Quirk-Silva Gets Opportunity To Do The Right Thing. Then Doesn’t.

I know I said that. But that was way back yesterday!

Tuesday was a big day for Fullerton Mayor Sharon Quirk Silva. Only the day before Quirk-Silva had issued a bold press release to her pals in the liberal blogosphere stating that she was going to request that her colleagues on the city council suspend the illegal 10% water tax. She even helpfully explained why the new 6.7% number was a load of manure.

Here’s what she said, quoted verbatim from a press release sent to an admiring Liberal OC:  “I will also call upon members of the city council to join me in a motion to stop any further diversions of water revenues to the general fund until these questions are answered,” Mayor Quirk-Silva asserted.

Naturally, when the chips were down, SQS chickened out. Don’t believe me? Here she is, right after Councilman Bruce Whitaker made the motion she herself had said she was going to make, that is, agendize the suspension of the illegal 10% tax on our water. 

Oops.

Well, there you have it. Quirk decided to side with the blowhard who attended (and fell asleep at) the Water Rate Ad Hoc Committee meeting, and put off the decision to do the right thing for some other day.

The courage of Monday morning evaporated by the next afternoon.

What a leader!

 

193 Replies to “Quirk-Silva Gets Opportunity To Do The Right Thing. Then Doesn’t.”

  1. Oh, c’mon. Nobody expects Ms. Get Tough to to anything except some guy named Dan Cherminlewski.

    I dismissed that press release immediately. If Norby hadn’t voted for the illegal tax times he would have had a real killer issue!

    1. Have people here actually watched the video? The disagreement is apparently whether to agendize the item NOW NOW NOW (where apparently it will LOSE LOSE LOSE by a 3-2 vote) or to wait until the Ad Hoc Committee report comes in.

      Keeping up the pressure for change, as Whitaker does by trying to agendize the motion immediately, is fine. Attacking Quirk-Silva for not grandstanding is peculiar. As she says, there is urgency here — but not an immediate crisis; it doesn’t matter in the grand scheme whether this item is considered last Tuesday or two weeks later or four weeks later. There’s value in letting even those who might want to block necessary changes get a little more time for the due process that they demand, in part to take away their probable procedural objection to the way that reform was done. It yields more likely and more effective reform.

      In that light, the attacks made below are mostly absurd.

      1. Greg, you are right. It would probably be better for the public to see the three dinosaurs vote in favor of this illegal tax that much closer to election day.

        1. Fine by me. I hold no brief for them. But if this is illegal and they somehow want to break the law, I don’t want them to be able to say “we only made the decision we did because you rushed us and didn’t give us time to hear from our ad hoc committee.”

          Sharon clearly gets that. Whitaker may not understand the prospect of their doing this or he may understand that it’s possible but not consider it likely.

          I hope that it’s one or the other, because otherwise he’d be grandstanding.

          1. Again, you don’t know what you’re talking about. The 10% tax is illegal. Nobody disputes that anymore. The issue at hand is to suspend it until the legal amount is properly established.

            Quirk said she was going to do this. Then she failed.The Ad Hoc Committee won’t establish anything. That will have to be done by an objective third party to withstand legal tests. In any case all of this should have been done 15 years ago, and at the very least sometime last summer. The fact that it wasn’t should tell you volumes about the honesty and transparency of Fullerton government.

            Oh, and one other thing: if it weren’t for all the Kelly Thomas publicity, Occupy would have been chased out of Fullerton with nightsticks and tasers. And Quirk would have sanctioned it with a smile.

            1. I was basing my comment on the video clip of “proof” provided. Now someone below says that two councilmembers were missing — which suggests that the vote was put off as a courtesy — or perhaps to try to get their votes as well to put more force behind the acknowledgment of fault. (I have no idea of the reason, but I know that it’s a common courtesy.

              So it’s put off for a meeting, even two. Whether it is suspended or not, the money from this period is coming back even if its collection not suspended by administrative action in the meantime.

              You have no, and I mean none, idea what would have happened in Fullerton were it not for the Kelly Thomas case, in the context of our having just arrived from Irvine. It might have been a tougher fight, but we would have kept right up to the bounds of the law, with much more publicity and monitoring than your average homeless victim of police action would have, and plenty of attorneys here to react to such a response. So don’t talk through your hat and pretend that it’s proof.

      2. Greg – I know you say you are no longer on this site and that is a plus for the residents here in Fullerton.

        Your gang of patchouli lovers did NOTHING for this city other than destroy the grass at the Brea Dam and Hillcrest park.

        The “changes” your group made were not actual changes. The city does not bank with large banks here, and to act like making them switch to local banks and/or credit unions was a farce.

        And lets call a spade a spade – your group did NOT leave on your own terms either. You were forced out because your group had the tendency to destroy city and public property. Hillcrest park was vandalized more than once.

        The mere fact our council let you stay here was not because they were being generous; it was backlash to the citizens of this town. It was a chess move to see if we would complain about the homelessness. And honestly, I think you all came here because of the same reason.

        And for being such a “Robin Hood” of Orange County…this water situation is an immediate crisis, as you claim it is not. Which makes me believe you do not practice what you preach, This city willingly stole money from the poor to give to the rich. And now they are using that stolen money to do absolutely nothing good with it.

        Isn’t that what your group is trying to change?

        All I can say is GOOD RIDDANCE your gang of hoodlums are no longer here destroying the last bit of change, we, the citizens of Fullerton, can make.

  2. Real leadership means following through with actions that are in the best interest of taxpayers/ratepayers. In this instance we know with out any doubt SQS serves the public employees, placing their interests above all others.

    Thanks for calling her out Shadow. She needs to be held accountabble as do all of them.

  3. She is a typical indecisive leader. She will wait to see what is going to happen, then join the side who is most winning, or thinks is winning.

    Other than smacking that gavel down, she is lost in the clouds, she is not sure what to do.

    She was last to ever know, or think her little world with the 3 Amigos would be turned upside down.

    She is just riding the roller coaster and waiting to see where it stops.

    I bet the 3 Amigos seldom even speak with her or Whitaker on city business.

  4. Sharon Quirk-Silva always seems to studder and blunder through every statement of her’s that is more than 3 sentences.
    Also her little smile while speaking is a ‘red flag’. Usually some type of deception behind her words.
    At most every council meeting since she’s been mayor, she forgets to either do roll call, pledge of allegience, allow city attorney to discuss legal matters, etc.
    Silva also tries too hard to throw in some all too unecessary adjectives while stating something simple.
    She’s hard to listen too and for me hard to look at whilst that deceptive smile comes across her face)
    Toastmasters gives her a ‘D’. Much room for improvement.

