Will Fullerton’s Pensions Eat the Library and More?

Fullerton Hunt Library

You think we’re full of it when we warn you about the severity of the pension problem in Fullerton (and elsewhere). You think we’re joking about the pension crisis that threatens to eat our city budget whole.

You ignore when Fitzgerald laughs off structural deficits and joins our council in voting for every pay/benefits package our heroes demand.

Well it is a crisis. A crisis of math and a crisis of ethics.

How bad is it?

It’s so bad our City Manager is actively considering giving away property we can’t readily sell to pay what we owe on the pensions.

Here’s an except from an email forwarded by CM Ken Domer to now-former Administrative Services Director Michael B. O’Kelly, CPA asking for his feedback (emphasis added):

I wanted to share information about fairly new alternative funding concept in public pension – funding using “assets-in-kind”.

Followed by:

The concept of using assets-in-kind for pension and OPEB funding is currently being considered by the State of CT. Attached is one of the presentations made during the hearings of the CT Pension Sustainability Commission that explains the approach (PDF document). I thought it may be interesting for you to review. Of course, the approach is not specifically designed for the states, but can be implemented by the local government as well.

Assets for Pensions

Essentially, the pension fund is ready to foreclose on Fullerton.

First we’ll lose worthless assets like the poisoned park, the bridge & stairs to nowhere, some undeveloped land. Then council will vote for some more hero benefits and CalPERS will change the discount rate again and we’ll move on the hunt branch library, the main branch library, the community center, Hillcrest and so forth. At some point we’ll sell City Hall and Council Chambers to the pension fund which would be fitting considering the heroes and their pensions already own our council and staff.

We’ll do all of this because, according to our council majority the budget is balanced.

And because we’re in excellent financial shape.

nothing to see here more along

OC District Attorney Spitzer Goes Limp for Perv Cop

In case you haven’t heard by now, the Orange County District Attorney’s Office which is led by Todd Spitzer, filed a peeping charge against Fullerton Police Officer Jose Paez for filming up the skirt of a 16 year old student.

Let that sink in for a moment. A 16 year old, who Paez was on campus to protect, was his victim under color of authority.

According to the case information the violation date was 11/03/2017 and according to the FPD press release it was found by accident while investigating something else.

Paez Case Detail

Based on the Body Worn Camera audit conducted by FPD we know that Paez also attempted to film up a teacher’s skirt on 08/29/2017 which shows a pattern of behavior.

He also had underage sex videos and photos on a phone in his possession. Apparently chain of custody at FPD, regarding Child Pornography, is so lax that they don’t know who has it on what devices or where it’s stored.

To further complicate the issue, Paez was allowed to schedule deletion of his own Body Worn Camera videos.

Taking into account the potential charges such as peeping on teachers and underage students and possession of child pornography on his phone it seems unprofessional that Fullerton PD wouldn’t contract this case out to another department or agency. This ins’t a case of policy violations to be investigated by Internal Affairs but rather it is one of potential criminal conduct against children under color of authority. The community and students at FJUHSD deserved an objective outside source to look into these issues.

This is something they did not get because Fullerton put their perv officer first and the wall of silence stood still. Not a single officer came forward about Paez. Not a single council member. Not a single school board member. An officer was allowed to prey on our children in his capacity of School Resource Officer and the protected status of the police was more important than public notification.

Thanks to the DA only levying a single charge dating to almost two years ago this smells more like another case of FPD being caught with their pants down than actual due diligence. The priority doesn’t seem to be in protecting our city and our city’s children despite all of the attaboys Chief Dunn gave himself in his Press Release on the issue.

What stopped Paez from sharing nude photos of your daughters with his friends and co-workers? What’s to stop his replacement from doing the same?

Nothing and that’s how FPD likes it so shut up and go back to sleep. They’ll make this go away like so many other cases of criminality by their own in blue and then have the audacity to ask for a raise which council will give them.

