Tuesday’s TEFRA Tank

The scheme to rubber stamp a deal that would have cost the City and local agencies a million bucks a year in property tax revnue was voted down 3-2 last night.

On Sunday I shared the news of the agenda item returning to the council after being continued in June. Let me reiterate.

TEFRA stands for Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act, and authorization permits a little-known statewide housing agency to issue bonds that will provide $180,000,000 for an unknown non-profit entity to buy and remodel two huge apartment complexes over by Cal State Fullerton. The projects will subsequently be restricted to low and medium income renters.

Of course the kickers were that the projects were going to be eventually removed from the property tax rolls by the County Assessor and that the 395 now-restricted units would not even count toward the 13,000 new unit quota demanded by the State of California based on numbers cooked up in their social engineering lab by SCAG – the Southern California Associations of Governments.

Economic Development is my specialty…

The whole thing was obviously being presented by a completely biased staff led by the ever-egregious Sunaya Thomas. All you had to do was pick up on the tenor of the staff report.

Well, naturally the two socialists on the council were big supporters, as predicted. It was all about subsidizing the so-called “missing middle” a comparatively new term concocted by sociologists to identify a new group of underserved (subsidized) people like teachers and nurses and Shana Charles’ pals, the impoverished Associate Professors at CSUF. Charles bemoaned the latter’s rough life in the slums and tent cities. Okay, I made that up but you get the picture.

The lack of logic from Charles – and her fellow traveler the Dodgy Doctor from Damascus, Ahmad Zahra – peddled crap so illogical I would be remiss if I didn’t share it.

Still 13,000 units to go!

Charles claimed that this plan would remove existing overcrowding in the existing apartments. She didn’t say how; presumably locked in lower rents would mean less crowding as fewer residents were needed to make the monthly nut. Huh? What would keep future tenants from from reducing whatever the cost is by jamming into apartment units? She didn’t think about the outcome of her assertion: if the crowding were lessened, where the hell would those people go? The street? Her position was that the already badly bungled could suck up the property tax loss.

The Man Who Was Never Mayor…

“Dr.” Zahra made an even stupider claim: that these subsidized public housing projects would boost the sales taxes, the local economy and hence the city budget! What the everlasting fuck? Did this idiot want us to believe that none of the current residents in the “market rate” apartments contribute to the Fullerton economy?

A very-much awake Chris Norby in a contemplative mood…

Fortunately, wiser heads chimed in. Earlier, former Councilman Chris Norby showed up to lay it out to the Council. The projects will provide no property tax but demand all of the usual services, plus more; and that the so-called “preservation” of units described by staff was nonsense. But of course the tender young Marxist Elijah Manassero was there to promote government subsidized housing, possibly hoping to move out of his dad’s house someday.

Nobody bothered to ask if these complexes were already effectively affordable, and were already being used by folks who work and go shopping in the area. Staff didn’t say, another indicator of the lack of professional objectivity from our under-compensated employees.

Commonsense prevailed…

Nick Dunlap, to his credit, demonstrated the appropriate annoyance at the nonsense, skewering the weepy idiocy presented by Zahra and Charles. He immediately moved a substitute motion to can the idea right after a motion to approve was made by Zahra and Charles. It was seconded by Jamie Valencia, and the in the vote, Mayor Fred Jung provided the deciding vote to pull the plug.

I would hope that this is the last time we’ll see this sort of thing, but the old adage “it’s never over ’till staff says it is” is always a Fullerton factor.

Fullerton Throws Itself a Pity Party

Puddles on the floor…

Last night the Fullerton City Council held a special meeting. They called it a budget workshop, but it sure turned into a lachrymose affair. The weepy speechifying seemed more than a little rehearsed.

The meeting itself was more or less a rehash of previous meetings. Of course it should have been scheduled for July 7th but that would have interfered with the “community” budget sessions that week which staff claimed had 30 attendees; the survey that went out elicited about 70 responses. 100 out of 150,000 people. They had to admit that statistically, the responses didn’t mean much.