  5. Typical Democratic party manuever/manure (take your pick) is to appease the population and take a populist position when talking with residents, and then as soon as it’s time to put your vote where your mouth is, they’ll instead side with the public employees union members, and Fullerton residents be damned.
    Reminds me of the tale about the crocodile and the snake who were in a flood. The downpour caused the snake to seek higher ground and when the snake saw that there was no way off of the island, the snake called out to a passing crocodile to let her ride on the crocodiles back so that the snake could survive.
    The crocodile reminded the snake that it was venomous and that the crocodile could potentially die if the snake bit him. The snake assured the crocodile that no such thing would happen and the crocodile goes against his own better judgement and decides to give the snake a ride because the snake seemed sincere in her reassurance to not bite him.
    The snake gets on the back of the crocodile and is indeed saved from the flood and all seems well until the snake senses that she’s getting close to land again and visciously bites the crocodile from behind and inserts it venom. The crocodile immediately turns around and indignantly says to the snake, “you just bit me didn’t you? You totally lied to me when you assured me that you would never bite me! The snake turned around and looked at the dying crocodile and said, “what did you expect from me as a lowly snake? It’s in my nature to strike and bite you when and where you least expect it”.

    This one’s gonna reallyt haunt you SSSSSSSSSSSSSilva.

    1. Cool analogy FL.

      I don’t know Whitaker, many of you do. From my vantage point behind the computer, he has NOT WAIVERED in most of his commentary and decisions.

      That is a sign of a LEADER. Whether you agree with him or not, he is a LEADER, but damn sure has the potential if he still lacks certain things in some of your opinions.

      And the 3 Amigos have cast him aside for the most part, because Whitaker can and has made a decision on his own.

      In watching him speak in the first few weeks of the Kelly Thomas incident, Whitaker seemed un sure of himself, I only took it that way because Whitaker lacked the information needed to make an informed decision.

      I might have missed someting about this man, but for the most part he is an outcast among the crooks within.

      I always like siding with the outcasts such as Whitaker. I’ll drink a beer with him anytime.

      But bottom line, there is a man you need to support. I think he is learning quickly myself.

    2. In responce to the kelly thomas ordeal quirk recomended a taskforce for homeless.This seems like a diversion of the real issues like reform of the police department.

        1. What “campaign for Mayor”? Fullerton doesn’t elect a Mayor directly, like Santa Ana or Irvine. Candidates all just run for Council.

      1. What I like most about Ms. Sharon Quirk Silva is her ability to see a problem, form a committee, and poof… the problem goes way.

        And that’s why a bigger more involved government is better than limited (small) government.

        We fix problems you small minded folk create!

      2. She did more than that, including going out on a limb very early on. (I don’t remember exactly what, but wasn’t it something like calling for the Police Chief to resign or step aside?)

        If you think that the Kelly Thomas situation was a problem only with police action and not also of how the city deals with homelessness, or if you think that homelessness is not a real issue, you’re not even trying to approach this seriously.

        If SQS were ONLY concerned about homelessness, you might have a point. But, from the start, she wasn’t. It is possible to deal simultaneously with more than one issue raised by a single tragedy. Trying to turn that into a political liability is very strange. I’ll bet that your recall candidates are smarter than to do so, but by all means demand it of them!

  6. If Ms. Ssssssilva keeps this up she will become someone’s belt or pair of bootssssssssssssssss.

  7. Go to any of the last 3 council meetings on the city’s website and you will hear Madamn Mayor choking her way through the first 5 minutes.

    Seemingly drunk in a way. Possible ‘small-brained’ syndrome and obviously indecisive.

    She’s pretty cute when she isn’t talking though.
    🙂

  8. She is weak and thus unethical. Quirk-Silva lies to the good people of Fullerton who have been forced to turn over their hard-earned dollars to liars and thieves who call themselves our municipal government. We, the good people of Fullerton, deserve better people than Quirk-Silva. She needs to go from our government.s

  9. So is she saying these things expecting not to get called out? This is the same crap she pulled after Kelly’s murder. She said it was about homelessness and not the corruption in our PD. I think it’s time we buy her some socks!

    1. When you see the flip flop stances that this woman has displayed from my vantage point, it’s a clear RED FLAG i’st time to buy this woman some socks.

  10. “I know I said that. But that was way back yesterday.”

    Great photo caption once again Fullerton Shadow.

  11. I love the two months before an election when all the liberals suddenly style themselves as fiscal conservatives.

    Well, all of the liberals except for Bankhead. He can’t even remember to pretend anymore.

  12. So either this people on council aren’t being illegally taxed themselves or are just plain ignorant to “real life.” Because anyone who is having their money stolen would want that said money returned. So which one is it?

  13. How does she expect to succeed in Sacramento by postponing and delaying every hard decision she faces?

  14. this part-time teacher never take any decision ,she is manipulated by pat ,i got to see that very close .so what ever ‘mayor sharon says is just noise.and im sure she has order from mr pat in what way she has to responde. by the other hand mr whitetaker alway has solutions for the problem he doesn’t have to depend from nobody ,by the other hand he is a real city council,who knows what he is doing,mr whitetaker is not just a par-time teacher.

  15. Loretta Sanchez has been whispering in her ear,and she is taking the bait. She is no more qualified to Ribbon Cute than I am to run a marathon.
    As, for party lines, lets face it, all sides are crap. Im conservative on financial issue, more liberal when it comes to education,homeless. ect. At this point I am judging those leaders, and those in the running for those seats, by their actions.
    I have seen Mr. Whitaker, who a year ago, I couldnt have picked him out, if you had asked me. I have watched this man, ask questions, answer my questions, out in the community, at homeless shelters- believe me he and his wife werent there for a photo op, like Mr Mckinley. I may not agree with Mr Whitakers political affiliations, but I think his consistency and moral compass, may actually have a lasting effect on the citizens.At the end of the day, dont you want a leader, and not a puppet to the party, whatever party that may be?I think SQS, tows the party line, and Mr. Whitaker may have to, but the man does ask some hard hitting questions..nore than I can say for any of the others.

    1. Did you know that Sharon has been an employee of Loretta Sanchez’ office during her summer vacations the past two years?

