotel while attending a League of Cities conference in Long Beach – about 25 miles from her house.

7. In June 2009 Keller enlisted members of the OCCCO to publicly promote the fraudulent Redevelopment expansion. They sure owed her a favor since her Collaborative had funneled over $25,000 their way in 2007 for “community organizing.”

8. In June/July 2009 Keller voted for the bogus Redevelopment expansion with its evident failure to indicate any blight. The findings were a lie. Of course the expansion area had been redrawn to exclude a property Keller owns so she could vote on it. How’s that for fancy footwork?

9. Also in June 2009 Keller supported the relocation of a McDonald’s franchise about 150 feet to the corner across the street from Fullerton High – to tune of 6 million bucks. The childhood obesity issue was embarrassing since one of the Collaborative’s mission is to fight it, not facilitate it. Keller only backtracked when it became clear that the jig was up. Later that summer she proclaimed herself a “fiscal conservative.”

10. In July Keller proposed a City of Fullerton blog – without any bloggers, of course. In other words a City propaganda vehicle that would disseminate filtered information and necessarily involve city employees in censoring the unpleasantries often associated with participatory democracy on the internet.

11. In August and September 2009 our investigation into the Fullerton Collaborative and its doings discovered that the vast majority of  Fullerton Collaborative expenses went to pay for Keller herself; that her hapless fellow boardmembers were woefully ignorant of her both her fund raising sources and her activities; and furthermore,  that since she was considered an FSD teacher and public employee, she got to maintain her benefits thereof, but was cut loose from any District supervision to pursue her dream of philanthropy and self-promotion.

We connected the dots for you.

12. In October 2009 as a city council person she voted to postpone debt payments to the City from…her employer, the Fullerton School District. Sharing smiles with her boss who was sitting in the front row.

13. In December she voted to approve the fiasco-in-the-making Richman housing project scam – another staff/developer driven monstrosity (see #1, above) that even fails to address Fullerton’s most pressing housing needs (if you happen to be persuaded by such SCAG priorities).

14. In January 2010 it became apparent that for $50,000+ you can’t even hire an Executive Director that will take the time to update her organization’s on-line calendar events. Move along folks, nothing to see here!

15. In February 2010 we learned that even though Keller is a treated as teacher (for her own benefit) not only is she freed from the drudgery of the classroom, but she has apparently failed to account for her time away from FSD on political junkets, etc., as all teachers are required to do. Of course this means the accrual of unused sick/personal day time. It turns out that some real teachers resent it. How odd. Naturally FSD is clueless. Naughty!

Oh, well. That’s enough for now. No doubt more dubious Keller behavior will surface in the coming months, and as it does we will surely share it with you; and just as surely Keller’s Posse of Political Whatevers will make looking the other way into a full time job.

136 Replies to “The Pam Keller Recap”

  1. I am keeping my tin foil-hat on it just might be the reason I am not a victim of the Keller smile.. Throughout Fullertons political history, we seem to buy the smiles from our female electeds. Sad commentary but so true.

  2. If this is the SHORT version, I’m fearful of how truly ugly the long version is.
    If only this could be mailed to every Fullertonian mailbox.
    sigh

  3. But Pam is such a nice lady! You people are so mean. I’m sure if you just sat down with her for a cup of coffee at Monkey Business she could explain all of this.

    1. PL I don’t think laziness is the problem. I just don’t think Keller is all that bright. Average intelligence (and below) doesn’t mix well with political ambition.

      Unfortunately this seems to be the norm in Fullerton. Just think about Bankhead, Jones, Wilson, Clerasil, etc.

      Maybe it’s that way in most local politics.

  4. when the truth comes out (mail, signs, robo calls) about the Real Pam Keller, ever the bleeding hearts wont vote for her. I’m sure there will be a lot of people running this upcoming election, let’s hope Fullerton can do better in 2010.

  5. If she would just either go back and teach or end her relatioinship with the scool district I for one would be cool with Pam. Her desire to have it both ways is loosing her credibility in my eyes

    1. Well, BL, I can’t be quite so generous. Even if the FSD ends the corrupt and corrupting relationship there is still that long record of hypocrisy and terrible votes and complete lack of accountability. True on the latter issues she’s no worse than Jones or Bankhead, but that is setting the bar woefully low, doncha think?

  6. keller personifies the worst in politics. she is nothing more than a thief who steals from the FSD and tax dollars from fullerton to buy power and influence for herself. she must be voted off of fullerton’s city council before she inflicts more damage on our town. Maybe FFFF would organize community action ,now, to get rid of this woman. We could call it the collaborative to get rid of Keller.

  7. Hey. I’m famous. Thanks for the shout out.

    Here’s the fun part. On the other thread, Pam’s followers were described as having a “cult of personality.” Yet I see no blogs praising her works or engaging in idolatry that typically occurs in cults that revolve around a central figure.

    Looking at the responses to this thread, all of you should ask yourselves. Do you believe Pam and her followers spend more time thinking about the author of this post its followers? Or does the author and the respondents spend more time thinking about Pam and her followers? Then tell us whose ahead in the “cult of personality” attitude. You folks are the ones who follow with rapt attention her every word and action and carrying on and acting like jilted prom dates.

    The needle on my ironometer is pegged on this one.
    I read the all the claims of corrupt allegations, and see nothing in the way of proof other than opinions of those who can’t stand the fact that Pam doesn’t allow her policy beliefs to be influenced by this same group.
    Folks do read this blog. So what? More than likely it is for the comic relief of observing the paranoid ramblings of a collection of malcontents.

