A couple days later, as FFFF shared, Skasika Kennedy recreated public comments (erroneously, of course) and added her typical “editor’s note” at the end of Bushala’s statement, bragging about standing up to his falsehoods.
It turns out that Bushala is not going to take this defamation lying down, and has retained counsel by the name of Briggs Alexander. This firm sent the following letter to Skakia Kennedy yesterday calling out her failure to show wherein Bushala had lied, and demanding that she reproduce (without editorial comment) a letter from young Bushala in lieu of facing legal action for libel.
Wow. Suggesting that the Kennedy Sisters behave like responsible journalists and quit defaming citizens. What a novel concept.
The look of vacant self-satisfaction…
It’s pretty sad when it takes this sort of effort to get people who call you a liar to prove where the lies are. In this instance there are no lies since the documents detailing Zahra’s dubious slime trail across the United States have been published right here on FFFF. Of course the Kennedy’s have no interest in the truth and are completely enveloped by their ideological miasma in which truth is whatever helps you feel good about your cherished ideals; okay for private rumination, possibly costly in a public forum.
Last fall a silly committee was created by the City Council to pretend to explore ways to raise Fullerton’s public revenue. It’s gone by the hopeful name “Fiscal Sustainability Committee.”
No one really believed this “ad hoc” committee was meant to do anything but to propose some sort of sales tax increase, and that’s exactly what they did this week at what looked to be their final meeting. Of course there were only 4 members present and they split on whether to propose a general sales tax increase or special sales taxes aimed at “public safety” and infrastructure.
But this predictable and inconclusive conclusion is not what my post is about.
This post is about a guy named Derek Smith, one of the appointees to this committee, lifted out of obscurity by none other than Councilman “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra.
Guess what a very quick search reveals? Smith was not a random appointment based on apparent fiscal experience. Derek Smith is the political operative for the UFCW 324, the grocery store worker’s local union. Does that ring a bell? It should. Derek was clearly the mastermind of the national HQ’s $60,000 contribution to an “independent” political action committee dedicated to electing Vivian Kitty Jaramillo last fall. The origin of that money suggests a much darker source: the local SoCal MJ dispensary cartel.
That’s a lot of green from the produce section. How come? Because the OCFW 324 represents workers in the local marijuana dispensary business, part of a wider cartel that has been trying, with the help of Ahmad Zahra, to crack into Fullerton for several years. Jaramillo was going to be their Golden Ticket for a revived marijuana ordinance.
So Smith’s real fiscal experience consists of blowing $60K of somebody else’s cabbage on the S.S. Jaramillo.
Backscratching is fun – with other people’s money…
Back to Fullerton, Cannabis Jaramillo’s loss to Jamie Valencia was disastrous to Zahra in so many ways, not the least of which could his apparent utility to the MJ cartel.
Anyhow, at the end of the meeting Smith voted to recommend a general sales tax increase for Fullerton to deal with our fiscal crisis, although in the front of his mind must surely have been the idea revenue from the sale of cannabis products – good for the budget, good for his union.
And last year we were number 29, among Orange County’s 34 cities based on per capita unrestricted net positions (UNP).
FFFF’s Bureau of Data & Statistics (FFFFBDS) was presented the following chart produced by the California Policy Center, a conservative think tank who tracks such things.
Keep going to toward the bottom…
Ouch. Fullerton is way down there at the bottom – each citizen being in the red for $1050 – based on 2023 numbers from the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report. We are better off than Orange, Costa Mesa, Anaheim and Santa Ana.
Pretty soon Fullerton is going to have to pay the piper and we will be presented, once again, with a Measure S-type sales tax increase in the 13% range. The question is whether such a tax can pass at an election. A General Tax only needs 50%+1 but may be a tough sell; a special tax – for infrastructure, say – requires 67% a harder nut, but one where people can see what they’re getting.
Accountability? It was never on the agenda.
An infrastructures tax does noting to alleviate Fullerton’s chronic financial mismanagement under Fitzgerald, Flory, Zahra, Quirk-Silva and Charles. It’s very clear that the liberals on the Council want the tax that eluded them in 2020.
Ideas, anyone? Anyone else?
But what about Jung and Dunlap? They are no longer able to distance themselves from Fullerton’s fiscal cliff having now been around for over four years. What have they done to ameliorate the chronic shortfall? The answer is nothing. For years the sleepy Bruce Whitaker voted no on annual budgets and he never bothered to put much thought into solving the problem.