In an almost miraculous turn of events, staff cut the earlier projected deficit all the way down to $3.8 million. How, you ask? By eliminated vacant positions and jockeying some funds around.

Staff presented three scenarios: A, B, and C, in least to most draconian order, all draconian, of course. Option C basically kept the reserve funds around $16,000,000 by not using them in the next three years. None of the options involved laying anybody off or negotiating pay cuts with the unions. Keep that in mind, because the weepy handwringing that followed would make you think personal catastrophes had occurred.

Department by department got up to sing the blues to a receptive council. Goddamn, you’d think we were in the Mississippi Delta. The upshot was that nary a single department head had the grit to proclaim they’d get it done no matter what. No, that would be bad form.

I learned a couple of interesting facts. A police corporal – a corporal, mind you – costs $300,000 per year; and an Associate Planner is currently subsidized by the General Fund to the tune of $70,000 a year. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with the latter, the amount is shocking. It either means that Planning fees would not be sufficiently recovering costs, or that someone was projected to be costing the public an awful lot for general, non-billable time in City Hall.

I would be remiss indeed if I didn’t mention the good offices of consultant Grant Thornton, who, by means of a change order, presented a completely useless report whose “conclusions” were a summary of perfectly obvious statements. It was maddening to watch the consultant read off the Power Point slides, verbatim. I wonder how much that cost.

Public comments were highlighted by an extremely angry woman named Jody Vallejo, Chris Norby (who again touted the services of the Sheriff’s Department and the sale of surplus property), and a call in from the funny little boy-man Dominic Moonbeam

Won’t look you in the eye while you’re trashing him…

Then to the Council. Mayor Fred Jung read an odd and uncharacteristically long oration in which he took personal responsibility for the City’s budget situation and yet defended some of his more dubious votes and noted that Placentia’s privatizing their paramedics did them no good since they too, were having a budget crisis, a very strange and illogical statement. He offered that the unanticipated ICE intrusion into Fullerton was somehow responsible for some contribution to Fullerton’s financial woes, but gave nothing to support that claim. Overall, I couldn’t really figure out what in the world he was trying to communicate, although if I heard rightly he did seem to suggest at one point that a general sales tax was needed.

Shana Charles and Ahmad Zahra blathered on and on. I had to leave off to get a couple of frosty beverages. I did get back in time to watch “Dr.” Zahra compete with Jung to take responsibility for the situation, and that was pretty entertaining.

Jamie Valencia in happier times…

Fortunately, Jamie Valencia had little say other than to point out the relation between budget problems and municipal credit ratings; she emotionally and awkwardly read a prepared statement about the crisis, but reminded attendees that she’s only been around for a year and a half.

Why is this man smiling…

Nick Dunlap concluded the speechifying with a soliloquy that included the claim that somebody in the Sheriff Department confided to him that contracting with Fullerton for police services wouldn’t work and that the City would owe the Federal government an untold fortune if the Fullerton Airport were redeveloped. I think both these claims need to be substantiated.

As usual everybody sang the praises of “economic development,” the talismanic chant of those who are either extremely ignorant, extremely cynical, or extremely desperate. Just because it’s been an unproven bureaucratic activity in the past is no reason to doubt its efficacy in the future; it must be protected, even nurtured! No one said anything about proving that economic development even pays for itself. Don’t ask, don’t tell.

Needless to say, everyone also sang the praises of “police and fire” the ruthless and untouchable combination of unions that makes or breaks candidates and whose member suck up 70% of the General Fund.

A Manfro All Seasons…

The three-hour weep-fest ended in the usual way a morass of confusion out of which the City Manager, Eddie Manfo is supposed to make a final agenda item that will lead to an approval of the budget, now two weeks late. He pleaded for some direction about how to come back but got none. Oh, well. Eddie’s services cost us at least $400,000, a year, even more than a police corporal, so he ought to be able figure out something plausible.

In the end Manfro asked if it would be okay if the budget decision were made in August. Nobody said no. Then they all stood up and went home.

