The relentlessly corrupt Nguyen spots unattended cash…
A couple weeks ago the Voice of OC did a couple of stories about the succession of the new Chairman of the OC Board of Supervisors. The first story posited the appointment of the incomprehensively corrupt Janet Nguyen as the new chair, over the then current Vice Chair, Katrina Foley. Foley has been passed over several times. The Voice’s reasoning was that Republicans Nguyen and Don Wagner would vote for the former; Democrats Vicente Sarmiento and Foley would vote for the latter. And our own home-grown rodent, Democrat Doug Chaffee? He has already endorsed Foley’s re-election opponent – a Republican – he thinks so little of her.
Brothers in arms: Chaffee and his mentor, the recently imprisoned Andrew Do.
Not one to miss an opportunity to promote himself (and his wife, Pilferin’ Paulette), the octogenarian made a deal to keep the office for himself another year. The little drama was scripted to make it look like Foley was behind the idea, which is pure nonsense. She didn’t have a third vote and was obviously cajoled into voting for Chaffee so she could remain Vice Chair..
Now here’s a fun snippet from the second Voice article:
Chaffee said he was “looking forward to a little more restful year,” but that he looked forward to using his last year in office effectively.
“I would accept the position if so elected.”
What predictably disingenuous bullshit from this decrepit, evil chipmunk.
But here’s the kicker: there has not been a single mention of Chaffee’s screw job of Foley by the Fullerton Observer that spends so much energy bemoaning the poor travails of “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra who also can’t scrape up that necessary third vote for elevation to the lofty title Mayor of Fullerton.
Personally, I couldn’t care less how the Chairman of the OC Board of Supervisors gets three votes; ditto for the Mayor of Fullerton. Three is three and that’s all that matters. Got your feelings hurt? Stay out of politics. But I have to admit my annoyance (not surprise) by the hypocrisy of the Kennedy Sisters’ refusal to even mention the story of how a liberal woman was kept from her “turn” in their precious uber-liberal rag.
Last night the Fullerton City Council voted 3-2 to amend the lease at the historic train station between the City and Bushala Brother, Inc. (BBI). Jung, Dunlap, and Valencia voted yes. Charles and Zahra no. The later tried to obfuscate and stall, but to no avail.
The Fullerton Observer and its brand new “writers” – political flacks Sweet Young Elijah Manassero and Steve Sherry tried their gosh darndest to mobilize a wave Observer troops to oppose the deal. In the end only a small ripple washed up on the sand to repeat the bullshit talking points they had been fed by Zahra and the Kennedy Sisters.
An advocate for retired real estate brokers…
Comically, some of the self-appointed experts on commercial real estate were the near-homeless council regulars.
Mayor Jung did a good job upfront of clarifying some of the misinformation being peddled, to Zahra’s obvious annoyance.
Staff did an okay good job defending their negotiations against the disingenuous questioning of Ahmad Zahra who kept trying to compare the depot with completely different agreements on completely different properties. Zahra had been challenged for his (in)ability to be impartial and then showed to everybody that he was not impartial at all.
Wants fine dining…
Sheena Charles wanted to talk to the Bushalas about the fact that no restaurant had ever appeared on the loading dock; she made the mistake of engaging George Bushala, Jr. in a conversation that ended in a comical overtalk exchange that left this viewer gasping for air.
According to Bushala, City staff had been causing problems for decades and had been using delaying tactics for years; and of course there was the obvious problem of the piece of loading dock not in the original lease is physically connected to the Bushala portion of the dock – a deterrent to development.
Spinning, spinning…
Dr. Sheena went to great lengths to act out her pretend astonishment. She bemoaned the lack of a “Trevor’s at the Tracks” like they have in San Juan Capistrano (I was immediately reminded of the idiot lefties who periodically demand the City bring a Trader Joe’s into town). She also wanted to know why the wealthy Bushalas (she is just a poor renter, she reminded everybody) wouldn’t give back a piece of gross sales as a sort of philanthropic gesture, I guess.
Mr. Bushala casually suggested her ignorance and confusion demonstrated: “that’s why you do what you do, and I do what I do.”