Then there’s newcomer Jamie Valencia who’s not responsible for any part of the problem – yet. Will she go for a tax on the ballot? Her public safety union supporters will push her. Does she even understand the magnitude of Fullerton’s mismanagement? I wonder.
In defeat, malice…
Of course we may be grateful that Valencia’s opponent didn’t win. Then a sales tax would have been inevitable.
On Tuesday George A. Bushala returned to the Fullerton City Council Chambers to address the the issue of Ahmad Zahra’s Marriage Fraud to gain permanent residency status. That was entertaining as Zahra got into a huff, interrupted, cried, got up and left the room. Then Bushala expanded on his thesis, noting that Zahra gets away with his behavior thanks the connivance of the fake news Fullerton Observer, a self-styled newspaper that is incompetent, always prejudiced, and that has gone out of it’s way to insinuate libels against people just like him.
In a high state of pique the Kennedy Sisters published their usual blog recap of public comments; but they let their self-righteous hosannas get the better of them.
First they recount an entire dialog between Zahra, Fred Jung and the City Attorney – none of which actually occurred.
A sense of irony being nothing if not completely missed by the Kennedy Sisters, Bushala’s speech is followed by one of those obnoxious “Editor” notes that are the hallmark of the Observer. This one is so faint it’s almost impossible to read, but really it’s just a lame daisy chain of excuses, self-righteousness and pro-Zahra bullshit that ends with an accusation that Bushala spreads falsehoods and she (which ever sister scribbled this) won’t tolerate it!
The Observer is “news of the people by the people,” donchaknow, the activist Mother that begat all sorts of save this and thats. They strive to get the truth out, so long as “truth” is compatible with their own warped, worldview. We all saw how mightily the Kennedy Sisters avoided the the story of the fake Markowitz candidacy. In fact Sharon seemed to involve herself in the cover-up by coaching the hapless Diane Vena.
And thus the circle is closed as the Kennedys perform yet again the very thing of which George Bushala accused them.
The facts are clear. There are no falsehoods related about Zahra. Everything Bushala said was a matter of fact, and FFFF has copies of the documents to prove it. If one wishes to question Zahra’s motives for running down to Little Rock, Arkansas to marry a female citizen, one is not spreading falsehoods, but rather is positing the most likely scenario.
The Kennedys believe “Dr.” Zahra is honorable and transparent – despite all the evidence to the contrary. This utterly slavish devotion renders them incapable to see their own culpable participation in Zahra’s lies. From his assault and battery case, to his Observer-enabled plagiarism they’ve been in lockstep with this Middle Eastern miscreant.
A couple months ago FFFFs attorney, Kelly Aviles sent a letter to the Fullerton City Manager announcing our intention to begin a paper edition of our humble blog, and requesting that the City permit distribution of that publication on City property – places like the lobby of City Hall and the Community Center.
You’ve got mail!
Dear Mr. Levitt:
I hope this finds you well. I am writing to you on behalf of my client, Fullerton’s Future, who’s in the process of launching a new newspaper publication to serve the residents of Fullerton. As part of the marketing and distribution efforts, my client seeks to place a newspaper rack in the lobby of City Hall, similar to the arrangements that have been made with other local newspapers.
We respectfully request the City Council grant approval for my Client to install a newspaper rack in the lobby of City Hall. My Client has secured a financial commitment from a local businessman for a significant amount of private financing to launch this new business endeavor committed to contributing to the local community by providing important local news, restaurant reviews, business advertisements, and information that reflects the diverse interests of our city’s residents and their needs for alternative news sources. In addition, an application to form a new 501-c4 will soon be filed with the IRS for this venture.
Please let me know if there are any specific procedures or requirements that need to be followed to facilitate this request or if the Council has any preferences regarding the placement of such a news rack at City Hall. We are eager to comply with any guidelines you may have.
Thank you for your time and consideration and we look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Kelly Aviles
FFFF hasn’t been particularly forgiving of all the murder, mayhem, misbehaving, and costly mistakes our highly paid employees have made over the years with the blessings of boobish city council members; the City has even gone so far as to sue FFFF contributors for mistakes made by employees and our City Attorney; therefore we figured our chance of getting our voice heard in City Hall was nil.
If you check out next Tuesday’s council agenda you’ll notice Item #14. It’s a Resolution establishing a policy that keeps FFFF off City property and limits the presence of non-governmental communications to the Main Library “community corkboard” – at the discretion of the Librarian.