    1. “Folks do read this blog. So what? More than likely it is for the comic relief of observing the paranoid ramblings of a collection of malcontents”

      You just described the reason people read the Observer. Good call “Observer”

  8. “More than likely it is for the comic relief of observing the paranoid ramblings of a collection of malcontents.”

    Or better yet, the comic relief of cross-dressing Nazis.

    1. Is there something you want to tell us Joe? I have no idea what relevance that comment has to the topic being discussed. If it makes you feel any better, your personal life is none of our business and I’m sure Pam doesn’t care that you play cross-dressing Nazi in your spare time.

      Again I get back to my original premise on the term of Pam’s followers being the “cult of personality.”

      Whose following who around and waiting in rapt attention for the remarks of that person’s words and actions? It certainly isn’t Pam or any of her followers.

      The number of replies to this thread by the so called observers of the “cult of personality” is reminiscent of the scene in Fatal Attraction where the Dan Gallagher character is out with his wife and friends while Alex sits at home alone flicking the lamp on and off while Madam Butterfly plays in the background.

      Talk about comic relief.

      There is an old vaudeville line that states the best comedy writes itself. This group is certainly a great example of that.

      1. The cult of personality involves swallowing the load of Keller bullshit whole with no scrutiny; smilin’ and saying “thanks Pam, you’re so wonderful, may we please have some more?”

        I notice you haven’t addressed any of the items on Keller’s naughty list. And there we see the Keller Cult of Personality at work.

        It’s true that FFFF has trained its sights on this miscreant. But it didn’t happen overnight.

        Go back and check the revelations over the last six months on this blog. You see a pattern of self-service, self-promotion and hypocrisy, all dressed up in the “it’s all about the children” baloney used to divert attention from all sorts of misbehaving.
        But Oh No! You can’t do that. That darn cult of personality doesn’t allow you to question Beloved Leader.

  9. Keller sold us out on Jefferson Commons and Amerige Court. She got into bed with the developers and screwed the rest of us. She took their money and stuck us with the projects. Her campaign promises were an outright lie.

    Explain away those lies if you can “Observer.”

    We voted for her in 2006 and will never make that mistake again. Not all the liberals in this town fell into the Keller Hole.

  10. Every time you bunny cookers post another thread about her, only reinforces my point about the so called “cult of personality” belief I stated earlier.

    Carry on.

    1. Oh, yeah, of course we’re going to carry on.

      Despite the fact that nobody reads the blog, this post is already near a thousand pageviews.

      1. Wow!! A thousand pageviews!! The real question is how many different addresses.

        Assuming it’s 1K different viewers that equates to about 1/70th of the total registered voters in Fullerton.

        The tectonic shift is almost palpable.

        1. Hmm. I wonder what Keller’s winning margin was in 2006. Remember, “Observer?” Around a thousand?

          Our system only counts hits from separate IP addresses. So your several dozen only count as one.

          And yes, we’re only getting warmed up. Your bunny is in the oven.

          1. I remember it was enough to unseat an incumbent. Something that is difficult to do at every level of the political world.

            You left out that tidbit. I’m sure it was just an oversight.

            I won’t predict the outcome of a future election, but I’m thinking a person with that kind of following and ability might be a little tougher than your comment implies.

      1. Says one bunny cooker to another.

        Are you all going to work on your lamp lighting and unlighting skills later?

    1. Brave? Did I read that right? What in the hell does Pam do in her life that would even require bravery let alone a disply of same?

      She is generous with other peoples money, takes time off and doesn’t log the hours as required, stays in $400 hotel rooms on the taxpayers dime when she is closer to home than many of our commutes, tries to retroactively spike pensions, sucks up to redeveloment scams, shall I go on?

      She could step out from under the cumfort and fraud of the school district and run her pet non profit like the rest of us do. No safety net of teachers benefits when she doesn’t teach. Be brave Pam, step out and actually take a risk that has a potential downside. That would be brave.

  11. Admin, in all fairness to Pam and her Posse, you should invite 4th SD Observer to write a post about all the projects Pam Keller has supported and opposed since she was elected to the city council, the proof is in the pudding.

    1. Excellent idea! 4th SD Observer, please write a post on the projects that Pam has voted to approve in Fullerton. I will publish it – verbatim.

      1. Sure you will.

        The writers of this blog have shownn themselves to be paragons of objectivity.

        I hope that wasn’t too big a word.

        1. Why not? I let you post all your nonsense.

          Go ahead. Tell us all about Pam’s votes. I won’t change a word. Could it be that in reality you too are ashamed?

          Don’t blame you.

          1. I’ll post all those accomplishments as soon as you link to a similar website or writings by your imaginary foe you refer to as the Cult of Personality.

            Do you really believe anything I would post would be recognized as an accomplishment by this group?

            I’m not naive enough to believe that would happen given the few writings I’ve read.

      2. I wonder how the Keller Cult of Personality would deal with the inescapable facts of the Amerige Court and Jefferson Commons disasters.

        Maybe we will find out. But somehow I doubt it.

    2. Says the bunny cooker posting late on a Saturday night.

      Do you think Pam was reading this? Or was she doing something worthwhile?

  12. Ah! Sunday morning coming down.

    Keller lost our support forever when she voted for Amerige Court – the monster that will eat downtown Fullerton.

    And her only interest seemed to be to get an ice cream parlor on the ground floor.

    No.