How dare you! I’m offended!
In the end Zahra pulled his usual “I have questions” that are nothing other than self-righteous speechifying – even interrupting Jung as the latter made a motion to approve the item. After a substitute motion by Sheena and Zahra to keep yakking it up failed, the original motion was approved and the deal was done.
MY APOLOGIES FOR IDENTIFYING THE WRONG HOUSE IN THIS POST. GABRIEL SAN ROMAN IS CORRECT. THE HOUSE IN QUESTION IS ON HILLCREST DRIVE.
That’s better.
Historic preservation, to my inexpert understanding, is about recognizing the significance of buildings that are associated with historic figures and with significant architecture. Enter the home of one Louis E. Plummer, longtime Superintendent of Fullerton Schools in the 1920s, 30s, and 40s. He wrote a useful history of the Fullerton Schools in the early days, I am informed.
Louis Plummer, father of Fullerton’s school systems.
Fullerton Heritage nominated Mr. Plummer’s house as a candidate for recognition as a Fullerton City Landmark. It’s (not) at 104 Park View Road – an attractive red tile roofed house from the 1920s. The item came up at last week’s City Council meeting.
104 Park View Road (not the house in question)
Things got challenging.
You see, Mr. Plummer was a member of the Ku Klux Klan back in the 20s, according to someone’s doctoral dissertation 46 years ago. I no have idea if the assertion is even accurate, but it presented real problems for the two self-righteously woke members of the City Council, namely the Good “Drs.” Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles, who can’t be seen as associating themselves with the Klan, no matter how ridiculously remote.
The same issue confronted the Fullerton Joint Unified High School five years ago and they took Plummer’s name off the FHS auditorium that bore it for 60 years, folding under WoW-style pressure from similar ignoramuses.
Apparently, nuanced conversation isn’t useful when you’re out to score what you think is an easy political layup.
Forget the fact that Plummer was significant leader in Fullerton and contributed to the development of the public education system in Fullerton – the soi-disant “Education Community.” And forget the fact that the house wouldn’t be a damn shrine for White Nationals. And forget the fact that the house is 100 years old and designed by the guy that did a lot of those historical WPA Spanishy buildings at FJC – the old concrete ones – not the new overbearing monstrosities. Forget that the dedicatory plaque will be on private property and will offend nobody. No. KKK.
In the end Jung, Valencia and Dunlap voted to approve the inclusion of the house into the Landmark Register (or whatever they call it). Zahra and Charles voted no. Charles and Zahra both claim intellectual attainment, being “Drs” and all. But if they have any they didn’t dare show it.
Right on cue the Fullerton Observer kraken Skania Kennedy released herself with a headline that blares out:
“Council Majority Approves Controversial Landmark Designation for Ku Klux Klan Collaborator Louis Plummer’s Residence“
Suddenly a public conversation requiring some sophisticated thinking becomes an attack on Sasksa’s favorite villain – Fred Jung and Co. In weaselly fashion Sansika labels Plummer a KKK “collaborator,” but of course there’s no more proof of that than there is of his being a full-fledged member, based on who knows what evidence collected by the dissertation writer without fear of a defamation lawsuit from a dead man.
It’s pretty clear that this effort is nothing more than a way to blackguard three decent people, and maybe someday supply a theme for a political hit piece.
See my badge? I’m a real journalist!!
Anyway, I’ll let Fran J, the Observers new reality fact checker take us home by responding to Saksia and her sister, Sharon on the Fullerton Observer blog:
As for decisions like the WoW program or the Plummer home designation, these are nuanced matters being flattened into soundbites. The Plummer home, what you refer to as KKK house is historic building that tells a story—good, bad, and ugly. Pretending that preserving it is an endorsement of racism ignores the value of reckoning with our history rather than erasing it. The city isn’t honoring the man; it’s preserving a piece of our past so we can learn from it. The LA Times also reported about the Louis Plummer house that actually better reflects the complexity of that issue which I encourage residents to read if they really cared.