      1. That comes as no surprise SSSSSSSSSilva would work for Sanchez, from what my research tells me they are personal friends and political allies, and I don’t think that has ever been a sssssssssssecret.

        I think every move she makes is all about her next election/move.

    1. David Begnaud at about 1:16 in response to Quirk-Silva saying, “I want this investigated..”,
      says, “it WAS; by the Fullerton Police Department.”

      David Begnaud has been the most revealing local reporter concerning all of these FPD incidents.

      1. I guess Sharon was satisfied by the answers she got behind closed doors. I don’t remember her ever talking about it again. Oooooh. Too controversial. Can’t have that now can we?

        Hey, Roland Chi, wanna be on the Planning Commission?

  16. Silva is not much of a leader if you want something important done. Anything controversial, she ebbs and flows and basically does nothing! How she got elected to the council is beyond my ability to comprehend!

  17. karma :
    That comes as no surprise SSSSSSSSSilva would work for Sanchez, from what my research tells me they are personal friends and political allies, and I don’t think that has ever been a sssssssssssecret.
    I think every move she makes is all about her next election/move.

    Yeah, no kidding. Have you noticed that Sharon has been extremely careful not to implicate the police union or its members since the Kelly Thomas beating?

    Everything out of her mouth about the police has been in the most generic terms possible. I don’t believe this is any accident. She knew all along she would need to tread lightly in order to solicit union money for her state assembly campaign.

    I’m starting to wonder if Sharon has been voting like Whitaker, not on merit, but because it’s obvious Bruce is so well respected and that’s what she wants too.

    1. Imagine for a moment that the Fullerton government was, in your opinion, well-run. It’s doing what you want the way you want it. Yet, for some reason, it gets sued anyway for what may be a meritorious reason.

      Do you really think that, given our adversarial court system, it’s the proper role of the Mayor to admit fault in all ways and to the greatest extent possible? I am NOT saying that a public official should therefore have to lie. I’m saying that sometimes their lawyers will be rightly telling them to shut up about what they say in public, because they will be called to answer for their assertions about liability in court, and that could change things from a fair verdict that found $1,000,000 liability against the city to a verdict that fairly found liability but led to an unjust $100,000,000 in damages.

      Again, Sharon understands this — and that is all of the information you need to assess her motivation in “being careful not to implicate the police union or its members.” And, again, Whitaker either doesn’t understand it, doesn’t think it’s a realistic threat — or is grandstanding.

        1. He keeps trying to meddle with things in my city (Santa Ana) too.

          FYI, Diamond is running against Bob Huff in the 29th State Senate District. I am suddenly a big fan of Huff!

      1. You’ve taken my point and exaggerated it out of context. Explicitly calling out their actions is really not what this is about. Sharon avoids even subtle hints that she is displeased with the police union. She avoids saying anything the FPOA would interpret as direct criticism. She is purposefully vague in a way that insulates herself from political backlash.

        It’s like me or you calling out the “problems” in Sacramento or Washington DC and vowing to fix them…all without explaining what the problems are.

        1. Well, I took your comment in its context. As you elaborate on it now, I won’t say whether it’s fair, but at least it’s cogent.

      2. She said she wanted an investigation. Was there one? No.

        She said she wanted to suspend the illegal water tax. Did she? No.

        Admit it. Your heroine is almost worthless.

        1. And with eight years on the existing council, her strings are being manuevered by the ‘Tres Hombres’ or ‘Puppet Masters’.

          She does whatever they say, such as “Sharon, tell the media you want an investigation, but say no more.” AND “Sharon, tell the media you will get to the bottom of the water tax, but say no more and don’t do anything.”

          If Greg Diamond doesn’t mind, I’d like to use his term from yesterday:

          Sharon is their ‘Sock Puppet’.

      3. When did Whitaker ever admit fault “in all ways and to the greatest extent possible?”

        For a lawyer you sure are imaginative. Which is probably why you:

        1) aren’t much of a lawyer, and;

        2) have so much uncompensated time to make up shit that fits your narrative on blogs.

        I look forward to your 35% loss in whatever you’re running for.

        1. I’m guessing that you aren’t much of a James Cameron, either.

          As for your question about Whitaker, I just went back to confirm that I never accused him of that — and sure enough I didn’t. Do we really want to get into how a lawyer would view his statements as an agent for the city with lawsuits approaching? Tell you what, you compile his best statements and I’ll tell you what my views would be if I were representing the city.

          1. Well, there’s nothing wrong with my reading comprehension, mate. Don’t try a third rate lawyer trick on me. Here’s what you said about “admitting fault”:

            Again, Sharon understands this — and that is all of the information you need to assess her motivation in “being careful not to implicate the police union or its members.” And, again, Whitaker either doesn’t understand it, doesn’t think it’s a realistic threat — or is grandstanding.

            The implication is clear even if the writing is turgid. Whitaker has done so, whether through ignorance, indifference, or bravado.

            For a change of pace, why don’t you address the the topic of the post. You’re worse than the cop trolls.

            1. If Whitaker doesn’t think it’s a realistic threat, then that’s not indifference, it’s judgment. It could be wrong, but it’s still respectable. Presumably, he doesn’t think that anything he’s doing poses a realistic legal threat that could lead to the city losing more money than would be just. Right?

              I addressed the topic of the post way up top. Not holding a vote with two of the three members who are likely to want to be on the wrong side absent is bad form where little is to be lost (and nothing need be lost by waiting one meeting. The notion that people on a body such as Council still try to show each other small courtesies is hard for people in the grandstands to grasp.

                1. You know why people take money from the police unions? Because they have it to give out and they do it. That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t create problems; it means that receiving money from them is not an automatic sign of corruption. Not everyone can be funded by a wealthy iconoclastic businessman.

                  For the record, if it matters, I’m not seeking money from them — not because I think it would mean that I was “bought” but because I know that they have contributed heavily to Bob Huff.

      4. Greg- Just wondering how you know that she “understands” anything like you state.

        The AdHoc REPORT is so, ready.

        I heard the meeting while it was going on, last Tuesday night, she was clearly, and stated so, not wanting to make a comments on the water issue without McKinley and Jones being there based on what Bankhead said. She said they want to wait for them because, she felt they know more about the water issue than she. (even though she’s the mayor of the town)

        1. Did she really say that? Hard to believe. That press release was, like, so authoritative ‘n everything. Some people actually thought she understood it. Others believed she actually wrote it!

