The sweet young “investigative reporter” Elijah Manassero has posted an “opinion” piece at the Observer blog. No investigative research was necessary for the Kennedy Sisters’ cub reporter. It’s all sanctimonious cant about how Fred Jung and Nick Dunlap have demonstrated “how not to run a city,” by delaying a necessary tax increase, and of course by getting rid of the ever incompetent Jennifer Fitzgerald lackey, Ken Domer.
Fullerton is in dire economic straits because of the Jung/Dunlap mismanagement, says the youthful bud Elijah, whose grand experience running anything other than his eager mouth is exactly zero.
But hold on a second!
If I knew what I was talking about this wouldn’t be Fullerton!
It was just a few weeks ago that Shana Charles and “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra and Co. were touting Fullerton’s massive reserve funds, funs so well and amply stocked – $30,000,000 – that Fullerton taxpayers could easily cough up a tiny $200,000 to hand over to undocumented immigrants for lawyers, food and rent.
What, me lie?
So which is it? Is it possible that Charles and Zahra deliberately lied to their acolytes? Or is the situation really as dire as the green sprout Elijah now asserts?
It seems both can’t be true.
I don’t remember…
Fullerton Boohoo is generally so stupid and so lacking in self-awareness that they end up arguing against what they have previously said. This sort of inconsistency is not abnormal for people clinging to ideology over practicality.
The other day my FFFF colleague, Fullerton Harpoon, published a post on a possible move on the part of Fullerton’s annoying liberal claque to drum up support for legalizing cannabis dispensaries in town.
A Hip Hop Drug Guy
It’s really hard to get worked up over Doc HeeHaw’s illegal “hip hop drug guy,” and Fullerton Harpoon was quite right in pointing out the absurdity of the “it costs so much to crack down on illegal stores” as a good argument for legal dispensaries when the real reason to have them is to generate large amounts of cannabis sales taxes and fee revenue.
With the Fullerton budget in parlous condition, cannabis revenue derived from an intelligent program isn’t such an unreasonable idea.
Let’s quickly dive back into history when we examine the previous cannabis dispensary ordinance and its revocation in 2020 and 2021.
Throughout 2020 public discussion was held regarding a potential cannabis dispensary ordinance. Public input was clear people wanted a 1000 foot buffer from “sensitive receptors” such as schools, parks, and houses. In fact the consultant’s map that reflected this desire became known as “the People’s Map.”
That was the map approved for recommendation by Fullerton’s Planning Commission. But a funny thing happened on the way to the City Council.
Flory: Was I really hoodwinked?
The ordinance was pushed through by the Council 3-2, in the waning months of 2020, even though an election promised a new councilmembers. Jan Flory, Jesus Quirk-Silva, and of course Ahmad Zahra voted yes. Jennifer Fitzgerald and Bruce Whitaker voted no.
The problem that many saw was that in the modified plan there was now generous latitude of potential locations, even to have a dispensary 100 feet from a residential zone. This latitude was undoubtedly the result of dope lobby pressure on Zahra and Quirk-Silva to increase their opportunities as much as possible, and to “share the pain” as Quirk-Silva put it. The public could shove it where the sun didn’t shine.
The other obvious problem was that the ordinance invested the authority to approve cannabis licenses in the hands of the City Manager, who at the time was the incompetent Ken Domer; the decisions would be shrouded in secrecy instead of transparently, in public
The People’s Map had been sandbagged by Flory, Zahra and Quirk-Silva.
Just said no…
In December 2020 and in the early months of 2021 the two new councilmembers – Fred Jung and Nick Dunlap joined Whitaker in pulling the plug on the ordinance. No one has tried to resurrect the issue – yet.
So I have a modest proposal. Why not go back to the People’s Map? Why not go back to the earlier suggestions that would have banned these stores within 1000 feet of anybody’s residence? In addition, why not require street visibility from a Primary or Secondary arterial so everything is in plain view? Sure, almost all of the cannabis businesses would be in southwest Fullerton – Council District 5, so what? That’s the reality of Fullerton’s zoning code.