Wow, there’s steaming pile of bureaucratic jargon – enough to satisfy anybody who admires that sort of gobbledygook. My favorite sentence is “The policy emphasizes that all City facilities remain non-public forums.” Wouldn’t want a public forum in City Hall, now would we? That space is reserved for government propaganda.
Stick it where it will do the most god…
I don’t believe this would be on the agenda at all without previous agreement in closed session, hidden away from prying eyes under the deceitful cloak of “potential litigation.” I wonder if they can legally enforce this policy.
We may have to start printing selected copy from our greatest hits and push pin them onto that community corkboard!
Starting out as a boutique hotel, a dumb idea took on a bloated, lumbering life of its own and has been kept alive through bureaucratic inertia and predictable metastasis.
Hostert
Now there’s a new twist. Word on the street is that the family of the guy with the original brainstorm, Craig Hostert of Westpark Development, is suing the current “developers” TA Partners. You may recall that Hostert is dead. His relatives seem to think that his money men, Johnny Lu and Larry Liu of TA Partners, pushed Craig out of his interest in the project. Johnny and Larry are said to be counter suing.
That can’t be good…
Parenthetically, I might add that Johnny and Larry are no strangers to the legal system, having left a trail of bankruptcies, foreclosures, and fraud in their wake. Fullerton being Fullerton.
Enhanced with genuine brick veneer!
I don’t know what the lawsuits might entail, legally, but due to the incompetent actions of Councilmembers Bruce Whitaker, Shana Charles, and Ahmad Zahra in upzoning the property, there could be a lot at stake. Remember, the City sold Westpark/TA almost two acres of land for $1.4 million (less demolition costs) while making it worth ten times that amount by abusing the allowable density in the Transportation Center Specific Plan.
Right now the City Hall silence remains deafening. We do know the council met in closed session about this awhile back, and still the public remains in the dark. Why hasn’t the City kicked Johnny Lu and Larry Liu to the curb long ago? They were supposed to have performed all sorts of stuff by now. Here are Johnny and Larry’s milestone obligations per the Development and Disposition Agreement, approved at the end of December, 2022.
Read. Weep.
Westpark/TA Partners are clearly in default. Plans submission was supposed to take place in December 2023 – fifteen months ago. Permits were required to be obtained fourteen months ago. Grading was supposed to start eleven months ago. Above ground construction was supposed to start by the end of last October – five months ago. See a pattern?
For some reason TA Partners was given some wiggle room in the actual verbiage of the contract for plans submittal – 240 days which would have been February of 2024, still thirteen months ago, and still a massive default.
Was there an “Unavoidable Delay?” Who gets to know? Why would the City fail to exercise its right retake the property? If you see a councilperson, please be sure to ask. Of course you won’t get an answer as the whole thing is shrouded in Closed Session secrecy. Without any action on the part of Fullerton, the two fly-by-nighters are still in possession of entitlements worth a pile ‘o cash – enough to excite the pecuniary envy of Mr. Hostert’s heirs and assigns.
I get the strange feeling that this latest legal entanglement might have repercussions for any case Fullerton might have in getting rid of Johnny and Larry. It shouldn’t, but it might be cause for staff to continue to string this thing out since it has been such a lucrative toy for Fullerton’s crack “economic development” employees.
Just when you think they couldn’t be more biased, vindictive and stupid, the Kennedy Sisters, Skaska and Sharon prove you were wrong. They not only lace their “stories” with prejudicial editorializing, now they have now taken to publish letters to their “newspaper” that give every appearance to be cooked up to cause mischief.
M. Chapman, maybe?
In the mid-March version of the Observer there is a very strange “letter” by someone calling themselves “M. Chapman.” It’s a weird missive alright, so odd and so badly written that you get the idea it was written by one of the sisters herself. I’ve seen walls at FJC covered in globs of pre-class gum that made more sense.
Our correspondent informs us of a house on Wilshire Avenue that nobody wants to talk about. It’s a Big Mystery to M. Chapman because no one wants to “save” it either. A conspiracy is afoot, make no mistake!
The house is an abandoned, dinky 400 square foot box that somebody tacked siding and a porch onto in the 1960s. It’s decrepit and looks like a fire hazard; but not to Chapman who sees a treasure.
For some reason Chapman thinks the “unsafe” City notices are “poorly written,” a claim I’ve never heard before, but obviously inserted here to suggest something untoward is going on.
Then the letter gets interesting. You see, the property next door is a “land grab” by “Bushala” and the insinuation is that he wants this derelict property for some reason.