    1. This statement implies there was a point in time where you supported her.

      Could you point us to the posts on this blog that substantiate this statement?

  13. I think it’s time to move past this Observer character. He rarely bothers to address the specific claims and evidence against Pam. When he does, he starts out with “I have no idea but…” and ends with some some form of “I don’t care and neither should you”.

    He’s a perfect example of the apathy and cowardice that keeps people like Pam in office. Observer doesn’t have the cajones to take a real hard look into anything.

    1. Please do move on. This is yet another statement made as an attack that ends up being an indictment of its writer.

      You claim I never address specific claims and evidence.

      Claims are just that. Claims.

      This group has made numerous claims that imply impropriety or even illegality. With zero proof other than the opinion of the writers.

      You are a perfect example of the apathy and cowardice of the critic who always claims to have the right answers, but lacks the courage to actually put their name on a ballot and test those ideals for support from the electorate.

      It’s much easier to criticize on a blog in cyberspace than it is to get out and ask people to vote for you and your ideals.

      Now ask yourself. Which one applies to you and which one applies to Pam?

      The critic typing in the darkness? Or the one who asked voters to support them and their philosophy of governing?

      Then ask yourself which is the more difficult.

      1. “Claims are just that. Claims.”

        Um, no. Not claims. Let’s review, shall we?

        It is a FACT that Keller voted on the St. Jude project where the applicant is a member and contributor to Keller’s Collaborative.

        It is a FACT that Keller took money from the Amerige Court and Jefferson Commons developers that went to support her employment.

        It is a FACT that she voted for both, projects that were entirely staff/developer “driven” in contradiction of her campaign promises.

        It is a FACT that she blew through over $1200 of taxpayer money staying at a fancy hotel 25 miles from her front door.

        It is a FACT that she voted on the fraudulent Redevelopment expansion – after her property was specially carved out of it so she could participate.

        It is a FACT that though she is not a teacher she receives the benefits of one, and has not accounted for her absences to FSD as required.

        It is a FACT that she doesn’t even bother to update the Colaborative website.

        I don’t want to move on just yet. Having too much fun with the Cult of Personality bubblehead.

        1. More claims of impropriety that is only there in the eye of the beholder.

          Are you saying the contributions from Amerige Court and Jefferson Commons developers came with strings attached that required her to vote in a certain way?

          You then go on to claim she “blew” through taxpayer funds at a fancy hotel 25 miles from her front door. Is that illegal?

          You then claim she voted on a fraudulent redevelopment expansion. Do you realize fraud is a crime? Could you elaborate on how her vote was part of this fraud? Wouldn’t that amount to conspiracy? Or is this just another of your tin foil hat ramblings?

          Could it be that her contract permits her position (which could be filled by any number of people) allows her to have a flexible schedule? Could that also be the case? Or do you believe every person in every company should only be required to perform the duties that befits their job title and nothing else? That is one of the tenets of organized labor. I had no idea you had such leanings.

          Is her not updating the Collaborative website improper? Could you elaborate? If she did, would that cause you to cease your criticism?

          Please don’t move on. You are reinforcing the perspective of the only existing Cult of Personality exists amongst those posting on this board.

          1. Sad when you can only defend your gal by saying she didn’t break any laws.

            1. She took their money and broke the spirit of her 2006 “no developer” money promise. I notice you don’t address the issue of her other 2006 campaign promise to have development “driven” by the people instead of those evil out-of-town developers. Guess even you know what a crock of shit that promise was.

            You also didn’t touch the St. Jude Expansion issue or the Steve Sheldon boat ride. Hmm.

            2. No it’s not illegal to waste $1200 bucks in public funds on a fancy hotel in faraway Long Beach. In fact it’s common among liberals to waste other people’s money. Just doesn’t look good good, now does it? That’ll look real good on a campaign mailer.

            3. The Redevelopment expansion, by law, has to be based on findings of blight. Those were completely cooked up. Dick Jones actually admitted the whole thing was based on “needing the money.” Don’t worry the issue will be resolved in legal proceedings; and Keller may even enjoy a deposition courtesy of FFFF’s lawyer.

            4. Keller doesn’t work for a “company.” Don’t change the subject. She’s a public employee and enjoys the benefits of “organized labor;” she is responsible to the people that employ her. And that’s what’s wrong with her “contract.” She is responsible to nobody but herself.

            You are right about one thing, finally. Any number of people could do her job – probably even you – and do it both better and cheaper, which is why the Collaborative should get themselves a new director and the FSD should put Pammy back in a classroom where she belongs.

            5. Not updating the Collaborative website is only improper if you believe that a 501c3 (public benefit corporation) whose only real expense is an Executive Director) should post its doings on-line. We’ve been waiting a month into the year and she still hasn’t done it. Is she too lazy or just to darn too busy collaborating?

            Please keep posting your nonsense. This is fun.

  14. 4th SD observer…. assuming that anyone here has not run for office is..oh here I go again…ASS U ME…ing..
    Blogs are for facts and opinions..
    My opinion is that Pam is a nice lady who doesnt not belong in the political world..and the sooner we all figure that out the better for us..the citizens of Fullerton..or maybe you do not care about our city? hummmm???

    1. Apparently the opinion of a plurality of Fullerton voters believe otherwise.

      Are they not as enlightened as you?

  15. Sorry..
    that last comment did not come out right…please let me correct it to say…
    My opinion is that Pam is a nice lady who doesnt belong in the political world
    Heat of the moment posting..