As far as other revenue options go, two proposed special sales taxes on the 2026 ballot might not pass as they require 2/3 majority; even if the council waffles toward reverting to a general sales tax there would have to be 4 council votes to put it on the ballot. Are they there? Without these revenue sources the practical financial aspect of cannabis-generated revenue appears useful.
The same argument against a special or general sales tax increase is always there: why should everybody be asked to make a sacrifice for the city’s welfare when the City Council and the hundreds of municipal employees, whose salaries and benefits paid for by the public, have sacrificed nothing?
And here’s a final thought: why not restrict cannabis revenue to specific deployment – such as roads, sidewalks and street lights?
Difficult decisions such as who gets licenses and how many there should be remain. I’m not confident in our existing bureaucracy to regulate this use successfully, but to me an intelligent rethink of the issue that minimizes citizen concerns is not a bad idea at all.
Somebody posted a comment the other day about some guy named Tim Johnson. I don’t know Tim Johnson, and I hadn’t even heard anything about him. I was directed to his performance at the last council meeting.
I would really worry about this guy’s mental and emotional well-being. Or I would if he weren’t such a puckered asshole.
You can watch his performance on the City Clerk’s website. His diatribe starts at 1:49:35 mark, right after young Oliver, the No Account of Montecristo.
It’s become a rather worrisome trend lately for the harangues of a few malcontents at council meetings to vent their angry spleen in increasingly agitated, even violent language and behavior. This Tim Johnson individual is a good example.
Constantly slapping the podium; offering wild gesticulations; pointing at councilmembers; shouting angry and abusive language; this seems to be this person’s stock-in-trade.
There was no substance in Mr. Johnson’s diatribe except hatred for Fred Jung who has not been sufficiently contributory to making Fullerton fun! Like his kindred spirits at said podium he seems to think insulting people is an effective way to get them to do what you want. He also seemed to think he has a right for councilmembers to look at him as he denigrates them.
A little research suggests Tim Johnson organizes a bike parade on the 4th of July. His web presence is something called “Fullerton Loves.” He is therefore qualified to determine right from wrong.
Like many other local oracles he approves of those who gives him attention. Nick Dunlap does, apparently, and so does the relentless self-promoter Shana Charles, the otiose councilmember from District 3. The cops and firepersons go to his parades, I guess. And that is the launching pad for his little rocket: Jung makes backroom deals in a cigar lounge, etc., etc.
I’m glad there is a police presence at council hearings as a handful of angry people try to shout down councilmembers with catcalls from the back rows. The obnoxious Kennedy Sisters have already been escorted out for disrupting meetings. Sooner or later civility is going to have to be enforced by the FPD.
The City of Fullerton has decided that the lawn in front of City Hall has to go. Why? It’s obvious. Grass is a symbol of conspicuous waste, consuming scarce water and providing discomfort to people who believe in self-flagellation as a form of moral rectitude.
There used to be a shallow reflecting pool in front of the building that has been modestly covered up to display the right kind of environmental sensibility. The blame is laid at the feet of the Legislature, but no definition of “functional” is forthcoming.
The City has promulgated a call for ideas from the citizenry in a press release a couple of weeks ago. Re-imagine the municipal front yard! A blank slate! A blue sky! Presumably your idea will save water and respect the ecosystem, etc., etc.
I could make the pitch that the reflecting pool, steps and lawn were part of a neo-formal aesthetic that went along with the 1962 building, but that would be a waste of my time and yours. Somebody has decided that the pool and the grass is offensive to modern sensibility, and provides an opportunity to engage the public in a feel-good Kabuki drama.
Don’t ask, don’t tell…
My guess is “Dr.” Shana Charles is an enthusiastic supporter of this. It’s right up her alley. City staff don’t give a rat’s ass about conserving water use – Hell, the City gets its water for free from the Water Fund. When they waste it, they raise our rates. And raising our rates also raises the in-lieu fee charge, which is just sweet icing on the General Fund cake.
The City uses water everywhere – from all the parks to street medians, to all the City facilities, and nobody is keeping track of the waste or the cost. If they are, they sure aren’t reporting it to the public.
The water needed to green the lawn in front of City Hall is a miniscule percentage of overall municipal use.