It’s fine to disagree on policy, but let’s do so with the full picture in mind. Mayor Jung isn’t perfect—no leader is—but he’s showing up, making hard decisions, and putting Fullerton on the map in ways we haven’t seen in years. That deserves a fair evaluation, not a list of half-contextualized talking points.
No, it’s not a musical recording. Not exactly. There’s no music, but there’s a lot of singing sad songs and lamentations.
Fullerton Boohoo, old and new…
It seems that what’s left of Fullerton’s Old Guard liberals and a scattering of younger adherents to no-fault government are having a real hard time grasping the reality of the Fullerton City Council’s new commonsense majority. These lefties don’t ask a lot of intelligent questions. They believe in empty abstractions and are happy to regurgitate whatever nonsense is spoon fed to them by the likes of Ahmad Zahra. They are appalled by councilpersons Jung, Valencia and Dunlap who have the audacity to question the go along, get along status quo of unaccountable government.
The meeting on Tuesday, March 4th was a total disaster for the so-called “progressives”
We noted that the idea of exploring charter city status for Fullerton was moved along, despite the all the silly fears of those gathered together by Zahra to oppose the concept.
What we didn’t cover was the introduction of measures to keep people from camping in public places and the protection of public facilities. It’s about time the City decided to end its attraction to vagrants who pose a public safety risk. Those votes were 3-2, of course, with Zahra and Charles siding with the immigrant homeless instead of their homed constituents.
No bueno…
Other issues were agendized, too. There was the topic of a letter opposing an AQMDs ban on gas appliances. Seeing the practical problems of the policy, the majority decided to oppose the measure. The vote was the same 3-2. Since there’s nothing a liberal likes more than following the mandates of completely opaque government agencies, Zahra and Charles were compelled to vote no, citing “public health.”
The following entertaining interchange took place (according to the Fullerton Observer Kennedy Sisters with their usual additions):
Mayor Jung without asking for council comments, said “I will move the item” – but Councilmember Zahra said he had some questions.
Councilmember Zahra made some clarifications, “For those who mentioned this was overreach from the state – this is not from the state. The governing body [SCAQMD] is multiple cities in Southern California, a regional body of members from LA, Orange and San Bernardino counties.” He said the letter merely states that we are supporting this – or not supporting this. So nothing is being imposed here locally whether it [the letter] goes out in the negative or positive. The actual SCQAMD meeting where this will be decided happens on May 2 – so anyone passionate about it can attend that meeting,” he said.
Mayor Jung “Is there a question somewhere in there?”
Councilmember Zahra passing over Jung’s unnecessary interruption went on to say – “The clean air rules are for manufacturer’s not residents and the rules transition gradually. So no one is going to come and take your gas stove. If we are looking at this from a public health view – he said we do have high air pollution in Orange County – those are facts. I think we should stay out of this discussion for now, or – in my opinion – we should support public health. So I am not in favor of sending this letter out.”
Jesus H., speaking of gas emitting appliances…
First, Mayor Jung was actually following Robert’s Rules of Order, in which motions drive discussion, not the other way around. But Zahra had questions, right? Questions? No, that was a lie. he wanted to make yet another campaign speech, and he did. Jung, quite reasonably, lost his patience with the usual Zahra pontification, and asked where the questions were. The “interruption” was not unnecessary since Zahra had already interrupted a legitimate motion; Jung’s was appropriate response to Zahra’s out-of-order speechifying, which Jung did allow to continue.
Naturally, Zahra lied once again, trying to make the SCAQMD look like a sovereign local agency, when in fact it gets its diktats from Sacramento, via the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the Governor, and the Legislature.
Finally, there was a traffic issue, the topic being the signalization of the Euclid/Valley View intersection. Staff supported this, but only by using some sort of grant money, meaning it’s not a priority; the guesstimate for the cost would swallow up the City’s total traffic signalization budget for a year. As a side note, there’s already a signal at the Hiltscher Trail crossing – just a few hundred feet to the north.
Zahra and Charles really wanted to throw half a mil at the problem and move on.