This is the upside-down world we live in where justice consists of a press release followed by a likely plea deal where a pervert with a pattern of behavior of preying on women and children while under the color of authority will be allowed to walk with barely a slap on the wrist.

Spitzer is continuing the efforts of his predecessor who refused to file charges against Fullerton Officer Rincon despite groping women in his patrol car during traffic stops. A pattern that consisted of letting off Fullerton Officer Christopher Chiu who forced a naked women to stand for him so he could shine his light up her crotch and then ask for her number.

Sexual predation seems to be A-OK behind the Blue Wall of Silence supported by the brass at FPD, City Hall and the DA’s Office.

We all knew, based on the Jailhouse Snitch program, that there was seemingly nothing the Orange County District Attorney’s Office wouldn’t do to protect bad cops but now that includes downplaying sexual crimes against a School Resource Officer. All to protect a pervert in blue.

When did FPD send the case to the DA? How long did they sit on the Paez problem? Was he fired or was he allowed to quit? Chief Dunn won’t tell you. Did FPD or the DA even ask for potential victims to come forward or were they too worried about the bad press they’d get by possibly uncovering a #PaezMeToo problem they ignored for at least a year?

Meet DA Todd Spitzer, same as DA Tony Rackauckas – a hero for self-proclaimed heroes and nobody else.

Fullerton Cops Label Camera Data Wrong 60% of the Time

It was bad enough when we learned that Fullerton Officers had (have?) no oversight in how they themselves are allowed to categorize videos and schedule them for deletion. Do something wrong like the litany of SB1421 criminal cops? Just change the category to delete the videos and nobody is the wiser.

It was worse that we learned that in the context of Fullerton Officer Jose Paez perving on High School kids and teachers while on the job, including for allegedly shooting video up a 16 year old’s skirt for which he’s being prosecuted.

But it turns out that Fullerton cops label their video files wrong 60% of the time according to Chief Dunn himself:

BWC 60 Percent

“We also learned the way we label data, officers tag the video via an app on their phones, is incorrect 60% of the time.  This contributes to the storage overages and can cause evidence to be missed.”

So when officers aren’t just deleting the videos of their criminal activity, such as Paez did, they’re potentially missing evidence for cases by simply not doing their jobs correctly.

The guys and gals in blue whom we pay the vast majority of our budget to can’t manage to tag a video properly for evidence – when evidence is quite literally one of the most important aspects of their job.

Guess they need more training and raises to justify that training. Bring on Fitzgerald’s taxes to solve this pernicious police problem. Just kidding. We’re paying for software (CAD integration) because a machine is the only thing that can save us from officer incompetence. But we’ll still get hosed with the taxes to pay for their ever growing pensions just you wait.

Fullerton School Board Ignored Issue of Campus Police Pervert

Paez Barista

For those of you paying attention to the story of Perv Cop Paez, I’ll direct your attention to some correspondence with the Fullerton Joint Union High School Board of Trustees from back in December 2018 when rumors of this story first came to light.

This is an email a friend of ours sent to each member of the school board:

FUHSD re Paez

Hi,

I just heard a rumor that a school officer working with Fullerton police, officer Paez, had naked photos of at least one student on his phone. If the student is underage I understand a name not being released but how many victims are there and do I need to be worried about my children?

Should parents be concerned about their child being victimized?

Is this true and if so is the school district covering this up?

I would hope that you learned something about honesty after Lindgren molested students at Nicholas. Please let me know if these allegations have merit and that Fullerton isn’t in the habit of covering up sexual predators.

Thanks.

Concerned Parent

Only one member even bothered to respond and that was the following paltry message:

Thank you for the information, I will bring this up with our Superintendent tonight. 

Thanks,

Andy Montoya

So there you have it folks. A Fullerton Police Officer, in his capacity of School Resource Officer, was allowed to roam campus unchecked, film up the skirts of teachers and students, delete his own Body Camera videos with no oversight and allegedly store child pornography on his (department issued?) phone and you the public get to know nothing.