Okay, let’s put in a cactus garden; or decomposed granite terraces for bocce ball courts. What the Hell. The world is our oyster! The more expensive, the better. No one will ever compare the cost of revision vs. the savings of decreased water use. We’ll charge it all to the Water Fund! We don’t pay the pay the water fees, the suckers do!
You will be taxed…sooner or later!
This is one of those pantomimes in which the ideologues get to exculpate themselves for our sins. City staff knows this; they also know that either way there’s time and material to be wasted. However, conducting a public dog-and-pony show – a public empowerment farce – is irresistible. And since there’s zero accountability, if whatever choice pursued fails, they can bank on the inevitable and costly remediation of what they just did.
No embarrassing questions will be asked or answered.
Back in March 2025 the Fullerton City Council decided to fire the City’s ambulance contractor and take the responsibility in-house. Why? Well, naturally there’s the official story, which is that there will be some sort of saving, which is nonsense, since it means adding 20 new public employees on the payroll, and was all based on wishful thinking. So instead of shopping out the paramedic business like Placentia did, Fullerton did the opposite, requiring acquisition of ambulance rolling stock and the various other appurtenances like gurneys, etc.
On this Tuesday’s Council meeting Agenda Item #10 proposes a payment plan for this nonsense. Guess what? It looks desperate. City staff is still proposing to finance the acquisition of all the ambulance stuff through acquiring debt, via a master agreement with Bank of America to buy City bonds at a coupon rate of 3.5%, and then use the proceeds to lease ambulances.
Well, there she goes. Don’t worry. There’s more where that came from…
Yes, you read that right. We’re paying for Fire Department empire creation with $2,000,000 credit. The capital repayment and interest on the bonds would amount to $2,175,000 by the time the last bond matures in November 2031. And let’s not forget the dough paid to bond counsel and financial consultants (UFI) who are selling this deal. And oh, yeah, let’s consider there’s now insurance, maintenance, fuel, etc., of vehicles owned by the lessor (BofA), which was all glossed over last April 1st, as was the cost of financing which is over $200,000.
The single Agenda Item #10 staff report sentence justifying the financing is laconic, and notable for what it doesn’t say; that the City still plans to finance the purchase orders for this equipment supposedly issued in April. Here’s all we are told:
“Urban Futures, Inc. (UFI), the City financial advisor, and staff determined private placement financing offers the most beneficial and cost-effective solution for the City.
But there is no explanation why. None at all. Zip. Is the City borrowing $2,000,000 at a lower interest rate that it is making in an investment pool? Who knows? The City Council and the public aren’t informed, just as they weren’t informed when financing was proposed back in April.
The fun aspect of this is that the lease of these ambulances would be rent-to-own, a little con – making the credit-risk-uninformed think they are getting something great. I mean, who doesn’t want to own stuff, right? What good is a owning a six year old old ambulance? I don’t know, but my guess is they depreciate really fast. Maybe even faster than rent-to-own toasters.
He’s on it…
I really don’t know what to say about this completely unnecessary move. If the Council had just voted no on the unsolicited plan from the FFD we wouldn’t be looking at having to cover any loan vig at all. Neither the Councilmembers who voted for this – Zahra, Charles, Jung and Valencia had much if anything to say about this bond/lease back in April.
This is how I bought my first car, a 1991 Yugo!
Of course Zahra and Charles don’t give a rat’s ass about wasting money, especially when they script some sort of feel-good performance. Hopefully, Jung and Valencia will change their minds about this resistible offer, but I’m not optimistic. Maybe Dunlap can talk some sense into them.
With Fullerton tottering on the edge of financial meltdown the Council’s behavior towards the fire department (and its union employees) has been highly irresponsible. In October they accepted a one-time FEMA grant to hire a platoon of new “fire fighters” that we will become completely responsible for in 3 three short years, pensions and all.
No, I’m not optimistic at all. The financial leveraging is bound to be used as a pretext to pass a sales tax increase next year. And what if that fails?
Right after the City Council votes to ban nitrous oxide in Fullerton, they will discuss the creation of an ad hoc (that’s Latin, darlin’) committee of two councilmembers to work with staff to develop sales tax ballot measure language. It’s item #20 on your scorecard.