However, in the end the council chose to turn the item back to the Traffic and Circulation Commission for more review and more public outreach. For some reason Zahra pushed for “closure” on this issue, probably just out of spite, and to make the council majority look bad in front of the audience. But since they had no dopey, liberal ideal that could be used to manipulate anybody Zahra and Charles went along with sending the thing back to the TCC.
I was watching the League of Women Voter’s candidate forum a few days ago and I couldn’t help but notice how the Fullerton Boohoo darlings, Jan Flory and Vivian Jaramillo, kept attacking the incumbents for their refusal to “listen to the people.” Well, okay politics.
It’s a total waste of money, but it sure is short…
The two examples cited were the idiotic Trail to Nowhere and the equally stupid Walk on Wilshire. Ironically, the former was approved unanimously by the City Council; and Council majorities have kept the latter, the money-losing and annoying “WoW” alive for years.
If I knew what I was talking about this wouldn’t be Fullerton!
The fact is that both of these wasteful and useless “projects’ were the brain children of bureaucrats in City Hall and became the vanity projects of the egregious Ahmad Zahra and the lamentable Shana Charles who were instrumental in both cases in getting people to show up and harass anybody who might be exercising common sense. And right there to create the news and also report on it were the Kennedy Sisters, Skaskia and Sharon, who saw nothing wrong with trying to intimidate downtown businesses in the case of the moronic Waste on Wilshire.
This sort of “public support” is not organic; it’s artificial, and that’s why it’s commonly referred to as Astroturfing. Hence the irony that the same people who ginned up the “support” are the ones braying to demand that the Fullerton City Council “listen to the people.”
Well, irony isn’t the strong suit of people like Flory and Jaramillo. Neither is honesty. But self-serving sanctimony is.
Let them eat dog!
When the the idea of legalizing marijuana dispensaries in Fullerton came to the City Council in 2019, public speaker after public speaker, in English and Spanish denounced the idea as bad for Fullerton. The percentage must have been 30 to 1 against dispensaries. And where was Jan Flory, defender of the untermenschen? That’s right. She was voting to permit dispensaries in the closing months of 2019 – before the election that would usher in a new, anti-dispensary Council majority.
When the new Council revoked the Flory-Zahra-QuirkSilva dope ordinance and the vast majority again being in favor of disallowing dispensaries, guess who was there. Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo, that’s who, the enthusiastic marijuana advocate who proclaimed dispensaries were “right for Fullerton.”
Amazing how these twin pillars of public advocacy had no such interest in overwhelming public opinion when it came to legalized dope and it didn’t suit their ambitions; a public opinion, by the way, that was not ginned up by City bureaucrats, politicians or brain-dying ideologues, but that represented genuine public sentiment.
If you were paying attention in 2022 you may recall that the City of Fullerton went through a redistricting process based on the results of the 2020 Census.
Jan Flory was here…
The legacy of Jan Flory’s “Bar Owner’s Map,” ostensibly created by Douchebag Supreme, Jeremy Popoff in 2016, was fresh in everybody’s mind. Three districts had been gerrymandered with tentacles to reach into downtown Fullerton – in violation of one of the basic tenets of district map making – compaction.
The train of thought was weak but it sure was short…
One consequence of the 2016 map was to give recently elected at-large Jesus Quirk-Silva a shot a running early for the first District 3 race in 2018 against Greg Sebourn, a race that Quirk-Silva won.
Why is this man clapping?
When 2022 rolled around and the Council created a redistricting committee Fullerton’s lefties squealed in displeasure that Sebourn was appointed to it. He’s going to make a district that he can run in, cutting out Quirk-Silva, so they said. How dastardly. Members of the committee must forswear not to run in a district they created, so they said.
Out with the old…
Well, the districts were cleaned up, Quirk-Silva who had been gerrymandered into D3 was removed from it, and Sebourn didn’t run again.
She wants what you have…
But one fact seems to have gone unnoticed by all the self-righteous libs clamoring against the Council, the new map and against Sebourn. And that fact is that current Council candidate, Vivian Jaramillo, the person who sued the City to make a district she could run in, was also on the Redistricting Committee.
Not only did she support new gerrymandered maps that would protect Quirk-Silva, she supported the district she is now running in. How’s that for ironic hypocrisy?