The Fullerton High School Board of Trustees won’t even bother to respond to you if you’re concerned about such things as predatory officers abusing their power to peep on your daughters.

To this day the school board has remained mum, the police chief put out a press release extolling his own virtues and you can bet our useless council will pat the department on the back for the bare minimum that was accomplished here.

How many students were victims of Fullerton PD while on campus? How many have a #PaezMeToo story to tell? Are your kids safe from predators while on campus? You don’t have a right to know according to the Fullerton Joint Union High School Board and Fullerton Police Department.

FUHSD School Board

Fitzgerald Wants Fullerton to Suffer More

Good News Friends!

The paid lobbyist leach that is Jennifer Fitzgerald is officially running for Fullerton City Council again in 2020.

Do you love having a council member who is bought and sold more than a penny stock in a bull market? Here’s your chance to own a stake just like all of the downtown bars.

Prepare for sad face Fitzy as she complains about Sacramento and blames everybody but herself and her own voting record for why we’re broke with crap roads.

Unaccountable police perving on your daughters in the High Schools? Don’t fret, she’ll promise them raises and higher pensions as long as we get no accountability in return.

Fullerton may run out of property to sell to pay for her cronyism and mismanagement, but she’ll never run out of integrity to sell for a few votes and to feather her own nest.

So get ready for Fitzgerald 2020 where she’ll be towing child actor and chronic crony cuck Chris Gaarder along in the VP spot the same as she tried to do with Larry Bennett in 2016.

Could Fullerton do better? Obviously. But the real question is do we deserve better?

Fullerton Officer Paez Charged with Filming up 16yo Student’s Skirt

Jose Paez (left) with his former Captain Tom Oliveras. Both have been charged with crimes in the last year.

Former Fullerton Police Department School Resource Officer Jose Anthony Paez has been charged with a misdemeanor.

From the District Attorney’s Press Release:

FORMER FULLERTON POLICE SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER CHARGED FOR VIDEOTAPING UP HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT’S SKIRT

SANTA ANA, Calif. – A former Fullerton Police Department school resource officer has been charged with secretly photographing and videotaping up the skirt of a 16-year-old high school student.

The Fullerton Police Department initiated an internal investigation into accusations that Officer Jose Anthony Paez was acting inappropriately while on duty. The investigation spanned the last five years of the officer’s on-duty interaction with the public.

The internal investigation revealed several photos and video clips taken on Paez’ personal cell phone in November 2017 that were shot up the skirt of a 16-year-old high school student while Paez was conducting a police investigation on school grounds.

Paez stopped working for the Fullerton Police Department in May 2019. The Fullerton Police Department referred the case to the District Attorney’s Office for criminal prosecution.

“As the elected District Attorney, I am charged with judging the conduct of police officers,” said Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer. “Law enforcement officers are entrusted with a tremendous amount of authority and trust. The actions this officer engaged in betrayed that trust and preyed on the very people he was charged with protecting.”

Paez is scheduled to be arraigned on October 2, 2019 at the North Justice Center in Fullerton. He faces a maximum of one year in the Orange County Jail if convicted.

Deputy District Attorney Laila Nikaien is prosecuting the case.

A quick phone call to the DA’s office reveals that Paez is being charged with PC 647(j)(2):

“(2) A person who uses a concealed camcorder, motion picture camera, or photographic camera of any type, to secretly videotape, film, photograph, or record by electronic means, another identifiable person under or through the clothing being worn by that other person, for the purpose of viewing the body of, or the undergarments worn by, that other person, without the consent or knowledge of that other person, with the intent to arouse, appeal to, or gratify the lust, passions, or sexual desires of that person and invade the privacy of that other person, under circumstances in which the other person has a reasonable expectation of privacy. For the purposes of this paragraph, “identifiable” means capable of identification, or capable of being recognized, meaning that someone could identify or recognize the victim, including the victim herself or himself. It does not require the victim’s identity to actually be established.”

The DA’s office seems to essentially be charging him with peeping when there are questions of possession of child pornography in the audit conducted by Fullerton Police.