Well, there she goes
The tax idea was floated by an earlier ad hoc committee, the so-called Sustainable Budget Committee, or something suchlike. That committee ultimately decided to recommend to limit the parameters of the tax to two different special half-cent sales taxes, one for infrastructure and one for our old friend “public safety.” It was probably reasoned that they would get more support than a general sales tax, but they need a two-thirds vote of approval for a special tax – a tough nut to crack.
Of course, a General Tax increase only needs a 50%+1 threshold to pass. But you need a council super- majority – 4 votes – for that to get on a ballot, and that seems highly unlikely.
You will be taxed…sooner or later!
It’s been painful to watch this drawn out Kabuki and it seems as it if will go on at least until the deadline for getting on next year’s ballot. Fortunately there is little chance that Mayor Fred Jung will let the obnoxious and incompetent spendthrift “doctors” Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles anywhere near this language-developing process.
We have all seen the way that these government-written ballot measures twist language and logic to try to fool the public to approve them. The examples are so plentiful they hardly need enumerating. Remember the ill-fated Measure S in Fullerton? Hoo Boy was that some seriously misleading bullshit. Hopefully, Jung can require a simple and honest text without the usual treacle.
My cynical side wonders how much of the infrastructure tax language will actually include funding for the cops and financial bailout for the idiotic firefighter-union-members-as-ambulance-drivers decision, or FEMA FFD expansion grant nonsense. Anyway you cut it you want those well-funded unions on board for the inevitable campaign PR campaign.
Cry harder…
Fullerton Boohoo and the Kennedy Sisters will be crying out loudly that the fix is in by their new bogeyman – the evil Bushala Bloc – and that any ballot measure language will be crafted to fail without the steady guidance of our in-house council “intellectuals.” Tender young sprout Elijah will demand TRANSPARENCY. They may even still squawk about the need for a General Sales Tax increase, after all. But I think that Good Ship Lollipop has sailed.
Sweet flower Elijah Manassero has just lost his temper. Did he miss his midday nap? Does he have a full diaper? Who can say? What I do know is that he has scribbled another of his diatribes for the Fullerton Observer Sisters, piling on their desperate narrative that the owners of Les Amis are victims of some sort of conspiracy in City Hall.
Les Amis sans meubles…
The City finally removed Les Amis stuff from City property a few weeks ago after the aforesaid business spent a decade and a half dodging rent, stalling, trying to weasel out of signed agreements and of course, encroaching onto public space without permit or agreement on several occasions.
The defenders of the indefensible are trying to ignore all the facts of the Les Amis history of scofflawry, and pretend that the substantial 2022 rent increases by the City were insufferable, and hence non-payment justified. And anything that happened before this gossamer pretext is wished into Fullerton Boohoo’s collective cornfield.
Off you go. We’ll hear nothing of the kind…
Tender fleur Elijah calls his article a “history,” but conveniently omits most of Les Amis‘ real histoire, and like a typical Observer reporter shares unsubstantiated conversations related to him by Ms. Jinan Montecristo – the alleged victim in all this – as gospel. Young pup Elijah mentions nothing before 2022, of course, and even Les Amis recent spotty history of non-payment goes unmentioned.
Young Elijah pops up in the garden…
Fragile and fresh Elijah has tried to speak with nobody inside of City Hall to get the true litany of Les Amis bad behavior. That would be uncomfortable. He accepts as true what he has been told by the noaccounts of Montecristo without reservation. Did he get any facts from Mayor Fred Jung about the removal of the Les Amis detritus? Nope. Might he have been told that the upcoming discussion of lease rates in the future has nothing to do with lease obligations in the past and due now? Of course. Did he he inquire about the fact that maybe the removal of the stuff happened at 6:30 am so as not to block the adjacent alleyway during business hours? No. That would interfere with the conspiracy narrative.
Found another victim! Of me!
Since the young fleur Manassero visits and cites this blog all the time, he knows very well that his mentor and manipulator, Ahmad Zahra, voted to implement the 2022 rates; and he knows that the Montecristo clan said nothing about it at the June 21, 2022 public hearing. He has obviously decided that these facts aren’t necessary to convey his nonsensical narrative. Why clutter up your prosaic propaganda with embarrassing information?
