Walk on Wilshire Inspires Fraud

Just when you imagine that those purveyors of idiocy, The Fullerton Observer, can’t get any more entangled in making the news, they excel themselves. And by excel I mean fraud.

Saskia sez why write about news when you can try to make your own?! (Photo by Julie Leopo/Voice of OC)

A Friend sent in an image of the latest paper copy of the Observer showing an unattributed ad for the money pit known as the Walk on Wilshire.

It’s intentionally fraudulent.

The effort is intended to stir up support for the street closure that right now is on life support, having been given only a three month reprieve by the City Council in July, while the bureaucrats stumble around looking for plausible reasons besides self-interest to keep it going.

The scam here is to suggest that the businesses listed get some benefit from the Wilshire Avenue street closure that so far has only one dedicated participant after four years – Mulberry Street. That’s just an oblique lie. Some of these businesses aren’t even on Wilshire, or even close to it; and others inside the Villa del Sol have no practical proximity to the street even if they wanted to play along with this money-losing, make-work charade characterized as “business development.” There are even two salons listed, the connective tissue to WoW so tenuous as to be transparent.

And the worst part is, there are several business listed here who are actively opposed the the street closure. Their phone numbers are printed here, presumably so that Observers can call them up and harass them into supporting the continuation of this nonsense. Did the Observer obtain permission from these businesses to use as a prop in the propaganda campaign? Wanna bet on that?

Things never looked better for Fullerton.

This is the sort of behavior that has the hallmark of the Fullerton Observer over the years, amateurism blended with vitriol for anybody that doesn’t bend the knee to the bureaucrats in City Hall, and weird leftist ideology.

The Charge of the Light Brigade

So, according to the article these ponies and their associated costs are to be paid for by the cops themselves. Their horsing around to take place in addition to their regular duties. This makes one feel less aggrieved about the maintenance cost, but I have to wonder if this implies additional pay since the union would not like their boys working for free. Perhaps this is considered to have PR value.

Believe it or not, Fullerton now has an equestrian cop unit.

What’s that you say? Why? Why the Hell on Earth?

Rhinestone Cowboys…

I don’t know why, but I know it’s true because Orange County Register thief/scribe Lou Ponsi says so. You may remember Lou from his role as apologist for the FPD after six of their gang murdered Kelly Thomas in July, 2011. Before that he gained local fame by stealing a story from FFFF and pretending it was his.

Horsies? Really?

Why, during the influx of an immense ocean of red ink Fullerton has assembled a horse troop is beyond me. Horses need to be fed, sheltered and given adequate veterinary care (one hopes), and the use of them on Fullerton trails is completely unnecessary. Five cops on ponies is five less than could be patrolling Fullerton’s streets. (See addendum, above)

Will these bold equestrians be patrolling the Trail to Nowhere? Of course not.

Maybe they’re there for riot control, since a 900 lbs. horse is a substantial deterrent to all those rioters Fullerton deals with on a regular basis.

Whatever the the pretext for this nonsense, one wonders if this deployment was actually approved by our City Council. It hardly matters, does it?

I love the cowboy hats. A true sign that the spirit of the Old West, despite Doc Heehaw’s plea for “New West” behavior, is alive and well.

Public Gathering

It’s funny how, one by one, the advocates for the idiotic “Walk on Wilshire” determinedly reject common sense arguments against it’s continuance.

Gone but not forgotten…

The concept has been a money loser for the City. Who cares?

Created and perpetuated by “economic development” City employees as make-work for themselves, the thing is an economic sinkhole, just like the rest of downtown Fullerton, while the City suffers from a massive tsunami of red ink. Who cares?

Only one restaurant has deemed it worthwhile to fully participate in this financial disaster. Who cares?

The rights and interests of business owners elsewhere on Wilshire Avenue have been intentionally denied. Who cares?

The ability of motorists to use a public street bought and paid for by the public has been denied them. Who cares?

At the July 16th City Council meeting we learned what was valuable according to the advocates of this moronic scheme. It wasn’t really about “economic development,” because there isn’t any. It was all about the squishy, feel-good goal of a communal gathering space, as if this silly, blocked off space provided any better communal experience than private dining on the inside of a restaurant, or on the sidewalk.