          If she said that she lied. Agendizing the suspension of the tax was the issue in any case, and that could have been done Tuesday night. She whiffed. Badly.

          1. yes, that part is on the tape above if you want to hear it-she’s choppy so you have to listen hard-unfortunately.

              1. Are you asking why, if she understood after the criticism came out, she didn’t act before the criticism came out?

                1. Sharon lives in Fullerton and presumably sees or pays the water bill herself every two months. She’s been on the council several years.

                  One would hope somebody in her position would be well-versed by now on why our water bills cost so much. After all, this is someone who works part-time during the 9 months a year she does work for the school district. I take offense to her going to work (literally) for Loretta Sanchez without handling, or at least learning about Fullerton’s issues first.

                  Greg, please explain why Sharon should be elected to an Assembly Seat if she cannot grasp the water rate problems in Fullerton? How in the world is she sufficiently qualified to take on much bigger responsibilities in Sacramento?

                2. Vernon, when did the water rate issue publicly arise? I had the sense that it was partially or mostly through FFFF. So I’m asking, at one point would Fullertonians have reasonably known about the effect of this proposition, that apparently hadn’t been discussed much? The point isn’t the entire bills’ cost, just the illegal part.

  18. “Sharon understands this”

    Sharon doesn’t understand the time of day. She’s dumber than an empty burlap sack. No courage, either.

    1. It’s taken me about half a day to realize that you have no idea what you’re talking about at any time, made-up person.

  19. What I can’t understand is how these dumb politicians think they can get away with saying one thing on a Monday and pretend like they never said it the very next day?

    I know in Fullerton these people have gotten used to no one paying attention, but really, after FFFF hit town they can’t believe that any more, can they?

  20. What’s up with the commie red scarf? She’s always draped in that thing before appearing before “the people…”

    1. Red is the color some show to support our troops, It is also the color to show support for Womens Heart Health, most of the Research is done just for old white men, doesnt translate.

      1. Local Government is where unpromising Political Leadership should die, Thank God, RIP.

  21. Greg Diamond :
    Vernon, when did the water rate issue publicly arise? I had the sense that it was partially or mostly through FFFF. So I’m asking, at one point would Fullertonians have reasonably known about the effect of this proposition, that apparently hadn’t been discussed much? The point isn’t the entire bills’ cost, just the illegal part.

    You’re on two tracks here, Greg. Sharon is an elected official with theoretical access to the way Fullerton does its business, how it taxes people and why it charges what it does for services provided to residents.

    Here we are months after the water issue was revealed and Sharon still doesn’t know enough to understand how to proceed. It appears if I approached her on the street and asked for a water bill explanation, she wouldn’t have the foggiest idea how the City calculates it.

    She’s the mayor, she works part-time 9 months a year at the school district and couldn’t find the time to research this problem.

    When we, the residents, found out about the water tax problems is totally irrelevant. Politicians should be proactive, not just reactive.

  22. Does anyone know what this tax costs the citizens of Fullerton per month?

    I am wondering just how much money this delay could end up costing both individually and collaterally?

  23. Curious :This illegal 10% tax is costing Fullerton residents $210,674.15 per month or $7,022.46 per day.

    WOW, one more question…how long is the delay?
    I am trying to get an idea what this delay is costing.

    1. Why would you assume that the reversal of the charge would not be retroactive? Going back a month is not a logistical problem. Going back a decade is a logistical problem.

      1. I did not “intentionally” assume anything.
        I should have said; I am trying to get an idea what this delay “could” cost.
        Are you assuming the charge will be reversed?

        Is the answer to my question the delay is a month?
        Can I assume that from your post?

        1. I’m not saying that you did, I’m wondering why one would. It seems pretty obvious to me that it won’t be — or if it turned out that way, it would be on a 3-2 vote with the minority being Sharon and Bruce.

          A month would be two meetings. My guess is two weeks.

      2. One suggestion would be to cross reference city property records with the county tax assessors office to determine the owner of record for each year the illegal tax was applied. If the owner of record is unable to be found, the monies owed by the city should be turned over to the State of California’s Controller’s, “Unclaimed Property” office until the property owner claims their refund.

        http://www.sco.ca.gov/upd.html

        p.s. any and all California residents should check this database at least every year. I recently found over $300 on this database that was owed to me by an insurance company. Good luck!

        1. Great idea, I am going to check this out…can anyone answer if it has been decided “or not” that a refund is coming?
          ……I don’t want to assume it is or isn’t 🙂
          …..looking for answers

  24. Greg, I’ve got to give you credit here. This is the best flowing comment section on a post that I’ve seen so far. Its been on topic!

  25. Who supported quirk silva’s original bid for city council and what unique qualities did she claim to bring to municipal government?

    1. Unwavering support for the unions (Police,Public, Firefightersmand Teachers) who contibuted to her campaign monetarily, and also by walking precints for her. Check it out under campaign contributions on the City of Fullerton/ City Clerk website

  26. The trouble with being a zealot is you lose sight of reality. Sharron very clearly let down her community and was duly criticized. Nobody threatened to string her up, the bashed her fair and square.

    But with the likes of DanChimielwinski, Greg Diamond and Matt Cunningham all reason is lost. If you are critical WE HATE YOU!

    My little sister was like this (when she was six), if we didn’t like the purple schwinn we didn’t like her. These folks are so caught up in who they think they are supposed to be, they’ve forgotten who they are.

    Clearly SQS is under incredible pressure to perform because she is politically upward mobile. The power of the Sanchez machine was dilluted with her mismanagement of campaign funds so now Sharron is faced with running a grass roots campaign, for which she may be rewarded for her failure.

    But, why just because SQS has a D next to her name, or Julio Perez is a butterfly for labor do these usual suspects start tweeting. They are as bad as the corprate whores.

    When the parties start acting like Fullertonians and play “one person one vote” politics, we’ll get some change. meanwhile let the hacks broadcast………….

  27. Greg Diamond :
    Vernon, when did the water rate issue publicly arise? I had the sense that it was partially or mostly through FFFF. So I’m asking, at one point would Fullertonians have reasonably known about the effect of this proposition, that apparently hadn’t been discussed much? The point isn’t the entire bills’ cost, just the illegal part.

    I’ll answer that. it’s been known as an issue since at least 1994 when Snow Hume and a few others questioned the double dip. After Prop 218 passed it became illegal and in the late 90s it was again brought up. Jan Flory said she liked the arrangement. It was her way of supporting a utility tax without being tarred and feathered.