Still Taking out the Trash

A week or so ago the Fullerton City Council reviewed the solicitation for a new garbage hauling contract. Again. FFFF shared the last instalment of the drawn out saga relating how “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra went bonkers because two of the companies offered big upfront payments recouped by a higher CPI multiplier.

The meeting droned on and on and finally the Council went along with yet another temporization – cutting the number of eligible responders to three – CR&R, Republic, and Valley Vista. Republic was told to eliminate its upfront payment plan and revise its fee schedule. The process will now drag on until September, a move that will surely benefit Republic, the current hauler.

Noticeably absent from the final three was EDCO – the original preferred vendor of city staff. Why they were not given the same chance as Republic to delete the big cash offer and rejigger their numbers is unknown. What is known is that Republic, the company that came in dead last in the first round of staff analysis, moves ahead with several nice comments from some of Fullerton’s Left Guard who seem to be terrified of change.

CR&R, you may remember offered what looked like a $4 million gift for the City to pave a few potholes. But companies like this don’t work for free and surely they can lower their fees by getting rid of the Trojan Horse gift. That’s nothing but a hidden tax, right? Just better hidden than EDCO’s or Republic’s.

Valley Vista will surely never get more than three votes since they contributed to the Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform PAC that went after Fullerton Boohoo darling Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo in 2024. Zahra and Charles won’t vote for them because of this political involvement although they certainly wouldn’t mind had Valley Vista given money to the dope lobby’s Working Families for Jaramillo PAC. The Fullerton Observer Sisters like to remind their readers about the bad, bad folks at VV.

But Valley Vista doesn’t need four or five votes, only three.

The Council also decided to let its members talk to vendors directly, something that they had prohibited themselves from doing, apparently. Will the they share who they talked with, and what about? I wonder.

Anyway, let the death march continue. Sure it’s a big deal, but there’s no reason this shouldn’t have been locked up a long time ago.

“Dr.” Zahra Wigs Out, Tosses Hissy Fit

I decided to watch the afternoon Fullerton City Council session about hiring a new trash hauler, yesterday. When it came time for questions directed to staff I learned a few things.

First, I realized the extent to which Ahmad Zahra blames one individual – Tony Bushala – for every thing he, Zahra, doesn’t like. And it’s got to the point where anything attributable to Bushala is something he, Zahra, doesn’t like. Even when the attribution is based on his own baseless paranoia and suspicion and egomania. It’s embarrassing.

That’s a mighty fine thing you did, Anthony…

This accounts for his outbursts yesterday to staff and special council about the origins of the upfront payment to the City by a couple of RFP respondents, EDCO and Republic. As noted here, the idea was mentioned by Mr. Bushala several months ago at a Budget Sustainability Committee meeting and that was it. There is no demonstrable tie between that brief occurrence and any of the trash haulers, except in the febrile brain of the dodgy “doctor” from Damascus. Nada. It was never mention in the first round of RFP submissions.

When Zahra couldn’t get staff or the lawyers to agree with him and condemn the notion of a big initial payment he became agitated and began a completely unprofessional diatribe.

It was good stuff for the handful of his Fullerton Crazy claque in attendance who also faithfully believe any nonsense peddled by Zahra and who remain completely incurious about Zahra’s own string of malfeasances starting with immigration and marriage fraud to get into the country.

Anyway, what was really funny was when Zahra noted that Bushala’s own blog (FFFF) had indicated that the increased CPI differential amounted to a hidden tax.

I am gratified to know that Zahra is a reader of this blog. It’s really too bad he can’t learn anything from it. He is not the least bit opposed to hidden taxes, per se; quite the contrary. However what he and his pals really love is an officially adopted tax, out in the open, when the community proves it is worthy of the higher paid city government that the new revenue buys.

Of course it didn’t seem to occur to Zahra that his admission about the FFFF post undermined his conspiracy theory that Bushala was somehow, somewhere tied to the new proposals by EDCO and Republic.