The fact the that the Fullerton Observer has dedicated itself to defending this ludicrous scheme should be sufficient evidence of its idiocy. The real goal of this gaggle is to deny auto access to a public street; it’s the first small step to a utopia where everybody is poor, riding bikes and wearing Mao jackets. But that’s too nutsy even for them to propound openly. So they advocate for a “public gathering space” even though the “Walk on Wilshire” is not really open to the general populace at all.

What these people don’t acknowledge is that there is already a large public space in downtown Fullerton.

It’s called the Downtown Plaza, an acre of open space that already exists, and that can be used without any cost for those interested in the orgasmic experience of New Urban public gathering. There’s even a little parklet across the way. Here it is:

There it is. Take it.

There is absolutely nothing from keeping the City opening this huge space to public dining and permitting ALL the restaurants in Fullerton to cater their wares here directly, or through an on line application. There’s trees, green grass and blue sky overhead.

Bought and paid for…

Of course this would require almost no City involvement, and no project our economic development employees could put on their time cards. It was built a long time ago and, except for a few events goes mostly unused. But there it is. String some solar light in the trees, put out some tables and you’re good to go. There’s even a handy parking structure across the street.

Arbols y césped y cielo azure…

How about this as a “pilot” program: use the existing open space for that “al fresco” dining experience so beloved by Bruce Whitaker, and open up Wilshire Avenue to the people who want to drive on it, and for the businesses on Wilshire that need it for convenient access and parking.

Does this idea seem ridiculous? Why? At the very least it demonstrates the shallowness of the alleged arguments in favor of keeping Wilshire closed: the City doesn’t intelligently used the communal gathering space it already has.

And why not restrict outside dining to the sidewalks, where it belongs?

Café life. On the sidewalk.

Our City staff, and at least two of our City Councilpersons, maybe three if you count Bruce Whitaker, would rather shut down a public street to our detriment, but to their benefit.

The Poison Park Gets Some Federal Dough

At last Tuesday night’s Fullerton City Council meeting the annual CDBG show took place.

CBDG stands for Community Development Block Grant – money that is doled out by the Department of Housing and Urban Development to local governments to fritter away with no accountability after slicing off the lion’s share for themselves to “administer” stuff.

The local do-gooder community surround this federal largesse like hungry koi wanting to be fed. Some get money, some don’t. Most of these applicants are centered in the homeless industrial complex, that cluster of NGOs that are the recipients of untold government paychecks who are never held accountable for anything.

One of the items that caught my eye was money – $350,000 for the abandoned Union Pacific Park – the municipal embarrassment that has created an eyesore on Truslow Avenue for two decades. It was described in two different documents. The first mention is in the staff PowerPoint presentation:

This laconic slide is most unhelpful since there are no details. We know it’s a 1.4 acre park, but we also know there is a plan for a new park; so why this cryptic reference? You can’t boil a government potato for $350,000, so what’s the plan, a partial rehabilitation?

New but not improved…

We know if the walkways are “damaged,” it was because the City damaged them last year – when pressure was put on staff by the City Council to reopen the park. Do they mean sandblasting the graffiti?

The term “sports courts” is unhelpful because there is only one – an old basketball slab. Some people wanted pickle ball courts but can you do them without the rest of the park? What gives?

The staff report is accompanied by a slightly more specific “action plan” that gives details about the various grant applications. Here we discover this:

There is no existing trail in UP Park, so what are they talking about? Who knows? Are they referring to the dilapidated Phase I of the dismal Trail to Nowhere? Do they want to fix the barrio’s equestrian trail railing? No, the public may not know, but one thing is certain: nobody in City Hall wants to discuss the failure of the UP Park and Phase I of the Trail to Nowhere; they just want to waste more money on them.

The presentation did elicit a few words from some staff guy who stood up saying the City wants to add new “courts” and ADA improvements at the little parking area, language implying that there is indeed some sort of concept to rebuild this park in pieces, an idea which makes sense in a perverted sort of way – everything about this park has been screwed up by City staff since the proverbial Day One.

