Yes on K Fraud Funders, Followers and Flounderers

No on J K

By now you Friends are well aware of the flaming crash and burn known as Yes on K – the $300,000,000 Fullerton Joint Union High School bond grab that was hammered at the March 3rd polls. Yes, we know about the scam: the last minute approval, the deceit and flim-flam, the illegal use of public facilities and personnel to foist this bureaucratic-inspired, taxpayer funded joyride on the public.

Maybe the worst offense by the educrats and their pals who worked behind the curtain for Measure K was the way in which the legal campaign reporting requirements were mysteriously dodged – no records of the Yes on K campaign were to be found on either the Secretary of State’s website, or on the Orange County Registrar of Voters’ pages. How come? We’ll never know because those in charge of such things don’t care and know they are shielded by a system that tolerates it.

But that omission spurred a complaint by anti-K activist Tony Bushala, whose complaint produced, finally, an actual record by the Yes On K Committee. Now we finally get to know who funded this dumpster fire, who organized it, and who profited by it.

First, let’s examine the names of the contributors. You’ll notice that there aren’t very many. And please note that there are are no citizens listed. None. Just parasites of the educrational system: architects and engineers, all. People who have been cajoled, sweet talked, coaxed into giving money – lots of money – to the cause.

Something called Ghataode Barron Architects got stuck for an amazing 50 grand. Let’s remember that name, folks. Another happy contributor was pjhm, a lower case sucker looking to make bank on our dime. And there’s an architectural consultant from North Carolina? Really? Our overpaid administrators had to work overtime to find somebody across the country , Little Diversified,that was dumb enough to be shaken down for a lost cause. Obviously, the Newport Beach office didn’t inform corporate about how little $49,900 buys you in Fullerton these days. Finally, let us not overlook PBK, another architectural operation that has gotten greasy-fat off over priced school construction.

Fortunately the campaign filings also reveal some of the educrats who got themselves reimbursed out of petty cash for “phone bank supplies,” whatever that means. Here they are:

Hmm. Will Mynster. Now where have I seen that name before? Oh, right Principle of Troys HS and an architect himself – an architect of illegal use of public school resources and property for campaign purposes. Renee Gates is an Assistant principal in the district. So is Dan Sage. So is Caroline llewellyn. So is Jacqueline Barry. So is Marvin Atkins. So is Marcene Guerro. So is Steve Garcia. So is Belinda Mountjoy. So is Katie Wright. So is Jill Davis. Adam Baily has graduated to full-fledged principal. Todd Butcher is the guy in charge of construction for the district – a guy whose livelihood depends on a flow of cash from these massive bonds. What these six-figure educrats were reimbursed for remains a secret, although one supposes that manning the phone bank as the campaign took on salt water required lots of pizza and red wine. The real point here, of course, is that the whole operation was run by well-paid public employees with a personal interest in the outcome – and no private citizens, at all.

Ms. Moss smiles. The suckers were in need of a little wallet lightening…

And finally we come to the campaign consultant, who, along with some unnamed bond salesman shares the credit for this fiasco, although we should be thankful for their failure.. The name is Clifford Moss, who charged the District, er, um, the Committee over $30,000 in “fees,” not counting what they raked in as overhead on stuff like crummy mailers and yard signs. Clifford Moss. Hilariously Cliff’ got their ass handed them by a local guy, Tony Bushala, who didn’t cost anybody else anything. And it looks like Clifford Moss’s Laura Crotty, who somehow managed to spend fifty bucks on name tags, won’t be bragging about her 2018 100% campaign win rate anymore.

The Yes on K campaign blew over a hundred grand, outspent the opposition 10 to 1 and still lost in the “Education Community.” For those in the business that might suggest a rough road ahead – almost as bad as Fullerton’s notorious potholes. But the K Committee left almost 90 grand in the locker room, so don’t be surprised Dear Friends if they don’t try to slip this onto a future ballot at the end of some little-advertised board meeting.

 

21 thoughts on “Yes on K Fraud Funders, Followers and Flounderers

    1. The Fullerton Harpoon

      Glad you picked up on that. There are other important clues of collusion by district employees, too.

      Reply
      1. Anonymous

        Yeah, like the Assistant Superintendent of the district, Joan Velasco, was the treasurer for this ill-fated venture.

        Reply
  1. Anonymous

    I hope Mr. Bushala continues to press these criminal issues with the useless district attorney and Secretary of State.

    Reply
  2. Anonymous

    You forgot to mention that last year the FJUSD “Foundation” threw $30,000 into the slush fund. Is this a 501(C)3 or is it a PAC?

    Reply
    1. The Fullerton Harpoon Post author

      Maybe, maybe not. It would be interesting to find out how much work time was spent on this endeavor. I think a PRA request for e-mails and texts might be in oder.

      Reply
  3. Professional Consultant

    No RESPECTABLE architectural firm would have contributed like this. There’s now at least one former architect that’s looking for a job. Great job following the money!

    Reply
  4. Anonymous

    Just wait until the city employees get their next contracts like Other cities recently received. You guys will be paying more.

    Reply
  5. Anonymous

    Look at the Troy and Sonora websites. Look under admin and you will recognize all the names listed in the article. Disgusting! This administration is crooked and shady AF! Meanwhile the board pretends to care about the children and turns the other way. Lets remember that board member Bucchi was the only one to vote against the bond measure. Two members are up for re-election in November, Montoya and Fawley.
    Thank you Tony! Keep going!!!!!

    Reply
  6. John R Hogerhuis

    Why is it “crooked” for the people that know what funds the schools need to contribute to campaigns to acquire funds the schools need to make improvements?

    Administrators would know, and they are also citizens so, not a conflict.

    Reply
        1. John R. Hoogerbooger

          Sometimes I get us so confused that we have to start all over again from the beginning. It’s just easier than trying to figure out all that stuff.

          Reply
    1. John R. Hoogerbooger

      Ah, once again we are deliberately dense. Or just stupid. I can’t remember which is which with us I I keep telling us to keep our mouths shut. It never helps but I keep trying to give us a helping hand. Job.

      Reply
  7. O B Morton

    Why didn’t the Calstrs and Calpers goons appear on the list? I have a hunch it has something to do with the North Carolina folks. I bet there were a few big California donors siphoning funds to NC school bond efforts.You know: You scratch my back I’ll scratch yours.

    Reply
      1. John R. Hoogerbooger

        We rage on rags, yes we do. Sometimes we get so mad we want to hit ourselves in the face. And then we do.

        Reply
  8. Lab Rat

    Did anyone else notice that while there was reimbursement for “phone banking supplies”, nothing was mentioned about the actual phone bank? Did someone have 10 phone lines in their home that they were good-hearted enough to let the pro bond people use? Or, as I suspect, did they use the district office or school phones? If it was either an actual for-pay phone bank or someone donated the use of their company phones, it should have been listed in the campaign filing.

    And they certainly shouldn’t have been using district assets for the phone calls.

    But I guess these are details that all the little people like us don’t need to know.

    Reply
    1. The Fullerton Harpoon

      More good questions. There were fee payments to “Call Hub” listed that I presume were for robo-calls. There are no expense items that describe setting up a physical phone bank.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.