    Of course all the repuglicans were on board, too – RINOS and lazy folk like Norby who didn’t care about raising taxes so long as nobody called it a tax.

    I moved out in 2000, but my guess is you could just extend the description up through 2009 when FFFF did a post on the subject –

    http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2009/water-water-everywhere/

    This was TWO WHOLE YEARS before Ms. Quirk participated in selecting an ad hoc committee whose job was to whitewash a water rate increase.

    I guess I’ll have to do a post on this.

    1. Let’s put it this way: when did Whitaker bring it up? I would consider that to be fair notice, recognizing that there would still be a need for it be checked out and to figure out how to deal with the ensuing loss of revenue.

          1. Wrong. She went along with the appointment of an ad hoc committee (it wasn’t even her idea – check the minutes) to rubber stamp a rate increase.

            Answer a simple question if you can: why did she say she was going to move to suspend the tax on Monday morning and then refuse to second Whitaker’s motion to do just that the next night?

            Hmm?

            BTW, the “appropriate action” would have been to stop the illegal tax seven years ago before she approved it SEVEN times.

            FAIL!

            1. Mr. Diamond ‘may’ be domonstrating a bit of gratitude and favoritim toward Mdamn Mayor since her and Jones said ‘yes’ to an Occupy bill (?) or something to his benefit, and Whitaker didn’t.

              Could that be true Greg?

              It seems to me and many you are ‘binding over backwards to defend Quirk-Silva, where this post clearly demonstrates her ‘waffling’ and ‘flip-flopping’ on this issue.

              1. I know, favoritim should be favoritism,
                Mdamn should be Madamn and
                ‘binding should be bending. It’s the blog.

              2. I was wondering the same thing myself Wrong Guy, as I had read earlier that Doc Jones was participating in sleepovers with the Occupy crowd while they were camping out at Brea Dam.

                1. If so, that is not only news to me, but the very idea of his camping in that dank spot cracks me up.

              3. Yes, it could be true — but it isn’t.

                I’m glad that Jones voted with us. I still expect to favor his recall (at least unless he commits to not run in November); it just makes me think that he also has a good side to him.

                As for Whitaker and the others — honestly, in some way it’s really better to have the issue than the win.

            2. Hellllo. why DIDNT she say something 7 years ago and forward about this? cause no one else said anything or because she didnt know and didnt care?

              If SQS wants her security blankets before she can make a decision (stall tactic or just doesnt know shit from shinola), at least suspend the damn illegal 10% until then, like you said you would do.

              What were the daily figures again that this is costing the taxpayers, again?

            3. As I’ve explained, I think it was because Jones and McKinley were absent from the meeting, and the elimination wasn’t truly urgent (because a motion passed at the next meeting could be made to apply retroactively), and she thought it either courteous or politically appropriate to have them in on the decision.

              That makes a hyperventilating response like this story completely out of whack with the circumstances. Of course, given that it’s just trying to push Norby’s candidacy, that’s not so surprising.

              1. A motion at the next meeting could be made retroactively? What the hell are you talking about?

                All she had to do was AGENDIZE the issue for a decision, not make a decision, which would have been a Brown Act violation. Do you know anything about how government works?

                Antway, she said she would and she didn’t.

                No hyperventilation, and I don’t care anything about Norby.

                1. Whitaker’s motion was not on the clip. Was it to discuss the repeal of the water tax at a future meeting? I had thought that it was to discuss it at that meeting. I presume that three people would be enough for quorum — or they wouldn’t have been introducing motions and requiring seconds to begin with!

                  What was the agenda item to be, if not to repeal the act? The Brown Act applies to decisions made outside of a meeting — which this wasn’t, right? — not to somehow barring communication between Council members AT a meeting. And if it was for a future meeting, why couldn’t it have been agendized through normal processes, which I’d think would have been in time for that meeting?

                  There are emergency measures that allow a council to place an item on the agenda to deal with exigent circumstances about which they could not have known at the time that an agenda is set. Isn’t that what Whitaker was doing?

                  It’s the application of the decision made at some future meeting that could be retroactive, such as “we cancel all water tax assessments retroactively to March 13.”

              2. Mr. Diamond – did you assist in writing the water related statement/letter (below) for Sharon Quirk-Silva?

                “I feel that it is important that despite the anticipation of an audit of water fund transfers to the general fund, the report by Municipal & Finances Services Group is not an audit, but a study of data provided by the City. A formal audit requires a Certified Public Accountant and it is important that the Adhoc Committee members and public understand that this study does not meet the rigors of a formal audit,” Mayor Quirk-Silva stated. “Furthermore, I am concerned that a separate but related appraisal report by Stephen G. White, appraised the value and rent covering city facilities dedicated to the service and delivery of water based upon market rates for residential property at the request of city staff. Such appraisals for facilities dedicated to water utilities are typically appraised for their ‘utility value’ which can be substantially lower. As presented this appraisal leads to justifying larger transfers from the water fund to the general fund than may be warranted, ” Mayor Quirk-Silva added.

                “Finally, enterprise funds such as our water fund are typically governed by a fund board. Such boards review detailed financial statements related to the water utility. The MFSG study makes no reference to this which I see as a significant short-coming in the area of transparency and accountability. Thus, before taking any further steps, I urge the Adhoc Committee to advise the city council about steps that ought to be taken to increase transparency and accountability so that transfers from the water fund to the general fund are technically, legally and ethically done. I will also call upon members of the city council to join me in a motion to stop any further diversions of water revenues to the general fund until these questions are answered,” Mayor Quirk-Silva asserted.

                “While this process leading to greater transparency and accountability has been difficult, I am glad that the city council supported my effort last year to create the Adhoc Committee on Water Rates. I wish to thank members of the Adhoc Committee as this process potentially continues to an acceptable solution that is fair to our residents and rate payers, while improving our aging water system,” Mayor Quirk-Silva said.

                1. Nope. I didn’t know about it until I received it by e-mail, at which point I thought that it was newsworthy and republished it at OJB. If I had played a part in writing it, I’d have divulged it.

                2. If Greg wrote Quirk’s letter it would be full of inane and irrelevant questions.

  28. Greg Diamond…you remind me of an “actuallista” that likes to spoil a good joke. You wedge yourself into a conversation and nitpick every paragraph, every sentence. It’s the type of annoying, arrogant person that interrupts you at every opportunity that starts the sentence with “Well, actually…”.