Beauty and The Beast
The first statement is just defamatory. Bushala Brothers, Inc. bought the vacant lot next door from the North Orange County Community College District with the condition that they relocate a NOCCD bungalow from Chapman Ave., which has been accomplished – a fine upgrade to the neighborhood. (picture above). BBI was the highest bidder, responding to an open and fair public bid. The house is now owned and occupied by a family member who bought it at market rate from BBI. Naturally, Chapman provides zero evidence to support his insinuation that maybe “Bushala” (by now we have to ask “which one?”) wants to own the dilapidated property next door. That’s classic Observer Sister stuff, right there.
At this point, it seems pretty obvious that somebody is cooking up information and “M. Chapman” is regurgitating it. Now who could that be?
Chapman is real interested in his/her architectural discovery, it seems, so he/she turned to Fullerton Heritage for help, but they wouldn’t “touch it with a ten foot pole.” More sinister evidence of something, Chapman concludes. Chapman says he/she was referred to the Observer(!) for some inexplicable reason – the Kennedy Sisters know very little about anything.
Then Chapman reveals the stupidity of his/her own narrative by sharing that Fullerton Heritage did indeed touch the issue with a ten foot pole. In fact, somebody at FH went way out of their way to do Chapman’s homework for him and provide a bunch of information, alas, none of it evidentiary to suggest the derelict shack was historical.
In parentheses at the end of the quote, someone thinks the run down mess would make a great “juice and java shack” which, of course the lot is not zoned for. Was it Cheri? Was it Chapman? Was is Skania Kennedy? Whoever said it, they got the shack part right.
(I now have it on excellent authority that the last paragraph in quotation marks did NOT come from anybody at the City or Fullerton Heritage. In other words, the “editor” – Skasia Kennedy made a glaring editorial error that wouldn’t have been made in a high school news paper.)
This “letter,” doesn’t quite seem right. It’s a sort of patched together amalgamation of supposed innocence (just asking questions here!) while sharing both outright libel and concocted “guesses” that lead the reader to suspect that information was shared with M. Chapman (if there even is one) from a source that wants to publicly disparage “Bushala” over something nobody gives a damn about.
And that means that the Kennedy SIsters, Skasia and Sharon, who published this tripe are complicit in this cut-rate farce.
Fullerton parks managers have a long and standout history of making things up, pursuing projects of benefit to themselves (programming), and of discounting real public input. I scanned old posts of FFFF to get a sense of the Parks Department players. Two of the leading prevaricators, Hugo Curiel and Alice Loya are gone; but a new face has emerged in this long tradition. And that face belongs to a guy named Edgar Rosales.
As Friends know, FFFF has been inquiring about the status of the deplorable Trail to Nowhere, noting that that two principal milestones have been completely missed – namely design submittal to the State and start of construction. These milestones are currently 8 months behind schedule. Mr. Peabody wondered aloud if it were even possible to meet the October ’25 completion deadline, and whether anybody even cared.
It turns out that the wheels of progress at City Hall may grind slow, but they do grind, especially if somebody else’s money is being wasted.
A sharp-eyed Friend noticed this item from the minutes of the January 13, 2025 Parks Commission meeting.
Enter Edgar Rosales, the new Alice Loya, Junior Grade. During his explanation of the Trail to Nowhere, Rosales started lying too; and misleading the Commission so blatantly, that it really was something to behold. His presentation was infuriatingly dishonest. But first, Edgar’s Transparent California dossier.
The price of prevarication…
The first Rosales lie to the Parks Commission was the assertion that the project was on schedule. Of course it isn’t. Here are the contract schedule milestones.
No, not on schedule. Check the dates, Eddie…
FFFF has already shown that the contractual milestones are completely blown out of the water. Submission for final plans to the State was supposed to happen last June. Mr. Rosales didn’t bother to inform the Commission that this milestone still hasn’t been met eight months later. No. Instead he told them that preliminary designs were submitted last June, ostensibly to make it look like the schedule was met – just in case any of the Commissioners thought to inquire. They didn’t, of course, because they didn’t know.
Well, well, well…
Then Rosales volunteered that last August soils testing was done, again a statement crafted to look like the something meaningful had occurred – to look like the maybe even the construction start milestone had been met. Soils testing isn’t construction. That milestone is obviously blown open, too since it follows design, bid and award. The statements is not only a deliberate obfuscation of the true schedule delay, it begs the question of why the City told the State the land was clean in the grant application when they obviously didn’t know and didn’t care. That lie has been propagated endlessly by Trail supporters like the Kennedy Sisters.