And why should Fullerton expect anything resembling honesty, integrity, or basic journalistic ethics from The Fullerton Observers and its proprietors – the Kennedy Sister, Sharon and Sitka.
On Tuesday the City Council was presented with an agenda item that opened discussion about a City response to the recent ICE operations and provide some sort of assistance to people being harassed by the masked bandits formally known as Immigration and Customs Enforcement.
How dare you question my origin narrative!
Naturally this bit of boohooing was agendized by Ahmad Zahra, who reminded us he is an immigrant without sharing the fact that he got a Green Card and ultimately citizenship, via immigration fraud, and his pal, Shana Charles who can’t find anything so stupid she won’t go for it. Plus we learned that she has an ex-husband, and this gentleman’s Guatemalan family is under some sort of duress.
What you see depends on where you stand
As usual, Fullerton Boohoo turned out in force to apply pressure to give public assistance to people without legal status in the country. Ahmad Zahra was clear: the broke City can find $200,000 in the municipal sofa cushions to do something for somebody: at least $100,000 for legal defense and at least $100,000 for some undefined daily living/rent assistance. There was no mention of who would administer such funds, who would get them, or any other practical detail. Rome wasn’t built in a day, you know.
I have no problem providing help for indigent citizens who have been wrongfully detained/legally harassed by the ICE goon squad. Citizens who can’t afford legal representation have recourse to public defense in the criminal justice system. But making local taxpayers pay for the legal cases of non-citizens is absurd. There is no question among the intelligent that everybody in America deserves due process. Why this should extend to Fullerton handing out monetary relief for illegal aliens escapes me.
The staff report on the matter, as usual, was equivocation personified, and useless. Halfway through, the staff report jumped ship completely and began describing a residential tenant registry to gather data about housing stability. What the everlasting fuck? It’s almost like somebody in the City Manager’s office cut and pasted something from a whole other agenda item.
Valencia is smiling on it…
In the end a Council majority voted 3-2 for the staff to cook up some sort of resolution to affirm (their) community values and prepare for the necessary budget actions. Zahra and Charles, of course voted to do so; and somehow Jamie Valencia was bamboozled into going along, although she later stated that her vote only meant that the City should act as a facilitatorto some extent, for non-profits, churches, and anybody else who wants to help the newly discovered clientele. Hopefully she directs the City Manager to dump the whole idea of public funding.
Says the 4 year old as he spins around and waves his arms frantically for attention.
Transparency, uber alles!
And so our new acquaintance, lively young fleur Elijah Manassero presented himself after the last city council meeting in another of those pre-written emails to the Fullerton City Council.
Earlier that evening the Council passed a new ordinance making bar owners responsible for the cacophony that emanates from their establishments. At the meeting, tender Elijah, pretending to be a big supporter of small businesses, claimed that the majority of the bar owners were already in non-compliance with the new regulations.
Of course they are are. They’re in non-compliance with the old regulations, too. That’s whole point of putting a stop to the amplified music free-for-all. Sweet Elijah’s conclusion to his “argument” is that bar owners shouldn’t be held responsible because of their…irresponsibility.
Think harder…
But back to the fragile sprig Manassero’s email. The comfy chair he was sitting in in the council chambers was still warm when he hit the send button for his missive to the council. Get a load of this:
Dear City Council,
What I witnessed tonight was deeply disheartening. The decision made by this Council Majority disregarded both the data presented and the overwhelming public opposition. For those who campaigned on transparency and accountability, this vote reflected neither.
Councilmember Valencia – I encourage you to review information before meetings, not during them. The claim that Los Angeles and Orange County maintain 45-55 dBA limits is demonstrably inaccurate. These are residential limits, not commercial. Fullerton’s own consultant, Dudek, explicitly found such limits incompatible with downtown conditions.
Mayor Jung – you dismissed data in favor of personal anecdotes about your visits downtown. The code enforcement logs, which I provided, contained the evidence you seemed to be missing. Instead of engaging with facts, you deferred all reasoning to a donor and then immediately adopted his requested carve-outs. That was not impartial governance.