    I can understand this if you are in a court of law and had the miserable fortune to be incarnated as a lawyer. Let people discuss and participate in this forum without your interruptions. Leave the douchebaggery in the courtroom.

    1. Let it be known that no one can question anything on FFFF! They will be tarred and feathered if they do!

      No, I Eat Greg, it’s called putting LOGIC into an argument. If you put words out on the internet, be prepared to defend them without insults.

    2. Is it just me, or did the “P.S.” of that comment get adjusted to avoid another diatribe like the one that happened on the blog about the water main break?

    3. Greg, it’s not worth it to even comment. They obviously will attack and malign anyone who dares to question. Intelligent, thoughtful comments have no place here if they dare to question.
      The sad part about this is that if you actually stopped and thought about it a little, the questioning is helpful to you. People can agree with a platform yet also question. It’s not a bad thing. Attacking that will only hurt you in the long run. As I see it, you all look like racist bigots right now.
      Admin, please block my ISP so that I’m not tempted to comment again and take me off the comment subscriptions lists. Thank you.

      1. “As I see it, you all look like racist bigots right now.”

        You paint everyone in here with a broad brush. Your credibility has plummeted. Yes Admin, please ban him.

    4. Enjoy your social support from however many individuals these different commenters turn out to be. I’ll see you around here.

      1. The efficacy of both technical and fundamental analysis is disputed by efficient-market hypothesis and E=MC squared.

  29. *huff* *puff* *weezes* …I’m gonna post a bunch of offensive messages under different alias, write long winded diatribes expressing my fake outrage then tell all of my friends about how racist Tony Bushala is *clutches chest* …hold on *puff* …oh boy all this typing is wearing me out *catches breath* Why am I doing this? *fart* Well, since I’m a fat tub of guts with no work ethic its hard to pass up a lucrative under the table offer to target this blog. *shart* …ah screw it, I’m not getting up.

  30. Come by Orange Juice Blog. Bushala cross-posts the intro to many of his stories there and we have discussions about them at higher than an eighth-grade vocabulary level. Ideologically, it’s a mix. We love having smart conservative voices there, too.

    1. Thanks for the invite Jeeves, Just as soon as I feed the goats, get the car down from the blocks and off the front lawn and brush my toof-I’ll be there with my dictionary.

      1. I appreciate the mods here scrubbing out the homophobic posts (on which I’m getting copied before they go away); if they think that this is fine, that’s OK.

        USA Today used to be said to be written at an 8th-grade reading level, but supposedly now it’s 10th-grade (as, sort of amazingly, are the NY Times and Washington Post.) Here’s a article from 2005 with a table: http://www.impact-information.com/impactinfo/newsletter/plwork15.htm.

        Eighth-grade level doesn’t mean goats, blocks, and toothlessness; it’s a shade under the population median. Reader’s Digest is ninth-grade level. I think this blog is about there, so maybe I should say “ninth grade.”

        1. I truly hope that your comments on this blog, as well as your apparent need to pass judgment on the reading levels of the lowly proletariat and bourgeoisie at FFFF, is at least enabling you to pay off your student loans for your aristocratic law degree at Columbia.

          Or, perhaps you are so brilliant, or needy, that you received a full ride scholarship? Or, perhaps your parents forked over the money, or heaven forbid, – you actually worked your way through law school?

          I would hate to think that the hardworking taxpayers are going to get stuck paying for your elitist snobbery. But, then again, isn’t that what the Occupy movement wants? Aren’t OWS protestors asking for FREE education for all? Perhaps, we taxpayers can all just get together and pay for everyone to attend Columbia University? Or, perhaps, Obama can just keep printing money, completely destroy our economy, and forgive all of the student loans that the students AGREED to? You’d love that, wouldn’t you? Yes, a true Marxist utopia would be so wonderful, wouldn’t it? The only problem with that is that everyone will be starving to death when our economy collapses, and then the only people who will be attending any university will be the aristocratic ruling class of elites.

          Please be sure to make good use of your (above ninth grade) vocabulary skills and advise your OWS crowd to be sure to plan on paying off their student loans. (I’m pretty sure you had at least one course in contract law.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrPGoPFRUdc

        1. No, that stupid hound…hes probably at the neighbors trash can a-gin.

          I need to go slop the hogs now. Bobby Joe is teaching me banjo at noon, I’ll try to git over to that thar smart writing corner today.

    2. “Well, Actually…” I did go over to the Orange Juice Blog earlier before you mentioned it. It’s funny how you say:

      “…and we have discussions…”

      I saw 10 post over there. Half of them were yours. Looks like you hear yourself type. How is that a discussion when you make up half of the content. Serious clown fail.

      1. Are you talking about posts or comments? Three of the last ten posts are mine. If you meant comments — uh, look harder. (Or don’t. Seriously.)

        1. With respect to the cross-posts on this topic over at the Orange Juice Blog, 5 out of the 10 “comments”, are yours. The fact still remains. How is this a discussion when you make up half of the “posted” content/comments. You must love hearing yourself type.

          I love how you can’t help yourself to prove that you are “Well, Actually…” person. 🙂

          1. Well, actually… ehh, forget it.

            If you look elsewhere, especially for weekday posts, you’ll see discussion. But … don’t.

  31. I was looking at financial support provided to SSSSSSSSSilva in the 2006 election and noted that the SSSSSSSSSSSilva’s fundraising was primarily came from out-of-town developers and the Slidebar Cafe….

    ‘http://cityoffullerton.com/Weblink8/DocView.aspx?id=391780&dbid=1

  32. Greg Diamond :
    What “campaign for Mayor”? Fullerton doesn’t elect a Mayor directly, like Santa Ana or Irvine. Candidates all just run for Council.

    Did you understand the gist of the post or are you just being your normal difficult self ? Do you really want to split hairs about whether Sharon Quirk Silva is sponsored by the Fullerton Police Officers Association, and their watering hole, and I do mean hole, “The Slidebar?

    http://cityoffullerton.com/weblink8/1/doc/300589/Page1.aspx

  33. Greg Diamond :
    You know why people take money from the police unions? Because they have it to give out and they do it. That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t create problems; it means that receiving money from them is not an automatic sign of corruption. Not everyone can be funded by a wealthy iconoclastic businessman.
    For the record, if it matters, I’m not seeking money from them — not because I think it would mean that I was “bought” but because I know that they have contributed heavily to Bob Huff.

    quid pro quo. No one gives you money out of the goodness of their heart without wanting something back in return.