Tellingly, not one councilmember bothered to question the idea of phasing construction of anything, and whether this is a good idea. It may be that some of them want to plant grass and then forget about the Big Plan. If that is the plan, no one wants to talk about it publicly, and the UP Park Committee has vanished, never to be heard from at all.

At this point the piecemealing pantomime is good for appearances, and the appearance seems to be to be seen doing something, no matter how futile the flailing.

I guess the otherwise laughable piecemealing means that this next inevitable failure will happen in less a less expensive manner.

Walk On Wilshire Coming Back

Closed but not forgotten…

Next Tuesday our City Council will once again address the issue of Walk on Wilshire, the bureaucrat-driven “pilot program” that closed off the 100 block of West Wilshire Avenue to street traffic so that three restaurants could set up shop in the middle of the street. The issue is whether to approve an extension of the idea. Pretty soon they’re going to drop the word “pilot” altogether, and we’ll know that City Hall has permanently squatted on the street.

As usual, the staff report is so poorly written that it takes some forensic work to figure it out.

Off we go, into the Wild Blue Yonder…

So far the thing has cost ninety grand, but more “enhancements” are projected – another $80,000. Staff says lease revenue for the past 27 months is less than $36,000, but somehow will go up to $40K a year once two more users build their “parklets” – a silly phrase that has currency among urban “planners.” That remains to be seen, but any way you slice it, with ongoing maintenance costs it will be years before the City recoups its outlay – if it ever does. This concept seems to have eluded the crack minds of our “Economic Development” employees, and our City Council that steadfastly spends more to get less back. But that is the constant theme of Downtown Fullerton.

It’s funny how depriving the taxpaying citizens of their right to drive on a public street is seen as a good thing in some circles – cars bad, bad, bad; and the impact on other businesses on Wilshire Avenue isn’t taken into account at all. Some folks seem to think the experience is cosmopolitan, likening it to a veritable Parisian vacation, but failing to note the difference between a sidewalk café and putting tables out in the middle of a road closed for that purpose – something no Parisian citizen would tolerate for a second.

Even though the staff report says it awaits City Council guidance, it is replete with pro-street theft propaganda, including another one of those ginned up polls done by Kosmont whose previous efforts include this hot mess. And it gets even worse.

Staff is requesting an “Asssement” opportunity to locate other places in DTF to recreate the money loser on Wilshire, “vibrancy” sounding ever so much better than bureaucratic busywork and inconvenient street closings.

Well the die is already cast on this one. Zahra and Charles just ooze sanctimonious support for this hare-brained idea; and Bruce Whitaker is all in for it, too, for some nincompoop reason – maybe because his wife likes it. Nick Dunlap recused himself last time and may do so again. Or he may just go along with more staff-driven nonsense. Only Fred Jung seemed really opposed to this scheme, but he’s going to be in the minority.

More Bungling And Intransigence From Fullerton’s Underpaid Bureaucrats

On June 26th the Fullerton Planning Commission revisited the never-ending saga of a Noise Ordinance Revision, mostly as it applies to illegal noise in Downtown Fullerton, a situation that City Code Enforcement has for years been energetically ignoring. Friends may recall that the City Council bobbed and weaved on this issue at the end of 2023 and again in February, without, seemingly even bothering to read the proposed mess of an ordinance. Taking bold action the Council referred the matter back to the Planning Commission who had already rubber stamped it.

But when the PC did review the matter again, the same thing it had already approved, the Commission seemed to have developed both curiosity and courage. On March 26th they savaged the jumbled and contradictory hodgepodge and decided they had better have an on-site examination of the actual problem and the problem makers; afterward they would reconvene.

And reconvene they did, for a “workshop.” Somehow – and it’s not quite clear how – the meeting had been identified somewhere as a “public hearing,” a meeting where important discretionary decisions are made. Even the staff report contained a recommendation to approve the ordinance changes – a formal action. Some of the Commissioners wanted to shut it down then and there, and reschedule the matter; others were eager share their opinions after on-site field trips. In the end the Planning Commission continued the matter so that staff could get it right next time (they won’t).

The staff report itself contained the usual propaganda and misstatements and handwringing that have become the hallmark of Sunayana Thomas, Fullerton’s Planning Director and Economic Development expert. Here’s one:

This statement is absurd, of course.