  16. Enlightened? If you want to see how the people of our good city vote..they recalled Bankhead years ago and re elected him in the same year..so..enlightened…the plurality of Fullerton voters are not enlightened or even educated in the political world..sometimes I wonder why they even vote at all..
    It is my opinion ..it is your civic duty and right to vote…however, if you are not aware of who you are voting for..at least heard them speak or met them personally…or look up their voting record, then please do not vote!

    1. So you’re saying the voters who voted one way and then voted another only a couple of years later aren’t as enlightened as you and should have voted in the manner you approve?

      A yes or no is adequate.

  17. No ..for the short reply but for the facts, it was not a couple of years later..it was at the same time…got it?

    1. So what are you saying about the voters in Fullerton?

      Please be more specific. Were the voters who recalled Bankhead the same exact group that voted him back into office? Or was there a special election to recall?

      Those types of elections draw two very different demographics.

  18. hahahaha first you want a one word reply now you want more..quit teasing me..
    I think you have it partly figured out but if you want more info..and as you might see my version of the facts as bias..look it up yourself.
    I could not say that the same exact people voted him out and back in..no one can as the ballots are confidential.

    1. Because more than likely the recall was pushed by a group who knew they could be successful in a special election when fewer voters are paying attention or participating.

      Given the ultimate outcome of his being re-elected it only confirms that belief.

  19. A brief history lesson and then…look it all up for all of the details..the reason for the recall of three of the city council memebers was a utility tax they wanted to push on the voters..you included if you lived in Fullerton at the time.. interestingly we have survived without the tax being forced upon us for what 15 years now? There are a lot of other facts about the recall and once again..stop assuming you know anything about it. A recall is more complicated than your tiny brain can handle..so piss off. I am not here to do your work for you…take some time and do some research for a change.

    1. How is a recall more complicated than my little brain can handle?

      Do you believe that only your self proclaimed superior intellect can understand issues as basic as political elections?

      When I’m told an issue is to complicated to understand, there is typically an ulterior motive to the issue.

      Lastly, Bankhead was re-elected and has been there ever since. I’m thinking the voting public didn’t feel the same way as those who voted in the recall.

  20. Joe Sipowicz :Sad when you can only defend your gal by saying she didn’t break any laws.
    1. She took their money and broke the spirit of her 2006 “no developer” money promise. I notice you don’t address the issue of her other 2006 campaign promise to have development “driven” by the people instead of those evil out-of-town developers. Guess even you know what a crock of shit that promise was.
    You also didn’t touch the St. Jude Expansion issue or the Steve Sheldon boat ride. Hmm.
    2. No it’s not illegal to waste $1200 bucks in public funds on a fancy hotel in faraway Long Beach. In fact it’s common among liberals to waste other people’s money. Just doesn’t look good good, now does it? That’ll look real good on a campaign mailer.
    3. The Redevelopment expansion, by law, has to be based on findings of blight. Those were completely cooked up. Dick Jones actually admitted the whole thing was based on “needing the money.” Don’t worry the issue will be resolved in legal proceedings; and Keller may even enjoy a deposition courtesy of FFFF’s lawyer.
    4. Keller doesn’t work for a “company.” Don’t change the subject. She’s a public employee and enjoys the benefits of “organized labor;” she is responsible to the people that employ her. And that’s what’s wrong with her “contract.” She is responsible to nobody but herself.
    You are right about one thing, finally. Any number of people could do her job – probably even you – and do it both better and cheaper, which is why the Collaborative should get themselves a new director and the FSD should put Pammy back in a classroom where she belongs.
    5. Not updating the Collaborative website is only improper if you believe that a 501c3 (public benefit corporation) whose only real expense is an Executive Director) should post its doings on-line. We’ve been waiting a month into the year and she still hasn’t done it. Is she too lazy or just to darn too busy collaborating?
    Please keep posting your nonsense. This is fun.

    @Joe S.

    I’m not the one making accusations of impropriety. You and your folks are doing that.

    I don’t know anything about her developer promise. Could you post a link to that statement? Is it wrong for a candidate to change their postion? Or do you believe they should never be swayed given information that may make them draw a different conclusion that might be of better value to all the constituents they represent?

    I didn’t know anything about the St. Jude expansion or Steve Sheldon (who?) boat ride. What is your issue with someone taking a boat ride? Is that illegal? Was anyone else on that boat ride that might be significant? Like other Fullerton leadership? Or was she the only there with Steve?

    Was her support of the Redevelopment issue based solely upon her discretion? Or was there an analysis and recommendation by city staff? Which I’m sure was vetted by the city attorney. Did she act contrary to those findings? And lastly, what do Dick Jones’ remarks have to do with Pam’s support of the issue?

    She is a public employee. Once again I ask. Is she doing something outside the scope of her duties as requested by the FSD? Would you be happier if she were paid the same wages and benefits and had a different title? That seems to be your biggest concern.

    How do you know anyone could do her job better? It’s difficult to argue with a remark that is based on a hypothetical. Though I’m sure you knew that when you wrote it.

    Your point no. 5 is yet another accusation vaguely disguised as an opinon.

    It says a lot that you believe I am posting nonsense when you continue to respond. Do you typically respond to those you believe nonsensical? Thank you for the further insight into your mindset.

    1. 1. Both developer/development promises were made in 2006 and in fact remained on her website through last year. You are either ignorant of you gal or just lying.

      2. Don’t know anything about St. Jude development? I described it above. They are Collaborative contributors, Keller voted on their project. See comment #1 (again).