I observe that a third proposal, by CR&R offered four million bucks, upfront for street repair. This appeared to be seen as some sort of a philanthropic gift. It was seen as such by Councilman Nicholas Dunlap. This is naiveté or dumbness. Nobody works for free, and the cost of that four mil is obviously wrapped up in CR&Rs rate structure that would obviously be lower without their apparent upfront largesse.

The City’s special council mentioned that a lawsuit described as a precedent by opponents of the upfront payment idea was not really precedent since the matter was returned to a lower appeals court where the matter was settled without adjudication. According to this chap an upfront deal repayment would have to be legally justified based on the value of the franchise and that would be his job. I’m confused by this since the proposals by EDCO and Republic do not involve in-lieu franchise fees at all, but rather describe one-time monetary payments, exclusive of the in-lieu fee. This needs clarification.

More on the meeting to be continued…

Taking Out the Trash, Redux

On Tuesday the Fullerton City Council is going to address the topic of selecting the next solid waste hauler. This is a big deal, with a lot of money involved.

Last time, we saw the can kicked, as usual, when the council decided that six finalists would be permitted to sharpen their proverbial pencils and make final and best offers, en route to a final selection.

And so they did. I won’t bore the Friends with the various details of proposals because in the end each is offering different rates, services, and feel good community involvement, the last item a useless PR gesture that somebody in City Hall thought merited points in their selection calculations.

But two RFP respondents offered something else. Big loans to the City’s General Fund that would be recovered over many years via augmented rates.

EDCO has sweetened the pot by offering a $15,000,000 one time payment to the City to be recovered by a differential in the annual Consumer Price Index that is applied to fees.

Republic, the current hauler, is offering a $10,000,000 one time payment they are charmingly calling a “Community Enhancing Payment” which sounds better than “City of Fullerton Bailout.”

Obviously these two cash offer proposals would present the City Council immediate, if only very temporary, relief from the impending budget reserve liquidation, and will attract attention for that. The other positive political result could be the elimination of a November 2026 ballot tax question – a problem in getting on the ballot, and passage by the voters. However, the underlying structural budget deficit would remain and would need to be addressed, anyway, and immediately.

The formulas increasing the CPI scales would really be amount to a hidden tax on waste producing customers in Fullerton, and the City would be in the effective position of incurring debt leveraged on hauling fee increases. I presume the offerors and the City have investigated the legality of this.

Of the two proposers, EDCO was previously ranked first by a narrow margin, while Republic was in last place. The City’s relationship with Republic really soured during negotiations for SB 1383 when Republic did the old bait-and-switcheroo so there’s that to consider.

Meantime CR&R is promising $4,000,000 upfront to pay for road improvements – no strings attached – however there are always strings attached and in this case recovery of the 4 mil will certainly be reflected in rates higher than other proposers.

Is the upfront payment concept viable? I think so. It would buy some time for the City. But somebody would have to pay the piper, and somebody is still going to have to make the budget cuts required to balance a budget and no one has shown any appetite for this bitter menu. Appointing a useless committee to study things has been a waste of time. Almost.

One of the committee members did suggest the very thing that EDCO, Republic and CR&R are offering demonstrating that at least somebody was thinking of alternatives.

My guess is that “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles will not support this big payment option, seeing great liberal virtue in imposing a 13% sales tax increase like the ill-fated measure M of 2020. On the other hand, that passage is a risky business and they need 4 votes to make it even get on the ballot. Nick Dunlap probably would not vote for putting a tax on the ballot, or going with the upfront payment plan. But his vote might not be needed. The waste contract only needs 3 votes. Where are Jung and Valencia? I guess we’ll find out Tuesday.

Hey, Where’s Our Charter?

Today, one of our commenters, “Union Avenue,” wondered what happened to the idea of Fullerton becoming a Charter City.

13 months ago the Fullerton City Council voted 3-2 to start studying the idea of Charter City status for Fullerton, a move away from what it is now – a General Law City.