    I hope you realize that the FPOA has a published manifesto about attractive characteristics ($$$) to be found in candidates for City Council, as well as an extensive interview process with each and every candidate that they choose to support.

    So if you think that the FPOA is giving their money away to whomever asks them, think again.

    1. Not only do I not think so, but I never said so. I’m sure that, like most donors, they want access to make their case. It may be that, like many donors, they want some sort of an oath of fealty. But the theoretical possibility of a quid pro quo doesn’t mean that there is an actual arrangement for a quid pro quo. And there is a whole lot of room between “they give money to those whom they think will support or at least listen to them” and “they give out money to all passers-by.

  34. Greg Diamond :
    You know why people take money from the police unions? Because they have it to give out and they do it. That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t create problems; it means that receiving money from them is not an automatic sign of corruption. Not everyone can be funded by a wealthy iconoclastic businessman.
    For the record, if it matters, I’m not seeking money from them — not because I think it would mean that I was “bought” but because I know that they have contributed heavily to Bob Huff.

    …DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE THAT GREG?????

    http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2011/peer-into-the-thought-process-of-the-fpoa/

    1. I believe that they’re like most other donor associations, as explained in the comment above.

      I can tell you that in my dealing with unions, I’ve made clear that I’m in favor of the union movement generally, that I will listen to what they have to say (regardless of whether they contribute), but that I will not promise to support what they want all of the time or even most of the time, though when it comes to “existential threats” (as opposed to, say, wanting a few more jobs in exchange for the Anaheim hotel giveaway) I expect to be on their side regardless of contributions.

      I don’t know whether they’ll contribute or not, but that’s an example of what I think is responsible solicitation of donations without even approaching a quid pro quo.

      (I presume that, as a donor, Tony does pretty much the same. I haven’t approached him either and don’t expect to.)

  35. Greg Diamond :
    You know why people take money from the police unions? Because they have it to give out and they do it. That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t create problems; it means that receiving money from them is not an automatic sign of corruption. Not everyone can be funded by a wealthy iconoclastic businessman.
    For the record, if it matters, I’m not seeking money from them — not because I think it would mean that I was “bought” but because I know that they have contributed heavily to Bob Huff.

    Um, say, Greg. Do you have a real job?

    1. Yes. It involves working on cases at my computer, most of the time, which makes popping into blogs over the course of the day easy and kind of a nice break.

      1. You sure take a lot of “breaks.” Can you really afford to do that, or are you some sort of super-genius?

  36. Greg these are two questions I try to ask any candidates running for state or federal office.

    1. Have you ever been to, attended or visited Bohemian Grove?

    2. Are you a Freemason?

    1. No and no. Member of the Illiminati or Opus Dei? No and no.

      Member of the Skull and Bones society? I’m sorry, can you repeat the question?

      1. Good one, Mr. Diamond (credit when credit is due); and weren’t many of those who attend(ed) the festivities at Bohemian Grove wealthy and/or Republican? And possibly misogynists as well (e.g., keep the little woman in the kitchen)?

  37. “Greg Diamond :
    You know why people take money from the police unions? Because they have it to give out and they do it. That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t create problems; it means that receiving money from them is not an automatic sign of corruption. Not everyone can be funded by a wealthy iconoclastic businessman.
    For the record, if it matters, I’m not seeking money from them — not because I think it would mean that I was “bought” but because I know that they have contributed heavily to Bob Huff. ”

    God dog I thought this depth of pretentious, stuck up, arrogant thought only existed in the movies. You truly have a superiority complex towards anyone outside your circle -you big douchebag -and for the record, these people are not cowards, that is reserved for you, Mr Belvedere. It has nothing to do with knowing the identities of people-it has to do with character and heart, neither of which you have demonstrated you have above average.
    So we all know your name? so? You weren’t seen protesting every saturday at a kelly thomas protest, you arent the one who is demanding an end to corruption, you aren’t the one who found out there was a camera that caught the entire Kelly Thomas murder, you arent the one who is at city council meetings every tuesday to demand justice and to make sure to keep tabs on things that should be watched without having to do this. You arent the one who gets mailers with false allegations sent to the entire city of which you live in, you arent the one who is constantly slammed without proof for doing the right thing.
    You are a big blowhard zealot without alot of anything going on inside.

    Jerk.

    1. I’m also not one of the ones all over the site who argue that this is ALL about police corruption and NOT AT ALL about how cities treat their homeless populations.

      Yeah, attacking someone (especially a non-officeholder) personally from the protection of anonymity is cowardly. If you don’t see that, it’s going to be impossible to convince you. As for getting slammed for one’s activism — yeah, I’ve only been dealing with that for about 35 years now. Guess what? It gets way worse than this.

      Thank you for your activism on the Kelly Thomas matter, which I supported. While a terrible and important tragedy, though, it’s not the only one in the world. I’m interested in what you think, for example, about the Trayvon Martin case.

              1. I did not read the posts or prior posts closely…just saw the question you asked about the Martin case and typed my question to you about the specifics of your question….I was curious what you were specifically asking about the case.
                I was genuinely asking.

                1. merijoe criticizes me for not having engaged in on-the-ground activism on a single matter (although I did write on it and take part in one action), but there are many issues that call for action. I don’t think that everybody has to have to do the same specific activist work that I do. My feeling is — there’s plenty to do; find a spot and get busy.

      1. “I’m also not one of the ones all over the site who argue that this is ALL about police corruption and NOT AT ALL about how cities treat their homeless populations.”

        Sorry, I just had to jump in here.

        That above statement makes me cringe. Mr. Diamond, just what exactly are you hoping to accomplish here? It is NOT all about the FPD. It is the whole shebang, from the top to the bottom of the city’s wretched leaders.

        Have you read any of this blog from July and August of 2011? Most, and I can’t speak for everyone, have been brokenhearted about the way the homeless, have been treated by the FPD. Then there’s Kelly Thomas who paid the ultimate price for being mentally ill. I really hope you can see that at some point.

        I don’t live in Fullerton, but CSUF is one of my Alma Maters, and I had my graduating ceremonies on the lawn of the Hunt Library. Fullerton has a special place in my heart, and I have been riveted by the unfolding events in this city.

        The people who are behind the recall are my heroes, because they don’t just talk–they DO! And they are making changes. Quite an inspiration.