Giving honesty the middle finger…
The grant application fraudulently described the site as environmentally “shovel ready“ a lie that FFFF exposed long ago, and a lie now unintentionally confirmed by Rosales’ rosy recital of the project history. In the contract this intentional fraud is grounds for revocation/repayment of the grant – not that anybody at the State cares, either.
FFFF discovered through a Public Records Act request that there has been no written communication between the City and the State agency awarding the trail grant. If any contract extensions were made, they must have been verbal; and if any exist Edgar didn’t bother mentioning them.
As to the budget, why, that was looking good too! No mention by Rosales to the Commission that the grant budget failed to include soils testing, soils remediation and removal, water lines, storm drainage, or toxic monitoring well modifications; nor did he bother to remind the Commission about the rampant inflation that has taken place in the past five years since the grant application budget was submitted.
Maybe that accounts for his assertion that the City Council had appropriated $300K to $500K of Park Dwelling Funds as the City’s share of project cost. No, the City’s share was budgeted at $300K only, but that extra $200K sure will be needed.
And the hits kept coming.
Rosales repeated the lie that “Phase 1” starts at the Transportation Center. It doesn’t. It starts at the ass-back end of the still closed Poison Park. There is no eastern trail connectivity to anything.
Rosales deliberately refused to acknowledge that Phase 2 doesn’t even line up with Phase 1, glossing over the alignment mismatch at Highland Avenue where no at-grade crossing exists.
Rosales repeated the oft cited future connectivity at the west end, not a lie exactly, but a hope so delusional that it can pass as one.
So it appears that here is finally a “90%”design, although it has not yet gone trough City plan check or come to the City Council for ratification; and so far it isn’t listed as a tentative item for March meetings. Thereafter follows bid and contract award.
But Edgar is optimistic alright, as one with nothing to lose might well be. He believes the project will be done in October or November. If pigs grow wings that might happen. But there is even less chance of meeting the “plant establishment” milestone by October which necessarily follows planting by some period of time – sometimes months.
I note that Assistant City Manager Daisey Perez was present for this presentation and we should assume that both she and her boss, the boneless Eric Levitt are in on the promulgation of misinformation about this project.
Speaking of Levitt, no one here can remember an award for design services for the trail being approved by the City Council last year. A search of Council meetings in 2024 provides no information. So maybe the City Manager alone decided that a firm called KTUA – a San Diego landscape designer – got the job.
The City Council meeting agenda for March 4th has some interesting “Closed Session” items on it. For those who don’t know, Closed Session is a private meeting of the Council when legal, personnel or real estate issues are involved. The City Attorney attends the session, too, in our case the hapless buffoons of The I Can’t Believe It’s a Law Firm of Jones and Mayer.
Here’s the line up of issues.
Number 1 is about something up at the City Owned golf course – one of the too little scrutinized assets of the City of Fullerton. This has been a source of embarrassment for City staff and FFFF instruction in the past.
Ferguson and Curlee. The easy winners…
Our Friend David Curlee ran afoul of City Staff when he uncovered the rank incompetence of Alice Loya and Hugo Curiel as well as the misappropriation of Brea Dam Enterprise funds. And that’s likely the reason they dragged him into the FFFF/Joshua Ferguson lawsuit.
Why is Johnny smiling?
Number 2 is about the idiotic “boutique” hotel fiasco in which the City up-zoned the Hell out our property and then virtually gave it away to “Westpark/TA” an operation run by a couple crooks whose prior record was never disclosed to the City Council or the public. Well we found out all about it, even if our highly paid “professionals” in City Hall didn’t bother.
Any reasonable representatives of the people would have shit-canned this deal on Day 1. Not Fullerton, of course. What in the world could they be negotiating? TA hasn’t met any of its deadlines, got caught recording a phony deed, etc. TA should have been dumped a long, long time ago and their purchase amount forfeited. Interestingly the City seems to have brought in Best, Best and Krieger to do represent the City. At least it isn’t Jones and Mayer. Still, I wonder why.
Zahra Congratulates Marovic for his lawsuit…against us.
Number 3 is about our old friend Mario “Bump Out” Marovic, the scofflaw who took over from the Florentine Family in ripping off the public. He’s still illegally occupying the space he was supposed to have demolished two goddamn years ago.