      3. Steve Sheldon was the developer’s front man/lobbyist on the God-awful Jefferson Commons project that Keller voted to approve. No Bueno!

      4. Sheldon’s boat ride included drinks and dinner and unless Keller paid her own way then she took a gift from a developer. See #1, again.

      5. The Redevelopment expansion was based on bogus findings of blight where none existed. Go look at the pictures to see if you agree; it was an obvious attempt to circumvent the requirements of the law. It was not “vetted” by the City Attorney. It was reviewed by the redevelopment lawyer who has a clear stake in its approval. Well, see ya in court.

      6. Keller is paid as a teacher and receives the benefits of a teacher. So why does she report to no one? Why doesn’t she account for her absences and accrue unearned comp time? Naughty, naughty!

      7. You just said any number of people could do her job. And I agreed with you. Jesus, just read what you write next time.

      8. Well how come the Collaborative website calendar is empty? There aren’t a lot of choices. Pam’s either to busy, too lazy, or can’t figure out how to do it. Either way, not so good for an ED! Maybe you should take over for her.

      9. Well you obviously think (or pretend to think) we are posting nonsense and yet you keep coming back. Why do you do that?

      1. 1. And should campaign promises be kept even if information comes forward that would cause the decision to cause more harm than good? How is that good policy?

        2. And you believe that somehow makes Pam totally subservient to their interests? Please detail why you believe that to be true.

        3. So what about Steve Sheldon? Do you believe one boat ride is all it takes for an elected to completely agree with their position? As I’ve asked several times. Who else was on that trip?

        4. Then why haven’t you or your fellow bunny cookers filed a FPPC complaint? This should be a no-brainer for tin foil hat types.

        5. Don’t know anything about the issue. Should be interesting to see if the court agrees with your position.

        6. I already addressed the issue. You clearly have a parochial mindset of the occupations of others. Your last comments sound more like what you might be hearing from your dominatrix. I bet that is how you view Pam, isn’t it.

        7. You clearly didn’t get the sarcasm in my statement. I’ll be clearer next time.

        8. Don’t know. Seems the only ones who care is you and your fellow Pam Cult followers.

        9. You and admin are the only ones who have made accusations of nonsense. I only responded to your remarks. I do it because you still haven’t proved anything other than claims. Unfounded ones at that.

  21. 4th SD Observer :What is your issue with someone taking a boat ride? Is that illegal?

    You are asking incredibly stupid questions that could be answered with the most rudimentary of Google searches. Please continue, I’m sure Pam appreciates the support.

  22. Your comments don’t answer my questions. Unless one can Google “improper boat rides” and see Pam’s name or face, there was no point to the orignal comment.

    You didn’t address the issue of what other individuals were on this trip.

    Nor do you address why a boat ride was improper. The reason is obvious, it isn’t. This is yet another tin foil hat post from the bunny cooker crowd.

    1. We posted about this boat ride last summer. It was a fundraiser for Quirk hosted by Jefferson Commons front man Steve Shelson (aka developer). Unless Keller paid for the priviledge then she received a gift – from a developer. Hustle off now and ask Pam which was it was. be sure to report back.

      1. And how did you know about it? Were you there? Was Pam going to take you and then stand you up? You continue to prove your obsession with her like a jilted prom date.

        Is there a gift ban or limit in Fullerton? If so, did she violate it and why haven’t any of you filed a FPPC complaint.

        I may be mistaken, but I was under the impression there is a seperate rule structure pertaining to elected officials attending events on behalf as guests of the host elected.

        If I’m wrong, I’m sure you can point me to the ordinance stating as such. Which begs the question as to why you and your fellow bunny cookers haven’t filed a FPPC complaint.

        You ignored the other part of my statement. Who else was on this trip? Anyone that might be a regular poster on this board? Just curious.

        1. Nobody said Keller broke the law (there you go again setting the bar as low as you can for your gal). I just said it was hypocritical to claim your campaign is not taking developer money and then you start soliciting contributions for your own job and take gifts from them.

          The record is there and the facts are inescapable. Your Beloved Leader approved those awful projects. Her developer buddies got huge win bonuses and we get stuck with the environmental impacts. And to any body but a Cult member that stinks.

          1. So your issue then is that she didn’t follow her campaign promises to the letter.

            Show me a politico that has done that. There is a time for campaigning and a time for governing. The two rarely completely coincide.

            Again I state it’s easy for those who have never run for office to understand that.

            You’re the only Cult member here. I guess you stink.

  23. 4th SD Observer :
    So your issue then is that she didn’t follow her campaign promises to the letter.
    Show me a politico that has done that. There is a time for campaigning and a time for governing. The two rarely completely coincide.
    Again I state it’s easy for those who have never run for office to understand that.
    You’re the only Cult member here. I guess you stink.

    Didn’t follow them “to the letter?” She weaseled on the whole goddamn promise.

    At least I got you to admit she didn’t follow her campaign promises. But then you excuse the hypocrisy with the lame “governing” shit, as if Keller ever governed anything.

    Anyway, your implication is perfectly clear: “When you’re running for office, say anything! When you get in you do what the developers and the redevelopment bureaucrats want. We’ll call it governing.”

    I wonder what the voters will think of that!

    1. You continue to disguise accusations as opinions.

      I have no idea what the voters will think of it. Though I’m sure if Pam gets re-elected you’ll be the first to respect their decision.

      1. Wrong. I make accusations based on observation of events. My opinions are also derived from those observations.

        And in my opinion Ms. Keller is a shallow, stupid, hypocritical, conflicted individual.