Then there was the same old litany of difficulties in legally enforcing anything and winning in court. Jesus H., when they don’t feel like doing something they’re just weak as kittens.

Two things emerged during brief “public comments.”

First, Joshua Ferguson pointed out that the notice error was a Brown Act violation and also that a “serial meeting” had taken place. The unnamed lawyer at the meeting who is employed by “The I can’t Believe It’s A Law Firm,” claimed everything was kosher because a quorum of the Commission never met to discuss anything, which begs the question of whether staff itself can organize a serial meeting, illegal under the Brown Act.

Another thing that popped up is that staff, on its own initiative has actually now raised the allowable decibel level that they are recommending in Fullerton’s Commercial Zones to 80dBs – based, presumably, on their field adventures.

Two things remain crystal clear: City staff doesn’t want to do their jobs, and the coddling of nightclub operators abusing their 47 Licenses is going to keep happening until some City Council caves in and gives the bar owners legal license to keep doing what they’ve been doing for 20 years. The long-running effort to protect lawbreakers in Downtown Fullerton will continue for at least a while longer. And every delay makes more money flow into the pockets of the scofflaw bar owners.

Foes of Fullerton’s Future Fail

I wasn’t able to watch the Fullerton City Council meeting last night to see If my predictions would take place. But I’ve heard about it. Some did, some didn’t.

If I knew what I was talking about this wouldn’t be Fullerton!

The item for consideration of a plebiscite 13% sales tax increase, placed on the agenda by Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles, went nowhere as I supposed it would. In the end the staff report was “received and filed,” a polite way of saying sayonara and into the round file with you.

Hey, you down there…

As predicted Zahra and Charles pleaded ardently for putting the tax on the ballot – even cutting the amount and placing some sort of sunset term. No takers.

What didn’t happen was the appearance of Zahra’s Zanies, his coterie of cult followers, to harass and harangue the Council majority. A little gaggle of folks spoke, discussion was held, and then the proposal was sent to the dead letter office. In almost no time the meeting was adjourned and everybody went home very early.

I wonder if Zahra even tried to marshal his forces, or whether he couldn’t muster any support. Why else agendize the issue knowing failure was certain. Maybe just to check the box.

Put your money in the bucket over there!

It could be that Ahmad’s Aimless Army was busy elsewhere, maybe even pursuing recreation on his famous Trail to Nowhere.

I don’t know if District 4 candidate, Vivian Kitty Jaramillo even showed up.

When the video is available I may get details of who said what, but I’m not sure it matters.

The Tax Meeting

There it goes…

The City is meeting tomorrow to to talk about putting a sales tax on the November ballot.

The staff report wrongly states that the City Council requested this item, which is an intentional lie. The matter was placed on the agenda by the minority of Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles, two individuals I wouldn’t trust to run a lemonade stand.

Show me the money…

These two fought long and hard to discuss the issue on June 4th, even though no public notice of a tax was on the silly revenue-grab agenda.

Tomorrow we will see a small army of Fullerton Boohoos crying out for a 13% sales tax increase on the ballot. Obviously they want to go for a general use tax because that only takes 50%+1 to win, whereas a special use tax requires 66% – an almost impossible hurdle.

But there’s the rub. A general use tax requires a 4/5 council majority to put it on the ballot, and the pro-tax Zahra and Charles don’t seem to be able to manage the simple majority required to put a special use tax on the ballot.

So what’s the point of this charade? We’ve seen this Zahra act before: mobilize his coterie of “underserved” residents to harangue the Council, and thus embarrass Jung, Whitaker and Dunlap.

Put your money in the bucket over there!

But this is not the ludicrous Trail to Nowhere, and bullying won’t work. There’s only one meeting available to get this done, and tomorrow won’t be it.

“Appetisers” for all…

The only question I have is whether District 4 candidate Vivian Kitty Jaramillo will stand up and support the tax.

What’s Wrong With This Picture?

Downtown Fullerton saw a ribbon cutting this week for “Madero.” It’s not a new place. It used to called “Matador” but an El Matador already existed in Costa Mesa and the story goes that Mario Marovic, proprietor of the Fullerton place, got sued and had to change the name of his establishment. So an event was held and here’s the scene:

All smiles…

The guy with the green hat is Mario Marovic. That name sure rings a bell.