You also stated that you wish to be “pro-resident” rather than “pro-business.” But when the vast majority of residents who spoke opposed these limits, that justification rings hollow. Outside of one of your donor’s former bloggers, no one living downtown spoke in support. If this vote was truly about residents, then which residents are being represented?
Councilmember Dunlap – I understand the pressures of coalition politics, but I also believe you know when something is wrong. If you continue to vote with those driven by donor loyalty rather than the public good, those distinctions won’t protect you in the court of public opinion.
To Mayor Pro Tem Charles and Councilmember Zahra, thank you for your thoughtfulness and consistency. You demonstrated what it means to listen to the community and think critically about policy rather than reflexively defending it.
For weeks I’ve raised awareness about this issue through my platform. That advocacy led to coverage by Voice of OC and then KTLA, which broadcasted your decision tonight. The public is paying attention, and what they see is a Council majority choosing special interests over small businesses, culture, and common sense.
I said this before and it remains true: there’s still time to change course, but that window is closing. This was the wrong decision, and I guarantee the majority of Fullertonians agree.
I’m disappointed in tonight’s vote, but encouraged that accountability is finally catching up. Please reconsider the path you’re on before it’s too late.
Respectfully, Elijah Manassero
Where to start picking apart this nonsense? You choose. But do linger over the part where the precious rosebud claims credit for media coverage of the issue thanks to his “platform,” whatever that may be.
Sometimes stuff pops up that you couldn’t possibly make up. The latest Fullerton Observer includes a piece co-authored by Curtis Gamble and Sankia Kennedy and features the headline I used, above.
Why write about news when you can try to make your own! (Photo by Julie Leopo/Voice of OC)
To start off with I have to say I can’t think of two people less likely to come up with a potential solution for anything.
Representing bus drivers, homeless, students and all the little people…
Poor Curtis Gamble is just a perpetually discombobulated fellow who takes an opportunity a couple times a month to polish his sense of self-importance at city council meetings, generally offering comments on things he knows nothing about. He presumes to advocate for the homeless, bus drivers, seniors, students, etc., etc.; people who would probably just as soon forgo his representation. Co-author Saska Kennedy is thoroughly annoying too, although she, like her older sister, Sharon, is propelled by the ideological dogma of the self-righteous and sanctimonious left.
Rancho La Paz
Their “article” presumes there is a homeless crisis in Fullerton. And it offers that homeless seniors represent 20% of this crisis. Their potential solution? Use the Rancho La Paz senior mobile home park as some sort of permanent housing for the homeless, moving them into trailers as they are vacated.
I can’t conceive of a worse idea: a village of homeless people assigned property, not their own, to live in and presumably maintain. Somehow the pathologies of homelessness – schizophrenia, drug abuse, living in filth would be rectified by mobile home park living. Cooking, cleaning, job hunting, health maintenance all self-performed by the newly housed, one concludes. Of course professional do gooders from Illumination Foundation (as a for instance) will be on hand to dispense “behavioral” admonitions and the necessary modalities.
The friendly coin collector…
The biggest unstated obstacle, and one that Curtis and Skansia work really hard to ignore is the fact that the mobile home park has an owner. When last I heard, that fellow is a real estate and numismatist named John Saunders who has been villainized by Fullerton Boohoo for raising rents on his ground leases and who, I believe, is highly unlikely to go along with Homeless Village. Well, maybe he would if the City were to reimburse him for rents and maintenance costs and policing of the village. That would cost a fortune.
The article fails to mention that typically land, not the mobile homes are owned by a guy like Saunders. A trailer wouldn’t be available unless purchased by somebody for the homeless purpose, or just abandoned by the owner.
Then there’s the issue of joint sovereignty. The south half of Rancho La Paz is in Anaheim, not Fullerton, so there’s that.
When I was done reading this nonsense I was left wondering its purpose. Is it just gratuitous virtue signaling? A Big Idea hatched by the disoriented Curtis Gamble and advertised by the Kennedy Sisters? Hard to say. But one thing is certain. The piece projects the typical lack of pragmatism that is the hallmark of the Homeless Industrial Complex, so maybe it has a chance – if politicians can be seen to be throwing money at a problem absent results.