    2. And at least you admit she hasn’t done anything wrong or outside the scope of her office.

      She just hasn’t voted in the manner you wanted. No big deal. She’s tasked with representing all of Fullerton.

      Not just you. If you ever get elected to anything you’ll understand that.

      1. I admit no such thing. Almost everything she has done in office is wrong, stupid, hypocritical, or conflicted.

  24. What in the world does “governing” have to do with approving the massive, overbearing, development monsters.

        1. Then you display your clear lack of lack of understanding of the function of those in city council positions.

          1. Well please explain it to us. What is there inherent in the “functions of those in city council positions” that required Keller to violate her campaign promises. Please inform us all.

            Are you saying that being on the city council requires a yes vote on bad projects? Or are you saying these are good projects.

            My husband and I see a big sell out. Someone we will never trust again.

    1. We will find out how the “math works out” when we go “out of our way” to inform the voters about miss Keller’s doings, ask KH.

    2. Oh brother. Pam Keller’s majority in 2006 over the hapless Leland Wilson was a whopping 600 margin.

      Goddamn, you really are ignorant.

  25. Joe Sipowicz :1. It was not “vetted” by the City Attorney. It was reviewed by the redevelopment lawyer who has a clear stake in its approval. Well, see ya in court.

    So how do you know this wasn’t vetted? Were you privvy to all those meetings? Did the City Attorney tell you?

    Prove to us this isn’t another of your tin foil conspiracy remarks.

    1. Vetting Dialogue:

      Jeff Oderman: Well the blight findings are pretty iffy, but nobody ever challenges these things. Don’t worry. If we get sued my firm will handle all the business.

      Dick Jones: We need the muhnay!

      Rob Zur Schmiede: Um, please stop saying that Dr. Jones.

      Dick Jones: But you told me that!

      Rob Zur Schmiede: Um, yes I know. And I’ve got 10 people to keep busy. But we just can’t say that in public.

      Pam Keller: Staff and the consultant says it’s all okay and this is how things are done. It’s called governing and I’m a governor.

  26. 4thSDO, trust me Joe knows what he’s talking about, and if you really want to know you need to watch all the council meetings regarding the redevelopment expansion and then and only then you will understand what Joe is talking about 🙂

    1. This is pretty funny stuff. You really want us to believe he knows his subject?

      He continually claims there is something nefarious about her attending a poltical event on a boat owned by Steve Sheldon.

      He is clearly not an elected or he would know attendance at political events are deemed to have no value and are therefore not required to be reported. That’s right off the Form 700 from the FPPC.

      Do keep up with the tin foil hat conspiracies.

      You really expect anyone outside of your cabal of bunny cookers that Joe knows his topic regarding the decisions made and the vetting he claims didn’t occur.

      I doubt he knows anything about anything.

      1. I know that you are a brainwashed member of the Keller Cult of Personality.

        And I know that you turn a cheerful blind eye to her shallow, self-serving hypocrisy.

        But that’s okay. You have already admitted that she ignored her campaign promises about development in Fullerton. And if there is a single thing I want people to remember that’s it!

        Well, I also want them to remember the $1200 hotel stay, too.

        1. Not blind at all. I accept the idea that holding public office requires the responsible individual to make difficult choices.

          Campaign promises are made. That doesn’t mean circumstances can’t change that require a different option be considered than what was promised. It happens at all levels and only the most politically naive don’t understand that concept.

          I notice you ran from the accusation regarding the boat ride for a political event. You were wrong. No doubt about it.

          I have no doubt if I were to research the rest of your claims I would come to a similar conclusion.

          1. Any way you slice it the boat ride was accepting something from a developer. Gift, Present, hospitality? Why quibble over semantics – I don’t remember saying she broke the law (your lowest of the low bar setting for Keller).

            Like most pols Keller just likes to be wined and dined by the ‘out of town developer” before she votes on their mammoth projects.

            BTW, I don’t recall that you ever addressed the issue of Pammy’s $400 per night hotel stay.

          1. I’m sure you’ve all heard the old wives’ tale that no hypnotized subject may be forced to do that which is repellent to his moral nature, whatever that may be. Nonsense of course.

  27. Yolanda Lopez :I’m sure you’ve all heard the old wives’ tale that no hypnotized subject may be forced to do that which is repellent to his moral nature, whatever that may be. Nonsense of course.

    You’re absolutely correct Yolanda. The critics on this blog have shown they are completely hypnotized by anyone not in lock step with their beliefs.

    Pam being the topic of this thread. I’m sure there are others.

  28. Joe Sipowicz :Any way you slice it the boat ride was accepting something from a developer. Gift, Present, hospitality? Why quibble over semantics – I don’t remember saying she broke the law (your lowest of the low bar setting for Keller).
    Like most pols Keller just likes to be wined and dined by the ‘out of town developer” before she votes on their mammoth projects.
    BTW, I don’t recall that you ever addressed the issue of Pammy’s $400 per night hotel stay.

    Nothing wrong with taking a boat ride. If your logic is followed to its nth degree, Pam would have to report a neighbor that takes her to the airport.

    I don’t have an issue with her hotel stay. Elected officials attend conferences all the time. It’s not like the Fullerton city council pays well. There is value to the electeds meeting with each other to address the needs of their cities.

    That happens in all walks of our society. I guess you believe the Fullerton electeds should be omniscient (another big word).

    1. #100!