Then something almost odd happened. The issue disappeared completely. No discussion. Nothing.

This isn’t the first time in Fullerton something just vanished. We can all remember the $1,000,000 so-called Core and Corridors Specific Plan vaporized completely without a rearward glance.

Why did this go away? I don’t know, but I suspect that three councilmembers who voted for it lost interest or maybe decided it wasn’t worth the trouble, political or otherwise.

“Dr.” Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles stirred up his usual claque to clamor against it, citing Fred Jung’s vaulting ambition, but failing to explain how, exactly, a charter would deliver an evil outcome.

I think it’s time to resurrect this idea, even though no one seems to want to chat about it. A lot of good could come from it. Despite the cries of horror from the Kennedy Sisters and their ilk, a new municipal organization could be created, with a strong, city-wide elected Mayor holding executive power and the accountability for it.

The “if it ain’t broke don’t fix it” argument now seems absurd. The City is a breaking mess. The infrastructure is a disgrace and the finances seem to have been handed over to cluster of chimps. Things are not working. One only has to look at the budget disaster and the basic accounting errors to know it. Who knows what the proverbial “deep dive” into Fullerton’s personnel, purchasing, asset management and risk management might reveal?

When things don’t work, and haven’t worked for a long, time it sure looks a lot like an invitation to change.

But change is hard for everyone, especially when lots of people are involved in the making of it.

The Dog Ate My Homework

Fullerton is supposed to have its budgets wrapped up by the end of June. That’s when fiscal years end and new ones begin. It’s in the Municipal Code.

But not this year. So a resolution was needed to keep the gears of government grinding in Fullerton at current levels so that “essential services” be maintained. At the June 16th meeting the City Council passed the appropriate resolution authorizing the continuation of the process into July. Here’s the casual explanation of what’s going on::

“Staff continues to evaluate revenue projections, expenditure estimates including cost containment and deficit reduction strategies, capital improvement requirements, reserve levels, organizational needs and other fiscal considerations as part of the FY 2026-27 budget development process.”

Permit me to translate the double talk: “a complete absence of leadership has stalled the process and nobody in City Hall has the remotest idea how to deal with the massive, impending budget shortfall except by taxation.”

Where there’s smoke…

We have seen over the past year the revitalization of the footling Budget Sustainability Committee that accomplished exactly nothing. Zero. Zip. Well, not quite nothing, because its members reflected the positions of those that appointed them. Dunlap’s appointee voted against all tax proposals offered up. Jung and Valencia’s appointees supported a half-cent special infrastructure tax, but not a general sales tax. Zahra and Charles’ appointees rejected a special sales tax and pushed for the one cent general sales tax.

One committee member suggested privatizing the Water Utility; another suggested borrowing from the deep pockets of the new (or old) waste hauler. Another idea was creating a business district to pay for the Downtown Fullerton deficit. Innovative concepts for a City on the edge of insolvency that got no traction. T he committee how disastrous budget cuts would be to the public, especially to the hallowed halls of “public safety” that sucks up the lion’s share of the budget. Service levels, donchaknow.

I don’t recall anybody discussing mandatory salary reductions. Maybe I missed it.

Which leaves the City with no viable tax path forward even getting one on the November ballot. Other revenue generating ideas went nowhere, including selling off real estate, particularly that where Water Fund activities are going on. Other ideas, such as selling the boutique hotel site aren’t practical because Council and staff and City Attorney have led to humiliation and fraud on the property and has seen it tied up in dispute.

Even as Fullerton’s “leaders” fiddled away their time, new information about huge accounting errors revealed the situation was even more dire than previously imagined.

It would be dereliction not to remind Friends that our illustrious City Council actually agreed to hire a bunch of ambulance drivers on credit and a dozen new “firefighters” at the behest of the their union even as the budget crisis loomed on the near horizon.

Wilshire Avenue Hosts Party

Yesterday the site of the former infamous “Walk on Wilshire” was home to a big party. The street was closed and lots of people set up chairs to watch World Cup soccer on a screen attached to a truck. A Friend sent over some images.