But it’s not surprising. In their sanctimonious world, the boohoos of Fullerton’s left can’t accept the possibility that their own interests and beliefs might be effected by any sort self-serving or let alone bad behavior, which is why no one mentions the unethical and possibly illegal effort by Team Jaramillo to work a phony candidate on the ballot, a sham candidate whose only job is to divert votes from candidate Linda Whitaker.
The Kennedy Sisters weed out comments and commenters on their blog that undermine their own partisan narratives. They have no problem, apparently, in letting stand crap that attacks the objects of their hatred. Fred Jung is accused of “unsavory” business practices, romantic infidelities? Really?
Let the lecture commence…
The following has been snipped to share the sort of “journalism” that takes place in the hallowed precincts of the Fullerton Observer:
AmyI think it’s clear what Jung stands for. Not through his inscrutable persona or his public statements, but from his actions on the dais: he stands for Jung, and Jung alone. He seeks power, connections, money. He seeks to climb the ladder politically and somewhat professionally. I believe he deliberately obscures his real job and income source because to do so would reveal more than he would like and invite scrutiny into what could be unsavory business practices. It is clear that he does not stand for the people and that his intentions are not for – and are often diametrically opposed to – the good of the people who elected him to power.
Matt Leslie My earlier reply to Amy’s comment above hasn’t been published, so I’ll try again. Amy, what evidence can you present to justify your belief that Fred Jung has engaged in possible “unsavory business practices?” I think this malicious online speculation about Mr. Jung’s private businesses reflects a certain frustration with the recent audit that found no fraud in the city’s budget on the part of Mayor Jung (or anyone else), despite Jung’s detractors displaying PAC sponsored signs and banners that baselessly suggested otherwise.
FK + TKI’m sure it didn’t help that he was dating Tammy Kim, an Itvine City Councilwoman who was charge with 11 felony counts. He was married the whole time. I agree with the other commenter that the article lacks real metrics, but I agree with the Author, Jung is in politics for Jung.
RobWhat a tired trope. Blaming Tammy Kim means you don’t know what you’re talking about, or you’re too lazy to make a real argument. It also lets him off the hook way too easily. If that were true, I suspect Jung would not have lost so badly. She still has formidable relationships with the Democratic Party and labor, and has helped campaigns across OC for years. Jung lost because of Jung. His campaign, his decisions, his record, his baggage.
Matt LeslieWow, now an accusation of personal improprieties from a completely anonymous commenter. Is this what the Observer now allows on its site?
I wonder if the this garbage is okay with the guard old and new, of Fullerton Boohoo, who believe the Fullerton Observer is actually an objective journalistic endeavor, but woi, in reality, will believe almost anything.
I really think that’s what a lot of last night’s council meeting regarding a proposed development at the northwest corner of Harbor Blvd. and Hermosa Drive was about.
The appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial was the issue and to their credit Dunlap, Jung and Valencia pushed back on the appeal. But the real show was put on by Ahmad Zahra and his stablemate Shana Charles.
First a little about the project. It would cram 32 dinky “townhomes” on a parcel that the City claims is 1.3 acres (it looks smaller); the zoning for the site is R-1-20 which is typical in the old horsey part of town – a minimum 20,000 square foot lot, or about half an acre. But the developer applied for permits during a period when Fullerton’s “Housing Element” was not in compliance with the State regulations; therefore he could rely on “Builder’s Remedy” a harebrained scheme by the State Legislature whereby somebody can cram a whole bunch of units on to a site and fuck you, neighbors. There just has to be mandated and restricted “low income housing” of which our friendly builder was to produce the bare minimum.
Such is our government that the project still needed to be approved by the Planning Commission, and City planning staff recommended approval lest there be spooky lawsuits. The PC bravely said nay, exercising their authority as a discretionary body. The Council did the same.
But it was a fight. Zahra and Charles did their best to defend what can only be described as an out of scale, mini-monstrosity. Five stuccoed buildings with crappy plastic windows; three stories each jammed onto the site with only way in and out. And because of, ya know, low income housing, the developer doesn’t even have to bring power to the site underground!
