Fullerton residents owe Councilwoman Sharon Quirk a big thank you for her stellar performance at last night’s City Council meeting. Quirk displayed responsible leadership and accountability to the citizens of Fullerton. Furthermore, she made a decision that saved Fullerton taxpayers $6 million while taking the leadership role in quashing the controversial McDonald’s move.
The best part of the night was that she was humble enough to admit error; she had previously supported McD’s McMove, but she realized that move was detrimental to Fullerton taxpayers and she had the courage to stand on principle.
Additionally, she tried to save the city/agency plenty more by voting against the RDA’s bogus blight findings that it is sure to lose in court.
We are proud to have Sharon Quirk as a Friend For Fullerton’s Future.
Dick Jones can’t seem to understand that it is ILLEGAL to expand Redevelopment for the bogus reasons he babbles about. “Blight” must exist in order to legally expand Redevelopment, and it doesn’t exist. This clip is 7 minutes long, but it’s well worth the watch.
Dear Friends, a few weeks back Friends for Fullerton’s Future filed an appeal of the appalling decision by the Fullerton Planning Commission to grant a bogus “special event” permit to Roscoe’s in order to legitimize the ongoing violation of the City ordinance regarding outdoor live amplified music in the C-3 Zone. The appeal was based on the fact that playing live amplified music outdoors is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare of persons visiting, residing or working in the neighborhood and is injurious to property or improvements in the area.
We are pleased to inform you that as a result of our appeal, Roscoe’s has withdrawn their application, therefore no public hearing on Roscoe’s appeal will be necessary.
What's that in the background, more McSpanish McMission Revival?
On July 7th at 6:30, the Fullerton Redevelopment machine is revved up and ready to shove the $6 Million Dollar burger plan, fake old and all, down the public’s throat.
APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER: FULLERTON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY.
A request to construct an approximately 4,400 square-foot drive through fast food restaurant for McDonalds in a Community Improvement District, which includes applications for a minor (doesn’t sound minor to me) development project for the site plan and architecture (fake old crappolathat people are sick of), and a tenative parcel map for lot consideration and lot line adjustment purposes, on property presently located (and owned by the Redevelopment Agency, ie. tax payers) at 501 N. Pomona Ave. (N.W. corner of Chapman and Pomona, across the street from Fullerton High School), (Categorically exempt under Section 15332 of CEQA Guidlines).
How could this project be exempt under CEQA? It’s a proven fact that this project will be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the kids attending Fullerton High School and injurious to property or improvements to the area. This McD’s project is a part of a larger project which must be considered ONE project! I smell a Mclaw suit ! ! !
Hat tip to one of our readers who just informed us that Matt “Jerbal” Cunningham over at the Red Clownty blog just reported that Anaheim Councilperson Lorri Galloway has announced that she is going to run for Supervisor Chris Norby’s termed out 4th District seat. This is terrible news for Tom Daly and Harry Sudhu as Galloway’s presence in the race will split the Anaheim vote, but great news for Fullerton’s Shawn Nelson. When asked what she would bring different to the Board of Supes, she said, “I also intend to bring something different, like way cute shoes!”
Loyal Friends, on June 16th the city council again demonstrated why the process behind selecting the boundaries of the proposed expansion area are almost completely arbitrary. The council voted 3-1 to remove 7 selected properties from the area.
The criteria employed in the deselection are these:
the properties are on boundaries,
they are not necessary
and the owners simply ask to be removed.
Now some cynical folks might surmise that these exclusions were just done to shut people up, including former Congressman Bill Dannemeyer, in fact we have already suggested that very same thought.
What is inescapable is the conclusion that if these 7 properties are not necessary than they never should have been included in the first place. How many haphazard lines drawn on a consultant draft table include non-blighted properties? The statistics presented by the lone dissenting vote, Shawn Nelson suggest very many indeed.
We suspect the city staff and their consultant are pursuing an age old strategy: grab all you can, get, and then hang on to as much of it as you can.
The Fullerton Observer continues to sink to new lows in its coverage of important Fullerton issues. Or lack of coverage.
In its most recent edition it published a redevelopment article which was simply an interview with RDA Director Rob Zur Schmiede, whose very job depends on RDA expansion. Wow, that’s cutting edge investigative journalism!
The Observer has totally ignored the RDA’s $6 million McDonald‘s move. An evil corporation making kids fat, a giveaway to the rich, money intended for blight going to promote junk food! Fast Food Nation was written by muckraking journalists that the Observer should emulate. $6 million to help McDonald’s make high school kids fatter!
McMore please
The Observer has completely ignored the story that has excited even usually tepid reporter Barbara Giasone. They will NOT embarrass the council majority that it helped elect with their endorsement. Jones, Bankhead, Quirk, Keller were all backed by the Observer.
Could it also be that the Fullerton RDA–is paying for quarter page ads in the Observer?
The Observer has published two pieces by Supervisor Norby expressing the County’s opposition to the RDA expansion, but only afterleaking both articles to city staff in time to write rebuttals. The rebuttals themselves are not fact-checked by anyone and are filled with lies.
In the current July 2009 edition (Page 4) Kennedy bewails the 1994 recall of Bankhead after he “voted to support a ½ cent utility rate increase to keep the city from going bankrupt”. Three wrong statements in one sentence!
is that you Molly?
It was NOT a utility rate increase, but a utility TAX on gas, water, electricity and cable TV. It was NOT a half cent but 2%. It did NOT keep the City from going bankrupt. In fact, it was repealed soon after the recall and has saved us Fullerton tax payers over $ 100 Million dollars over the past 15 years and the City is just fine!
True to form, the Observer has supported every city, county and state ballot measure that increased taxes, most of which went down in defeat. It especially likes sales tax hikes, which disproportionately affects the poor–the supposed constituents of a “progressive” paper.
Hey Pam, put your hands out and see if you can catch this, ready
Dear Friends, we have spilled a lot of cyberink on the subject of the McDonald’s relocation fiasco, and it really seems to us that it is about time for our elected leaders to explain just what is going on and how they got to this point.
No doubt Bankhead, Quirk and Keller believe that they are simply following an inevitable path dictated by years of planning and simply can’t be altered.
Knock-knock! The contract hasn’t even been voted on yet! It’s scheduled to come before the Council/Agency July 7th. Until then, there is no inevitability, only careful deliberation….we hope! You’re rubber stamps for the daydreams of long-departed staffers! You were elected by US to be stewards of our cash. Is this the best use of $6 million of OUR $$$?
When you are spending $ 6 million to move a fast food franchise 150′, you had better be damned sure why you are doing it, and you should be able to explain clearly why there are no better alternatives.
We suggest that it is high time for a complete review of the entire Fox project history, strategy, and consequences, especially while there still may be time to consider intelligent alternatives.
Downtown Fullerton was once an enchanted part of the city, complete with significant buildings and full of character. Comparing a photo of downtown in the late 1950’s to the same street today is like looking at two completely different places. The before pictures depict a hip and high-energy part of Fullerton. As opposed to the after snapshots, which show mundane building colors and sparse streets. An apparent combination of incompetence and ignorance has ruined the urban feel of our city and possibly the last piece of originality that Orange County had to offer. Where are we supposed to look for our city’s history and former glory, if not in our downtown area?
We need to take a look at our city’s recent history and begin holding people accountable for their mistakes and in turn, create a new thought process that can revive Fullerton to it’s original state.