The Fullerton Police Department issued a Press Release written to show how awesome they are and how committed to openness and accountability they are – despite have little to no details in the release itself.

The closest we get to details is as follows:

“When the criminal investigation concluded, Fullerton detectives requested the Orange County District Attorney’s Office to review the case for filing criminal charges against Officer Paez, whose employment with the Department ended in May 2019.”

Notice how as don’t even get to know if Paez was allowed to resign or if he was fired. The Press Release then goes on to extoll the unearned virtues of FPD:

“We are committed to being first to hold accountable those within our organization who do not meet the high standards we set for ourselves. That is exactly what happened in this case.”

This is the same city/department that worked out a settlement agreement with an officer to expunge Internal Investigations into her conduct specifically to bypass disclosure laws.

That settlement agreement, and this story about officer Paez are two of the things we wrote about a couple of months ago are some of the stories that led to the City of Fullerton threatening us with prosecution for telling you things we think you have a right to know about but they want kept quiet.

Prepare for City Manager Ken Domer, Police Chief Bob Dunn and the entire council and school board to keep you in the dark as this “ongoing case” works through the system. The city has yet to even give us a date for when Paez left the force or who’s phone the child pornography that FPD found in their audit was on – Paez’s personal one or his department issued phone. Nor have they explained why an officer had student sexts and underage pornography on any device so easily accessed.

Is this just another case of a badge giving somebody a slap on the wrist when a civilian would have been prosecuted to the full extent of the law?

Cicinelli Got $1K to Hide Out in Arizona

Back in 2012, after Fullerton Officers beat Kelly Thomas to death. In the aftermath, that is still ongoing today as former Officers Cicinelli and Wolfe continue to fight their terminations, the Cicinelli family asked for close to $1k in order to hide out in his parent’s house in Arizona.

 

Cincinelli Living Expenses

 

“We have recently been asked by one of our police officers involved in
the Kelly Thomas incident if the possibility still exists for
reimbursement of extra living expenses incurred in August following the
publication of their home addresses on a local blog.  I believe I had
conversations with Alan about this expense being reimbursable under this
policy.  As I recalled, our discussion was that certain expenses would
be allowable if they met the “reasonableness” test and clearly were
additional living expenses.
At the time, none of the officers asked for reimbursement.  We now have
one indicating that he did incur additional expenses in the weeks
following the publication of his home address when he relocated his
family.  He originally was inclined to not seek reimbursement, but now
wishes to do so.
Please advise whether you are in a position to consider such a claim
and, if so, what you will need to review to evaluate whether any
expenses are reimburseable.”
This request was received by Human Resources Director Gretchen Beatty, who we figured should have laughed it off, and then paid out to Cicinelli.
Cincinelli Living Expenses Approved
“We will reimburse the expense.  Can you just confirm that the amount being sought is 969.31 and the check should be made payable to Jay Cincinelli and mailed to [redacted].”
The excuse was that somebody doxed Cicinelli but the truth is that somebody ran a public Google search and posted comments around the internet of information readily found on said internet. Hardly an excuse to shell out more money to a guy who just smashed somebody’s face in.
Or as one City Staffer put it:
Jason Rosanne
“Maybe he should have thought about all this before he beat a man to death…..”

Fullerton Wants State to Help Fight Marijuana

Here in Fullerton, where our downtown is essentially wall-to-wall bars with hundreds of DUIs a year as a result, we don’t take alcoholism or drinking and driving very seriously.

Sure we hand out awards to the officers with the most DUI arrests but when it comes to the over-serving or other bad behaviors by bars we don’t just turn a blind eye, as a city we change the laws on the books to make it easier for those bad bars to operate. Hell, Jennifer Fitzgerald is so blind on the issue that she’s on record blaming “pre-gaming” in the parking structures for the problems.

You can get drunk and kill a 6yo in her front yard and Fullerton’s Staff and Council will yawn at the DUI culture they’ve created. That’s not fair – they won’t just yawn. They’ll actively spend the next year making the DUI factory in downtown worse.