Zahra tried mightily to show that the PC had no objective basis for their decision given staff’s assurances; but this begs the question of how much due-diligence staff actually put into this to make a balanced presentation in the first place. Apparently there was no traffic study required and because of our wonderful Legislature, “in-fill” projects are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. Staff said there was no basis for a claim of public safety endangerment, a finding, if made, that could be used to reject the project. Zahra tried to undermine the neighbors and the Planning Commission’s conclusions as mere opinion, not fact.
Two of our underserved population?
Charles was just as bad with her usual dumb grin, condescending routine. We have to abide by the State’s diktats and there was nothing else that could be done. And although public opinion is just great we have no choice, yadda, yadda. The ridiculousness of voting on something about which you have no choice seems to have escaped the otiose public health professor. How come you dropped the low income level from 20% to 13%, asked the smiling academic of the developer. Higher interest rates the fellow claimed; both were play-acting. The Legislature previously reduced that requirement over a year ago and of course they both know it.
A few of Fullerton Boohooers got up to present pre-coordinated statements: the need for housing uber alles. Fresh and fragile Elijah Manassero gloated that there was no way to reject this; and we need places for people like him to live, he tenderly beseeched! Of course these folks mentioned the horrible lawsuits coming Fullerton’s way – as if that had ever concerned readers of the Fullerton Observer. The “pastor” who can’t figure out how to button his shirt was there, on cue to preach to us that a city’s character” is more than just scale and density.
Satkia Kennedy on the job…
Sitkia Kennedy could be seen in the fifth row applauding these speakers, presumably before she returned to her role of objective journalist.
Not quite forgotten…
Our old friend Elizabeth Hansberg showed up via Zoom to advocate for the project. We recall her “advocacy group” that advertises her willingness to advocate for a project; developer donations to her non-profit always welcome. She betrayed her affiliation with the comment: “we are providing the opportunity for people to move up…” Of course she gleefully entertained the council with the threat of lawsuits from her legal pals.
In typical Fullerton fashion, the end the issue was punted to May 19th, I guess.
The net result of this proposal, if approved, is only 32 out of the 13,000 new housing units demanded by the SCAG and Sacramento crowd. Only 5 would be deed restricted to low income. The units are meant to be sold at this point so the positive impact for poor renters like Zahra and Charles is virtually nil.
I’m trying to figure out why the Fullerton liberal claque was so het up on this project. I couldn’t think of a good reason except that they thought this was something that would annoy northern Fullertonions – those folks that Zahra is always complaining get all the municipal goodies while his underserved constituents get the short end of the stick.
Is this really about a perceived class distinction of north versus south? I really don’t think there’s anything more involved than that. One of the speakers said it: “The entire city needs to do their (sic) part…”
Yesterday our young and lively friend, sweet Elijah Manaserro published an article on the Fullerton Observer blog. I call it an article because it isn’t a news story – almost devoid of journalistic content – it is really an opinion essay.
Out of the blue our tender sprout decided to elevate an issue completely off the radar – illicit cannabis dispensaries. And he shares the turmoil caused by these unlicensed, unregulated stores. “Whack-a-mole” he calls it, and dramatically claims the cost of enforcement is “staggering.” Of course the cost isn’t staggering at all, but when you are acting on behalf of a huge, monied interest, hyperbole is okay, I guess.
Green means green. One way or another…
Where the green shoot Elijah is going with this is clear. It’s same logic and language used by the Fullerton Observer and by “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra in the past to promote legal dispensaries. Since Fullerton can’t control the illegal activity, we might as well make it okay.
The good folks behind the legal dispensary push – the Dope Lobby – have been trying for years to get this use legalized in Fullerton, and it looks like they’re still hard at work – through the Observer and the green sprig Manaserro, the Zahra acolyte and possibly closed session confidante.
Always look for the union label…
This issue is not peanuts to the Dope Lobby, which consists of two elements: the lobbyists for actual dispensary companies, and the local grocery store workers union who represent dues paying cannabis store workers.