I don’t know anything about this get together – such as who organized it, etc. But one thing I do know is that it proved Wilshire can be closed for special events and then reopened.

This is what many people were saying all along as Fullerton’s Boohoo idiot brigade and the Observer nitwits clamored for permanent closure as an F-U to automobile traffic, and of course to residents and businesses in the 100 block of West Wilshire. Fortunately a modicum of intelligence prevailed and the wingnuts Zahra and Charles couldn’t get three votes to keep the street closed.

Put the bollards up, take the bollards down. So simple. So cheap, and so damned commonsensical. And of course nobody ever said that individual “parklets” couldn’t be utilized either, except that by the time City staff was on it as make-work, the clusterfuck naturally occurred.

So yesterday a few people were no doubt temporarily inconvenienced – instead of a lot more people being inconvenienced, and worse, all the time.

Boutique Hotel Remains in Limbo; But Johnny and Larry Have Been Busy

Warning: Conceptual only, not to be taken seriously!
The self-professed experts…

The City of Fullerton’s foray into boutique hostelry remains a big mystery to the public, partly because the public doesn’t know much, if anything about it; but mostly because the City staff doesn’t know what to do with their boondoggle and the people who voted for it – business experts Shana Charles and “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra certainly aren’t talking. Come to think of it, neither are the two councilmembers who voted against it – Fred Jung and Nick Dunlap.

Zahra’s Fullerton Transparency claque and the Fullerton Sisters are silent as the proverbial tomb.

Why is Johnny smiling?

The facts of this disaster hardly require another distasteful regurgitation, so I won’t do it, except to remind Friends that the City deeded over part of the Transportation Center parking facility to TA/Westpark for a pittance, given that they also change the entitlements making it worth 10 times what they sold it for. TA Partners is Johnny Lu and Larry Liu a couple of Chinese con men who had already pleaded guilty to fraud in LA County and who were in the process of going belly up on a huge loan in Irvine.

You may remember that the original grant deed that was recorded by Johnny and Larry was different than the one they recorded later, and the property description in the second recorded deed fraudulently includes the east end of the Depot loading dock now under leasehold by the Bushala Brothers, Inc., whose clock is ticking on their agreement. What a fiasco.

And it may be getting worse. That seems hard to imagine since the property was handed over three and a half years ago and nothing has happened. The hotel and attached mega apartment is supposed to be complete by October 21, 2026. My recollection is that the hotel and the attached mega apartment was supposed to be done only a few months from now. How many legally required milestones have been missed remains a part of the Big Sleep.

Meanwhile Johnny and Larry are said to have taken out a loan against their Fullerton real estate. I guess someone was willing to bet on the come, or just as likely, wasn’t – ahem – fully informed. Which deed was used to describe the lender’s collateral? Must have been the most recent one that includes the loading dock.

If some new loan fraud took place we can add that to the legal entanglements between TA Partners and the family of the original brainstormer, Craig Hostert, now unfortunately deceased. The agreement with the City should have excluded TA from creating debt on the property with permission from the City. But Fullerton, being Fullerton.

This comical boondoggle is now well over 7 years old and still there are no signs of official communication about the state of this mess, let alone resolution. Is staff trying to find a replacement to keep the embarrassment alive and save face for the disaster? Who knows?

The Steven Sherry Experience

Peeing in the canal, again?

Fullerton Boohoo comes in all shapes and sizes, but its members share one thing in common: a desperate drive to support Democrat Party candidates. Fullerton Forward, the brain child of someone called Steven Sherry is no exception. “Building a Better Future for All Fullertonians” is Sherry’s slogan #1. Slogan #2 is about “values”:

But you can forget the high-minded rhetoric. Fullerton Forward is really about helping the sort of candidates who pretend to profess this credo – brain-dead Democrats – the tax ’em then help ’em out via government ilk. These were the same sort of hypocrites who cooked up all the bullshit pretexts to keep Jesus Quirk-Silva on the City Council a few years back.