      The boat ride came with cocktails and was followed by dinner at an expensive Newport Beach restaurant. It was provided by a developer – not your nth degree friend.

      I knew you wouldn’t have an issue with wasting $1200 – chump change to you limousine liberals. The issue isn’t in attending a conference, the issue is why she had to stay at a $400 a night hotel when she could have commuted from Fullerton.

      Your “the job doesn’t pay well” excuse is the lamest bullshit you’ve peddled yet. That would excuse all sorts of extravagance and self-bestowed perks on the part of a council member. Besides Keller ran for the job. If she’s unsatisfied with the pay she should quit and go back to actually being a teacher instead of ripping us off.

  29. Joe Sipowicz :#100!
    The boat ride came with cocktails and was followed by dinner at an expensive Newport Beach restaurant. It was provided by a developer – not your nth degree friend.
    I knew you wouldn’t have an issue with wasting $1200 – chump change to you limousine liberals. The issue isn’t in attending a conference, the issue is why she had to stay at a $400 a night hotel when she could have commuted from Fullerton.
    Your “the job doesn’t pay well” excuse is the lamest bullshit you’ve peddled yet. That would excuse all sorts of extravagance and self-bestowed perks on the part of a council member. Besides Keller ran for the job. If she’s unsatisfied with the pay she should quit
    and go back to actually being a teacher instead of ripping us off.

    How would you know the details of the event. Were you there? Does that mean you accepted a gift from the developer? Are you now corrupted as well?

    You never addressed who else was present. Was one of the writers of this blog present? Why isn’t that wrong also?

    I love the limousine liberal crack. For the record I’m a registered GOP. Nice stereotype.

    You should read Yolanda’s comments. You are clearly hypnotized by your blind hatred.

    I don’t recall anyone saying “the job doesn’t pay well” excuse. Running for public office also shouldn’t cause undo expense on an individual either. Otherwise only wealthy elitists (see I can stereotype as well) would pursue public service.

    Something you seem to despise.

    1. “I love the limousine liberal crack.”

      We don’t probe into peoples personal lives on this blog.

      “For the record I’m a registered GOP”

      Right. So are Bankhead and heeHaw. Nice club.

      “You should read Yolanda’s comments”

      I did. Clearly directed at the Cult of Keller.

      “I don’t recall anyone saying “the job doesn’t pay well” excuse”

      Short memory you just did, above.

      “Running for public office also shouldn’t cause undo expense on an individual either”.

      Driving to Long Beach a few times is not an undo expense. Many of Keller’s constituents do it every day. Of course that has zero to do running up a $400 per day bill. That’s not even a good try.

      Peabody, save me a leg.

  30. Mr. Peabody :Mmmmm. What’s that I smell? Roasted bunny?

    Great point Peabody. If you recall, the analogy I’m using. The bunny cooker ends up dying at the end.

  31. Plain English, simple and short so that 4th SD can even understand.
    When you (as a Fullerton elected official) accept gifts from someone who does business with the city..it is dishonest not to recuse yourself when it comes time to vote on the issue…but 4th SD, you already knew that didn’t you? You just want to make sure that FFFF has some action on this issue by confusing the issue..I think you just love to see your words in print..well congratulations for that..whooo hooo..

    1. Well ackshually BF, she didn’t accept any gifts. A councilmember is required to recuse themself is when they are the sole benefit of that vote.

      Do keep up with the nonsensical ramblings.

    2. Or maybe you can show us how she solely benefitted from that decision.

      Would love to see proof.

      Or is this more like your pie in the sky rambling about gifts that aren’t really considered gifts except to the tin foil hat bunny cooker crowd.

      1. She took their money (after she said she wouldn’t), she voted for millions in entitlement benefit to the developers (after she promised to let the people “drive” development”).

        Those were evidently lies.

        Say, what do you do with those big floppy ears, anyway?

  32. Mr. Peabody :Well we all gotta go some time. Meanwhile I’ll have another leg of bunny.

    Meaning? At least you admit you are obsessed with her.

    Not that I didn’t already know.

    1. Not really obsessed. But like the others I am fascinated by your blind loyalty, and the loyalty of Pam’s perplexed Posse to someone who clearly doesn’t deserve it.

      But I do like the smell of rabbit cooking. And yummy flavor. Tastes a little like frog legs.

  33. To quote Joe S…The boat ride came with cocktails and was followed by dinner at an expensive Newport Beach restaurant. It was provided by a developer.
    So SD..if that is not a gift it …then it was a bribe..you choose..

  34. Joe Sipowicz :“I love the limousine liberal crack.”
    We don’t probe into peoples personal lives on this blog.
    “For the record I’m a registered GOP”
    Right. So are Bankhead and heeHaw. Nice club.
    “You should read Yolanda’s comments”
    I did. Clearly directed at the Cult of Keller.
    “I don’t recall anyone saying “the job doesn’t pay well” excuse”
    Short memory you just did, above.
    “Running for public office also shouldn’t cause undo expense on an individual either”.
    Driving to Long Beach a few times is not an undo expense. Many of Keller’s constituents do it every day. Of course that has zero to do running up a $400 per day bill. That’s not even a good try.
    Peabody, save me a leg.

    Sure you don’t. You follow Pam around like jilted prom dates. It doesn’t get more personal than that.

    What’s your point about Bankhead and heeHaw? Is there only one suitable belief system allowed to be considered a proper GOP? How very elitist of you.

    The only Cult of Keller is you folks. No other group spends as much time obsessing over her as you folks. So I’ll give you that one.