Smoke it down, Kitty…
A year ago the grocery workers local union UFCW 324, no doubt supported by the lobbyists behind the scenes, pumped a staggering $60,000 via the national HQ into a political action committee to get “Cannabis Kitty” Jaramillo elected to represent Fullerton’s 4th District. That effort failed, but the cash motivation endures.
The UFCW PAC paid $4000 to Andre Charles, husband of councilperson Shana Charles, to do some sort of work for the Team Jaramillo campaign; we can assume, I think, that Charles is certain to support a new cannabis ordinance, given her personal economic connection. This means that the Dope Lobby is still just one vote away from getting their majority in 2026 and a revitalized dope zone map.
Still don’t see connections? Guess who Zahra picked to be his representative on the so-called Sustainable Budget Committee?
Not a lobbyist, I tells ya…
Zahra chose Derek Smith, that’s who. He’s The government lobbyist for the cannabis workers a fact that has never excited young Elijah’s curiosity.
But now back to our fragile fleur of an “investigative reporter,” Manassero. He claims (dramatically, of course) that the illegal dispensaries have been “near schools” but conveniently doesn’t say which ones. The few addresses he cites to bolster his essay are no where near any schools. Of course in his dissertation he fails to mention that the previous dope ordinance, passed in the last hours of 2020, before a new council was sworn in, permitted dispensaries within 101 feet of our homes.
Finally, and inevitably, callow young Manaserro directs attention to the real issue: the budgetary benefits of cannabis sales taxes. This has always been a big motivator for MJ support in City Hall, given the fact that general sales tax increases, like 2020s Measure S, are difficult to pass. The proposed special sales taxes discussed last year need a two thirds majority to pass.
I don’t spark up doobs any more, but back in the day…hey that explains a lot about my life’s trajectory.
Here’s my prediction: as spring 2026 advances, we will see Fullerton Boohoo, Fullerton Angry, Fullerton Childish, and Fullerton Fun begin to advocate for legal cannabis stores, and harass the council majority to implement a new ordinance. As the August ballot deadline approaches we’ll hear even more racket from these people.
One of our commenters recently pointed out the “reply” string on a Fullerton Observer post supposedly written by a guy named Kevin Curriston, a chap who doesn’t appear to be the literary type. Some of comments are pretty good. Naturally Sharon, the elder Kennedy Sister, leaps into the breach to validate the theme of the essay. Amy the Angry Little Bird is on hand too, to lend her support.
A guy named Brian calls bullshit on the supposition that 40 public commenters represent anybody but a small percentage of Fullertonions.
That premise is not well-received in Fullerton Boohooville.
I particularly like Brian’s wicked request for Kennedy to share some of Zahra’s vast filmography.
A Mr. Matt Leslie reminds everybody that Zahra’s flipped on his first real decision and in doing so disenfranched a whole bunch of people when he appointed Jan Flory to complete Jesus Quirk-Silva’s term.
Matt LeslieThe author neglects to inform readers that Council member Ahmad Zahra did not attend this important meeting. Although it seems unlikely that other council members would have supported him for mayor, he had the opportunity to support Shana Charles for the position, but was not present to do so.Ed Response: Councilmember Zahra had a work trip out of town so did not attend the meeting.
BrianI see you seem to know a lot about council member Zahra, just what does he do for a living?
Sharon KZahra is a filmmaker. Currently the only Councilmember who doesn’t work is Jung. You can discover this kind of thing through the form 700 financial filings of each Councilmember. – though I notice Valencia has failed to file. Not sure why.
BrianWow, that is fascinating. Can you point me in the direction of some of his work?
AmyDunlap and Jung continue to gaslight the public and delude themselves by saying that public commenters are not representative.Every meeting brings new attendees infuriated by the actions of the majority, but Jung, Dunlap, and Valencia keep telling themselves the public’s voices don’t count. It seems they can’t bring themselves to accept that anyone could possibly disagree with their blatant corruption and repeated defiance of the wishes of the public.
BrianI’d imagine if you took two seconds to step outside your bubble, you may realize that in a town of 140,000+, 30 or 40 people don’t even represent a decimal of a percentage. And just because you comment, it doesn’t make your comments true. Much like this publication and the liberties it takes with the truth all the time.