Forgotten but not quite gone…
He is obviously in default of that agreement – a deal that moronically permitted him to open up his businesses and profit off our building on our sidewalk. Our indifferent City staff and Council doesn’t seem to have the stomach to give this weasel notice that he has been trespassing and that they were going to demolish the building add-on and restore the sidewalk themselves.
No, we don’t have to say shit…
Number 4 is one of those “anticipated litigation/significant exposure to litigation” items in which secrets can be withheld from potential litigants – like Friends for Fullerton Future – based on the squishy definition of the word “significant,” and self-serving public servant who happens to be defining it. Could this item be related to FFFF’s request for presence on City property? I don’t know, but I wouldn’t be surprised.
The wasteful fantasy known as “Walk on Wilshire” may be dead – even though its advocates continue their public weeping – but interesting information about the boondoggle continues to to come to light – information that doesn’t put Fullerton in a good light. WoW is yet another Fullerton cautionary tale.
One issue about WoW never discussed in public, was the Mulberry Street Ristorante parklet’s violation of the standards of Southern California Edison regarding setbacks around their transformer vaults.
Oops.
There’s the culprit, deceptively hiding under car…
It turns out there’s an Edison tranformer vault in the street right in front of the “ristorante,” and right where their “parklet” was built. Here’s the plan for the parklet. The vault is dead center in the middle of it.
The problem popped up in October, 2023 when an Edison inspector discovered a problem: Edison requires a 15ft set back around the outside of their concrete vault, free of construction.
Oops.
Now, we can’t tell what that set back would look like without a sketch. So let’s make one!
The off-limits area inside the black square essentially eradicates the poor parklet. Oops!
Edison sent Mulberry Street a couple warning letters, the second, repeating the issues, in December, 2023.
Mulberry St. Ristorante replied to both these missives, saying more or the same thing each time.
Saying fuck you to Edison isn’t a very smart thing to do if you happen to use electricity, as we will soon see. Be sure to notice how Brandon Bevins, Mulberry’s Manager, also advises Edison to talk to the City of Fullerton!
This correspondence triggered a series of subtly urgent communications between the City Engineer and Edison at the end of 2023. Even our highly paid City Manager, Eric Levitt, was somehow dragged into this low-grade stupidity – all because the City staff who “managed” this project never thought to talk to Edison in the first place.
The tenor of the correspondence and the subsequent meetings was polite, but somewhat stiff since SCE had zero intention of looking the other way. In fact, SCE notified Mulberry Street that they were going turn off the juice to the whole property on January 19, 2024 sans compliance. So Bevins, who must have been panicking, tried to scare the City into desperate action.
Bevins was plenty pissed, and suggested that the we pay the costs for his parklet – just north of $40,000! So now the City had another self-inflicted wound. But wait. Mulberry wasn’t in the clear, either.
In correspondence from December 2022 the City (somebody named Matt Laninovich) erroneously tells Bevins that their parklet can cover the SCE vault so long as there is a hinged door in the parklet platform for access. Of course he pulled that out of his ass; but he also wisely informs Bevins to consult with Edison. Had Bevins done so he could have saved everybody time and trouble, including himself. Nevertheless, the City is now a full partner in a SNAFU that was completely avoidable.
A resolution of sorts was achieved on January 24, 2024 when Edison agreed to let the parklet remain if seating on it were limited to an area outside a 15ft radius from the perimeter of the iron manhole in the middle of the vault. The manhole would have to be reinforced (in case it might blow off in an explosion, presumably) and the vault had to be accessible from the Wilshire Avenue side.
This resolution doesn’t look too promising for Mulberry Street that also had to pay for that additional manhole restraint. Look. There’s hardly any room for seating left.
Was the parklet enlarged to make it actually work? Did Edison finally look the other way? Documents acquired from a Public Act Request don’t inform us: at this point information provided by the City about this issue ends. Was there more? Who knows?
One thing I do know is that images of the operating parklet from last year show tables within the no-go zone.
How much risk were the patrons who used the Mulberry Street parklet exposed to for the past year? How much risk if Edison had not spotted the issue to begin with? I don’t know, but Edison has safety rules for a reason. The explosion of the transformer in Huntington Beach in 2019 gives us some indication of what can go wrong, and the consequences of that episode were actually considered lucky.
Walk on Wilshire. A tail-wagging-the-dog gift that keeps on giving. The thing is a moot issue now, fortunately. But if anybody feels like asking good questions about this or other city-created public hazards, I’ll bet my Nevada ranch they won’t get good answers.