I won, I won…

We met Fullerton Forward a few weeks ago as Sherry orchestrated a comical People’s Council meeting with limited pizza. The Fullerton Observer wouldn’t say who was behind the get together that attracted the cream of Fullerton Crazy’s crop, and that appointed immigration fraud “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra as the People’s Mayor.

According to the Fullerton Forward website, an individual named Linda Gardner is on the group’s 3 person “advisory council” whatever that title may mean. Here’s her bio:

Linda “…has been active in local and state politics for many years, serving as President of Democrats of North Orange County for six years and continuing to be an active member. Linda has actively worked on campaigns for California Governor, Senate and Assembly as well as Fullerton City Council and major propositions and recalls.

Linda is currently a Delegate for the California Democratic Party. She is passionate about positive change for the future of Fullerton.”

Sherry a former Democrat lobbyist, boasts about himself:

For over a decade, he has also worked in political campaigns, founding his own consulting firm, NewWave Strategies, in 2020. Through his firm, Steven has raised millions for clients nationwide and built highly effective, resourceful advertising campaigns.

Most of this is undoubtedly made up, and after you finish this post you may think the same thing.

Andre, all smiles for cannabis…

This guy looks an awful lot like the under-employed Andre Charles, husband of the insufferable hot air bag Shana whose employment history is sketchy, at best.

Anyhow, Fullerton Forward has finally submitted the necessary Form 460 required of political action committees after the June primary. This document is instructive for lots of reasons.

Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo

First, we can see several of Fullerton’s cyphers who contributed – like the failed Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo, who sued the City so she could get elected; and our old friend, the pathetic election fraud participant, Diane Vena, who endorsed Jaramillo then signed the nominating papers of the phony candidate/confessed perjurer Scott Markowitz. We see you angry liitle eye doctor Anjali Tapadia; and you too, developer shake down artist Elizabeth Hansberg; Aha, over there, indignant front parlor antique, Karen Lloreda, recalled from the Dana Point City Council, and come to Fullerton to roost in the municipal rafters.

Sherry raised almost $17K, which looks okay. But wait. There are only two main contributors:

As we will see, one is frequent Council irritant Helen Higgins, and the other is some dude named Joel Maus, which means “mouse” in English. I have no idea what his motivation is. Maybe he’ll drop by to tell us. He’s the $5K “small business” moneybags.

Like Andre Charles, Mr. Sherry seems to believe that personally doing well by doing good is his life’s path. How’s that? you ask.

Because according to the Form 460 Schedule E, Sherry paid himself almost $6000 for the campaign he ran against Fred Jung in the primary, a campaign that only lasted a couple months. I won’t even share the percentages of Sherry’s cost versus the totals he spent and raised, because the Form 460 Schedule E totals don’t add up to the total expenditures listed on the Form 460 top summary.

The best part of Sherry’s activities, with his name almost obscured, was this remarkable payment he made to himself: $4560.80 for “fundraising.” WTF?

I love the amount this honest and transparent political action committee paid to scofflaw Mario Marovic for holding their fundraiser at “Madero 1899,” even as his fake Irish pub across the street still illegally squats on the Commonwealth sidewalk. Did the dummy Sherry list the cost of the Big Fundraising Party twice, somehow? If so, the numbers still wouldn’t add up to the summary page, so it hardly matters.

Naturally, Sherry paid his tribute to the Democrat Party of OC – $500 on April 27th – confirming the purely partisan nature of his new plaything.

By the way, I’m informed that Sherry’s self-serve creation is also now the object of an FPPC complaint, dealing with illegal campaign sign disclosure rules.

Finally, we are we really to believe somebody who spent a lot to raise a little, and who, as treasurer and “Executive Director” of a PAC can’t seem to add, has “raised millions for nationwide clients?” Yeah, sure, Steve, whatever you say.

Almost half the money raised came from only two donors. If I were on that “Advisory Council” I’d be asking some serious questions of Mr. Sherry. Of course that won’t happen.