    Driving to and from Long Beach is only considered a reasonable expense to an elitist such as yourself. Miles and time committments (due to traffic) would not be considered reasonable by anyone other than those who have blind hatred like yourself.

    1. “Driving to and from Long Beach is only considered a reasonable expense to an elitist such as yourself. Miles and time committments (due to traffic) would not be considered reasonable by anyone other than those who have blind hatred like yourself.”

      Now you’re just making a fool of yourself. She would be entitled to mileage and parking. But she chose to stick us bunny cookers with her $1200 hotel bill. her time commitments? That’s freaking hi-larious. She works part time. And speaking of her “time commitments” she didn’t bother to tell anybody about her time off and so accrued bogus comp time.

      Jeezus you’re dumb.

  35. Breathing Fire :To quote Joe S…The boat ride came with cocktails and was followed by dinner at an expensive Newport Beach restaurant. It was provided by a developer.So SD..if that is not a gift it …then it was a bribe..you choose..

    None of the above BF. Are you saying she took a bribe and voted for Sheldon’s position based solely upon a boat ride and couple of cocktails?

    Please be specific.

  36. You know the old saying…If it quacks like a duck…
    I personally have nothing against Pam…like I said before..she is probably a very nice person..but as the record shows..not cut out for politics..or maybe she is too cut out for them..???
    You SD are very lazy..look it up..study it and then come back to post something here instead of asking inane questions just to filibuster..it is annoying.

  37. Breathing Fire :You know the old saying…If it quacks like a duck…I personally have nothing against Pam…like I said before..she is probably a very nice person..but as the record shows..not cut out for politics..or maybe she is too cut out for them..???You SD are very lazy..look it up..study it and then come back to post something here instead of asking inane questions just to filibuster..it is annoying.

    Yes or no. Are you saying she took a bribe?

    You’re the one claiming as such. It’s not a difficult question.

    1. Was it really a bribe? I dunno. But I know she took money for her Collaborative from developers after her promise not to take their money for her campaign. Then she approved their projects. No bueno!

  38. Joe Sipowicz :“Driving to and from Long Beach is only considered a reasonable expense to an elitist such as yourself. Miles and time committments (due to traffic) would not be considered reasonable by anyone other than those who have blind hatred like yourself.”
    Now you’re just making a fool of yourself. She would be entitled to mileage and parking. But she chose to stick us bunny cookers with her $1200 hotel bill. her time commitments? That’s freaking hi-larious. She works part time. And speaking of her “time commitments” she didn’t bother to tell anybody about her time off and so accrued bogus comp time.
    Jeezus you’re dumb.

    Actually I’m making a fool of you and the bunny cookers on this blog. Your quips about eating rabbit reinforced my analogy.

    You’ve admitted that is your mindset.

    Easily done I might add.

    Thank you.

    1. Easily done? We’re up to 120 comments (a record) and the advertisement of your ignorant, blind loyalty to Keller is the only thing you’ve accomplished. Except for admitting that Keller broker her campaign pledges.

      Anyway, you’re welcome.

      And we’ll see how the Keller campaign lies and the $1200 rip-off look on a campaign mailer!

  39. Mr. Peabody :Was it really a bribe? I dunno. But I know she took money for her Collaborative from developers after her promise not to take their money for her campaign. Then she approved their projects. No bueno!

    Great. You admit you made a statement in complete ignorance relating to the implications of taking bribes.

    Thanks again for letting us know.

    1. Bribe? I never used that word. That was your word.

      You’re nuts.

      BTW, I’ve got some rabbit feet here. Wantum? Might bring Keller better luck.

  40. Joe Sipowicz :Easily done? We’re up to 120 comments (a record) and the advertisement of your ignorant, blind loyalty to Keller is the only thing you’ve accomplished. Except for admitting that Keller broker her campaign pledges.
    Anyway, you’re welcome.
    And we’ll see how the Keller campaign lies and the $1200 rip-off look on a campaign mailer!

    Are you talking about the mail that people carry from their mailbox directly to the trashcan and never read?

    Yeah. Everyone I know believes the rhetoric in negative mailers as though it were gospel.

    Given the negative mail that was sent during her last campaign, it worked real well.

    1. 4th SD Observer :

      Yeah. Everyone I know believes the rhetoric in negative mailers as though it were gospel.

      Given the negative mail that was sent during her last campaign, it worked real well.

      The voters will decide whether the information outlined in this post is real or made up. Time will tell.

      1. I know! Let’s ask Jan Flory if those mailers sent out by Leland Wilson in 2002 had any effect! And then we can ask Leland Wilson if the hit piece sent out by Keller’s allies in 2006 had any effect!

  41. Mr. Peabody :Bribe? I never used that word. That was your word.
    You’re nuts.
    BTW, I’ve got some rabbit feet here. Wantum? Might bring Keller better luck.

    No you didn’t. That was Breathing Fire’s term. One of your fellow obsessed bunny cookers.

  42. It has been decided that you will be dressed as a priest, to help you get away in the pandemonium afterwards.

  43. What pandemonium? Why should I be afraid?

    You really believe I would be afraid of a bunch of nutcases who spend their time on a blog?

    This is good stuff.

  44. Hollis Dugan :In the words of our Friend Dick Jones: “Enough! Enough for gods sake!”.

    I agree.

    It’s been watching the bunny cookers respond to my posts with their wild eyed tin foil hat accusations.

    It reminded me of the time I played with ants and a magnifying glass.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.