But weed? Now that’s a problem that Fullerton is willing to tackle.

Fullerton City Manager Domer and Chief of Police Dunn want help from the State of California to crack down on “black market marijuana retailers” despite the city council steadfastly refusing to allow legal dispensaries to exist in the city.

State Help Weed

My City Manager forwarded me an article from the OCR..

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/08/28/state-begins-crackdown-on-black-market-marijuana-retailers-starting-in-costa-mesa/

He’s curious how you were able to get the state to assist you.  Any insight you can share would be greatly appreciated.

In 2016 the voters of CA approved Prop 64 for legal marijuana with 57% of the vote, even 52% of OC voters voted yes on Prop 64. Even Fullerton was pro-weed with a 51% Yes vote.

Fullerton Prop 64

Fullerton Weed 2016

Despite the vote, the Fullerton City Council has refused to allow a single dispensary anywhere in Fullerton. They won’t zone any industrial or commercial areas for legal weed leaving sellers in non-compliance.

You can run an illegal venue at the airport, refuse to put in mandated fire sprinklers in the largest nightclub in downtown, run a bar without the legal permits and so much more and the city is more than happy to let you get away with it. But weed? Oh man, that’s a sin too far and a sin that might cut into the profit margins of the bustling bar and fight scene.

This is substantially no different than Measure W, where 60% of voters voted against the development of Coyote Hills and the council is going to do it anyways. Welcome to Fullerton where your vote counts as long as we like the way you vote.

Ken Domer’s Arrogance Peaks Through his Emails

City Manager Ken Domer really is just another petty bureaucrat who doesn’t want people to know the truth. When our own Joshua Ferguson put in a record’s request asking for emails about this very blog and his own self, the city worked to limit the scope but not before throwing some shade his way.

Either Ken Domer is ignorant regarding how boolean searches work or he’s just being petty and mocking Joshua’s attempt at thoroughness.

Joshua Boolean

“Ivy, I know Josh, or Joshua, or Josh Ferguson, of Joshua Ferguson, stated no timeframe –”

I guess if you assume your messages will never be made public you’re free to be arrogant and condescending about those members of the public you don’t favor.

Hanger 21 is Still Illegally Operating at the Airport

Back in 2017 the city of Fullerton kicked Air Combat USA out of the airport and after a legally questionable bid process the city leased the hanger to a company called Hanger 21. We covered this briefly HERE and HERE.

Here’s some of the backstory from the City Manager himself:

Domer Hanger 21 PL

“The problem is that regardless of the lease term, it is the use that is non-conforming.  However, what is the remedy for a non-conforming use?  Cessation of the use, which could happen if the PL amendment is not approved or the lease is not.”

Realizing that the city had approved a bid for a business that wasn’t legally allowed to operate, the city swung into action to fix the problem. The remedy was for Fullerton’s City Council to chang the municipal code in an effort to make Hanger 21’s then-illegal use conform to local law.

And because this is Fullerton – they failed spectacularly.

On December 05, 2017 the city council approved Hanger 21’s lease AND then on March 20, 2018 they changed the zoning at the airport.

PL Zone Change 2018

“H. Other similar public facilities, commercial amenities, and special events on City-owned property when in conformance with the purpose of this zone and approved by the City Council.”

Read that and then think about the timeline because the city didn’t and hasn’t. I’ll point out the obvious problem:

“and approved by the City Council”.

The City Council cannot legally be said to have approved Hangar 21’s usage since they haven’t visited the issue since the municipal zoning change. This is a cart before the horse problem with the council just assuming that they’ve de facto approved Hangar 21’s lease and use through the zone change but that’s an ex post facto problem and is quite an illegal interpretation.

Score another blunder for Jones and Mayer.

Here we sit a year and four months later and the council has YET to fix this problem.

This is another case of city staff, consultants, attorneys and the city council being incompetent and hoping nobody catches on which of course has led to the city being sued.