        I usually let the folks here on FFFF talk amongst themselves when it is about the nitty gritty stuff with the election and each of the candidates. But now I sit here after a long day and see that you have taken over this blog. What’s up with that?

        By the way, there’s quite a cross section of people on this blog, with varying levels of education. So what! We learn to say what we say and then we move on, always trying to ignore the clever trolls.

        Sigh…maybe that’s just the way you are. You don’t know when to quit.

        1. Jane — thanks for the comment (believe it or not.)

          I’m replying there to a commenter (or maybe two) who said earlier today that it WAS all about the TV, in the context of making fun of Sharon Quirk-Silva’s also saying that Fullerton had to do a better job of dealing with its homelessness problem. I agree with your take on it — police brutality is a significant issue, but not the only one.

          I read FFFF off and on at that time and since. My intense involvement here since Saturday was triggered by a personal attack (for which no one takes credit.)

          In some ways, I like not knowing when to quit, as I think that many people quite too early. Thanks again for the civil comment.

          1. I love a good profanity session, but I think points are made better when that is left out.

            O.k., so you feel a personal attack. I understand that. I hate them myself, and then I get over it.

            Someone touched on something that you found offensive. I can understand that too.

            But trying to convince them of I- don’t- know-what is like leading to horse to water and trying to MAKE them drink.

            JMHO

            1. It’s sort of like get cut off or flipped off when your driving and minding your own business on the freeway.
              I never really take it personal, because A) I know that these people don’t really know me, and B) I watch these same drivers drive ahead of me and ride the tail of the next car in the same manner that they did to me.
              Bottom line is that I want to arrive home smiling and loving the people who really DO care about me,and I can’t do that if I take everything that happens to me on the way home on the freeway personal.
              In golf, as in life, it’s now how you drive, it’s how you arrive.

  38. Hang on — I think that maybe this is a fake Sean Mill. That’s not how he usually insults me. Sean, if that’s actually you, follow up with an e-mail.

  39. In my opinion, FFFF would be greatly respected as it should be if you allow people like Greg here to say what he wants to say even if you clearly don’t agree with it. If you really want people to come here, see what FFFF has to offer and take it seriously, people should lay off the personal attacks, judgements of the person, insults, etc. New people (as I am) should feel welcome and be able to say what they want to say without feeling unwanted. There are going to be people that have different opinions, but at the end of the day, anything more than a debate on a blog seems.. well, like a troll calling another troll that he or she is a troll.

    1. Um, who has denied Greg the opportunity to say whatever he wants?

      Tagging somebody as an ignoramus doesn’t deny him the right to keep babbling.

      If you feel unwanted that’s a personal problem.

      1. yes, but it doesn’t keep on topic by taking it to a personal level.

        But you could see that calling him names regardless if he deserves it or not could discourage him to ever coming here. Maybe not him but other Fullerton residents as well.

        1. He doesn’t live in Fullerton and I sincerely doubt he any real interest in Fullerton other than promoting Sharon Quirk and maybe protesting capitalism here.

          1. Just Asking :
            He doesn’t live in Fullerton and I sincerely doubt he any real interest in Fullerton other than promoting Sharon Quirk and maybe protesting capitalism here.

            I will agree with that as I see what he is saying here and on his own website. But that is not my point. Somehow, his website is link here and he does support the recall as I read somewhere. I think he deserves some respect for that. I could see how “Friends” are upset because he is overstepping this blog to support a fellow democrat, but at the end of the day, this is about change for the better for Fullerton. Ignoring everything else is best to focus on the real task at hand. At this point, the recall needs all the support it can get.

            1. Wrong. It’s not about supporting a Democrat it’s about supporting a politician who said she was going to do something and at the first opportunity to keep her promise, waffled hard.

            2. I’ll make this my last reply in this story for a while, which I’m sure will be a relief to us all. (That just means that I’m turning off automatic mail notifications, of which I’ve received more than 200 this week.)

              And, on reflection, I’ve decided to post my thoughts in Orange Juice instead of have them tucked away in a comment here. It may take a couple of days to write them. Tony has my permission in advance to republish it in its full and unedited form.

              Thanks to everyone — well, almost everyone — who has posted. It’s been occasionally enjoyable and relentlessly educational. I do hope that on June 6 there is no longer a three-man traditional-conservative Council majority.

              1. Yes, I’m sure it’s past time for you to run along now. After all, the billionaire anti-capitalist George Soros, dictator Hugo Chavez (“A, anti, anticapitalista”), AFL-CIO director Richard Trumka, Jimmy Hoffa, terrorists Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn, et al. are counting on your continued support to help convince more Occupy college students into thinking that these communists truly have our nation’s best interests at heart.

                BTW, are you doing pro bono work for Occupy 2012, for the “good of the collective”? Or, are you earning a very comfortable living via Occupy’s generous sponsors, such as George Soros, who specializes in collapsing the currencies of entire nations? http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=47009

      2. FYI, Greg Diamond recently threatened to sue me to force me to reveal the IP address of a commenter on my OC Politics blog. He is yet another blowhard anti free-speech liberal.

    1. The save our asses “campaign” is clearly in full force here and in parts of Fullerton.

      They’re not going down without a fight.

  40. ~~~ New Banners for the downtown~~~

    The best way to bring healing to fullerton is not hundreds of” I like Fullerton” banners but to have the officers involved in Kellys death answer for it. Kelly was a resident in our community. Who had the right to tell him to leave the downtown? Why did our officers who are sworn to protect and serve tell him he couldn’t stay here? He was told to leave according to an eyewitness account of a taxi driver. ” I love fullerton” Should represent all the peoples of the city not just a select class who shops there.

    http://www.ocregister.com/articles/fullerton-346362-harbor-banner.html

  41. Since when is losing a vote a winning strategy? For those of us who want the 10% water tax repealed let’s hope that Quirk-Silva and Whittaker are savvy enough to get at least one of the token Republicans to go along and “do the right thing.” Notwithstanding the Assembly race where Whittaker and Quirk-Silva can’t both win, I’ll tip my hat to them for doing the right thing for the residents of Fullerton when the time comes and we get a vote by the full council to repeal the water tax. It’s called “political maturity,” a rare thing among politicians these days.

    1. Is it possible someone will vote AGAINST repealing the 10% water tax? What could possibly be a reason for not voting for a repeal? just wondering

    2. I wouldn’t do any hat tipping until they actually do something. My guess is Quirky will never do the right thing. Not unless pushed up against the wall.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.