Right. He’s the scofflaw who got caught squatting on the City’s property on Commonwealth Avenue – the legacy of the Tony Florentine sidewalk theft. When that came out Marovic made a deal with the City to remove the egregious “bump-out” and to be complete by July 2023. Oops. Nothing has even started, 14 months after the start of work deadline. And we know that the City Council has been presented with some sort of legal claim by Marovic, because it was on their Closed Session agenda.

And who is the little guy on the left standing next to Marovic? Why it is none other than the District 5 Councilman Ahmad Zahra, dressed in his usual ribbon-cutting attire, palling around with Marovic and even giving him some sort of City proclamation!

Will not work for new clothes…

Now, we all know that little Ahmad is a notorious attention hound and desperate photo-op seeker. We also know that a City Council agreement isn’t worth the paper it’s written on. But this is really too much. Marovic is still squatting on public property and it looks like no one in City Hall has the balls to enforce an agreement signed by Marovic himself. Instead the City seems to be actively socializing with him.

No Solution in Search of a Problem

Clean sweep

Back on its May 7th meeting the Fullerton City Council had a hearing about street sweeping ticketing. It was such a super-critical issue that the Voice of OC wrote about it here. The author is none other than Mr. Hossam Elattar, the same boob who missed the Trail to Nowhere scam.

So many injustices, so little time…

Reading the Voice article you get the idea that the ticketing was a great social injustice, affecting the lives of what the author charmingly calls the “working class” in overcrowded parts of town. This is the editorial narrative the Voice of OC always deploys in its “news” – the oppression of the underserved.

Of course at the meeting, this same tack was immediately propounded by Councilmember Ahmad Zarha, who would go on to conflate this parking issue with the principle one affecting neighborhoods with too many cars: overnight parking bans. But a hero needs a problem to fix for the “poorer part of town” as he put it. The two issues are quite different since cars of the “working class” are used, presumably, to take those people to work and are gone when the sweeper rolls by. Oops.

The sweeping problem is that regular street sweeping keeps our trash out of the Pacific Ocean and instead goes to a big hole in a Brea hillside. The storm water system is regulated by National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits. The age-old practice of allowing cars to park on street sweeping days is no longer a thing.

Good Lord, what a to do over a non-problem.

Staff, to their credit, recommended to keep things the way they are – weekly sweeping of each side of each street, and tickets for those vehicles that haven’t been relocated.

Three proposed “options” added significant costs for more complicated logistics and signage, or a violation of the NPDES permit. Whether these costs were legitimate or just jacked up to undermine the options is open to cynical speculation. Obviously, the violation option was just an obvious non-starter made to look like a choice. And with our latest budget crisis nobody is going to waste hundreds of thousands down this rathole.

Our city council (Fullerton, being Fullerton) hemmed and hawed and finally decided the current system was flawed and requested new options. Our Mayor, Nick Dunlap was not happy with the “one size fits all” approach and found an ally in Ahmad Zahra who again pitched the issue as a discriminatory one since the most ticketing took place in south Fullerton. Fred Jung didn’t say much except to say he wanted something better, or to leave the status quo. All so helpful. Dunlap even proposed possible refunds to ticket receivers.

So just as with the downtown noise fiasco this issue will be kicked around some more. I’m surprised it wasn’t sent to the Traffic and Circulation Commission for lengthy cogitation.

No one really bothered to ask what the big deal was and how come people can’t get off their asses and move their cars. Yes, multiple-hour windows of time are used for sweeping, but in reality the sweeping schedule is an extremely predictable period of time, easily planned for. No tickets are handed out after the sweeper passes. While it’s true people may forget to attend to their vehicles, the cost of a ticket is educative, as I well know. Also, my street is a few blocks away from an overcrowded collection of 1950s apartments with too many cars. And yet, on street sweeping days these good folk are astute enough to relocate their vehicles by the time the sweeper rolls through. And after it does the streets slowly fill up with cars again.

I’m left wondering how this item was even agendized in the first place. Staff didn’t want it, obviously, so it must have been done at the behest of councilmembers looking for an issue to waste their time and our money on.