Sharon KBrian – sounds like you are talking to yourself on that critique. Most people are busy with their lives and don’t pay that much attention. And of course over half of our town’s 140,000 or so residents are children. Others have jobs that interfere with council meeting hours, etc. Some don’t think it is possible to fight city hall. Some are just not interested. Having 40 people show up at a council meeting and speak on an issue is huge. If people didn’t come out we wouldn’t have any trails in town; there would be a polluting flour mill across from Amerige Heights; the toxic park and McColl dump site would not be cleaned up; our museum center would be high rise office building; we wouldn’t have saved FOX or Coyote Hills and much much more. Some politicians – just out for themselves and narrow special interests – can fool people for awhile but eventually the truth of their actions come out
AmyThose who disagree are welcome to attend a city council meeting, but for some reason they have not.Jung received unanimous opposition to his taking of the mayorship at the last meeting. Dozens of public comments unanimously supported creating a fund for immigrant support against ICE raids and kidnappings. Dozens still attended to beg city council not to kill the Walk on Wilshire – twice; the paltry number of voices in opposition were those financially aligned with Jung and Bushala. If opposition exists, it has yet to show up to city council meetings.
BrianLike I said, just because you comment, doesn’t make your comments true. With this statement you proved my point again. Full of inaccuracies. Do better.
AmyI don’t see how, but okay. I’m sure you know best.
Matt LeslieAmy, I opposed Walk on Wilshire for several reasons, not because I was “aligned” with anyone. Please be careful not to be dismissive of the concerns of those with opinions contrary to your own.
AmyI fully respect your right to your opinion, but I do disagree that the bollards – comparable to those used on nearly every trail in OC – were an actual impediment to cyclists traversing the Walk on Wilshire and merited removal of the whole thing. I definitely wouldn’t go so far as to say any opinion I disagree with is invalid. That would be absurd. But the argument seemed so ridiculous as to be disingenuous to me. Perhaps I’m reading too much into it.That said, as one of the fewer than 10 detractors, you’re certaintly entitled to your opinion. I hope the dismantling of the Walk on Wilshire that so many enjoyed brought you great happiness and satisfaction.
FrankStep out of your bubble pal.
Sharon KBrian – if you are talking to me – you are right — I guessed that there are way more children than there are at least according to the stats I just looked up that say there are only 32,000 children under 18 in Fullerton. But when you are figuring out percentages of people think about the fact that – according to the OC Registrar of Voters – only 7,432 voted for Jung; 9,546 for Dunlap and 3,489 for Valencia in the last election. That certainly does not make a majority. Some of those who voted for Jung, Dunlap are among those who have come to council and said they were unhappy with their votes on various things and felt fooled when the vote to keep Walk on Wilshire open – turned into an expansion suggested by the two – and then that vote was postponed until after the election and both Jung and Dunlap proceeded to vote no. Really the point is that we residents of town want a fun place to live that we are proud of where people want to visit and small businesses can thrive. Dulling it down by reducing unique features, curtailing music, outdoor patios, walking paths, safe bike paths, etc does not make our town attractive to anyone. And everything turns into a big fight with residents begging for good decisions. And I am not alone in really hating their recent decision to not help residents targeted by ICE and other weird unfair decisions like not following fair rotation so every district gets chance to have their representative as mayor.
Matt LeslieAnd, by the way, if you want to talk about steamrolling over public opinion go watch the videos of Ahmad Zahra’s first council meetings in 2018. Dr. Zahra first voiced support for a special election to fill a vacant council seat, a position in line with nearly all public speakers on the issue during meetings. But he quickly changed his position entirely, aligning himself with a council majority who disregarded expressed public opinion in favor of an election and instead voted to appoint a someone to the vacant seat.Zahra’s swing vote to appoint a council member instead of holding an election disenfranchised an entire district of the city, instead foisting upon them an unelected representative for the two full years remaining in the council term. This decision was of much greater significance, in my opinion, than choosing a mayor from among sitting council members (something the appointed council member got to do). Where was the concern for “the public” then?
