That would be former Redevelopment Director and big Fullerton pension recipient Gary Chalupsky.
Some may remember Chalupsky for his long string of embarrassing boondoggles and Redevelopment expenditures of questionable legality – like building the Muckenthaler amphitheater which is not even in a Redevelopment project area.
Just type in “Redevelopment” in our search box and knock yourself out. From the Knowlwood fiasco and North Platform smash up to The City Lights debacle and the humiliating Poisoned Park disaster, Chalupsky was there every inept, unaccountable step of the way. For well over ten years. Plenty of time to get vested in CalPERS.
Gary Chalupsky was the guy who proved beyond all doubt that Fullerton was very much for sale. Ever wonder where the 100 East section of Whiting Avenue went? Ask Chalupsky.
Others may also remember this upstanding individual for his phony “retirement” and immediate double-dip that was countenanced by an incompetent council who seemed to think Chalupsky knew what he was doing.
Redevelopment is now thankfully dead. But it feathered a lot of nests along the way.
Did former Fullerton Police Chief Pat McKinley bring LAPD Chief Daryl Gates’ unique style of policing to Fullerton? This lady (Jean Thaxton), who worked for the LAPD under Gates and alongside his protege, Pat McKinley sure seems to think so. And we know that McKinley admires Gates as his friend and mentor.
Her son was shot in the back by a cop in Downey and she appeared at a Fullerton City Council meeting to support the family of Kelly Thomas – who was beaten to death by six cops of the FPD.
I liked the end bit where this woman admonishes the council to actually provide training for their cops rather than just turning lem loose with badges and guns. I’m sure they get some training; and I’m sure that some of them actually remember some of it. But police departments can’t teach ethics and humanity to a 20 year-old, even if they felt inclined to do so.
Ramos, Cicinelli, Wolfe, Hampton, Mejia, Major, Mater, Tong, Cross, Rincon, etc., etc., ad nauseam. McKinley: “I hired them all.”
One might ask the question, “How in the world did Fullerton get stuck with not one, but two Dick Jones”?
This spectacle of Doc HeeHaw sharing his consternated confusion over the illegal water tax boils down to this: his lawyer, Attorney Dick tells him it is illegal and should be got rid of (15 years too late, of course); and Doc Dick agrees. His solution? Change the name of the tax!
Can it be possible that he actually believes the idiocy that tumbles out of his yapper? When it comes to muddled, loud, Southern-fried buffoonery there’s just no beating F. Dick Jones.
No surprise punches from Pat McPension, as he disagrees with Bruce Whataker about what to do with the money that is taken from us via an illegal tax on water. Mr. McPension has become quite fond of this tax since it went to pay his own bloated salary and pension over the years.
McPension wants to keep our money in an “escrow account” so that if and when the “experts” properly educate him and the rest of the council, they can decide what to do with their ill-gotten gains; then, presumably, “they” will let us peons know. McKinley goes even farther claiming that he supports plowing the illegal tax back revenue back into water infrastructure without so much as wondering how the infrastructure got so neglected in the first place.
Well, here’s what I say: a person who has the opportunity to kill an illegal tax and doesn’t is no better than the person who supports an illegal tax in the first place.
I found this communication in our in-box yesterday:
An Open Letter to Doug Chaffee
April 23, 2012
Dear Mr. Chaffee:
I support the recall effort and will vote in favor of removing all three councilmen on June 5th. I support the statements made on the Notice of Intent to Recall, and I believe any candidate running to replace a recalled councilman should believe the same.
I saw this on Euclid today. The homeowner seems to be on both sides of the fence. It begs the question: Are you?
Um, anyone miss the irony?
The rumor mill is spinning around town. It claims that you’re proud to receive Pat McKinley’s endorsement of your candidacy should the recall succeed; and worse publicly stated as much during a fundraising event at the Pint House several weeks ago. If this is true, this is not compatible with the Notice of Intent to Recall. You have to pick a side and you have to do so definitively.
In fact, I demand you take one of four positions immediately.
1) If you have stated that you’re proud to receive McKinley’s backing, you must withdraw your candidacy from the special election on June 5th. This statement does not meet with the spirit of the recall and is insulting to the electorate. Candidates not supporting the spirit of the recall should not be on the ballot. Just because you had some extra campaign signs sitting around from 2010 doesn’t mean you’re entitled to run.
2) If you find it morally acceptable to be proud of McKinley’s endorsement of your candidacy, state so in bold letters on all your campaign literature, website, Facebook account, and during any public appearances you make. Failure to be transparent on this issue is dishonest.
3) If you’re not proud of McKinley’s endorsement, state loudly and often that you’ve signed the recall petition and outline why Pat McKinley needs to go. Demand that those posting propaganda against the recall remove your name from their lawns. Take a stance and make it clear that no supporter of Pat McKinley is a supporter of yours.
4) Do nothing. If you ignore this open letter and succeed in your candidacy, count on being recalled.
Sincerely,
Ryan Cantor
P.S. Dear Friends, just to show what a small world it is, after all, the property above is the residence of one Beatriz Gregg, mater familias of the Gregg clan that includes our old pal Aaron, whose 2010 campaign was, um, something of a personal embarrassment.
I’ve decided to re-run this post every few weeks from now until Pat McKinley is recalled. I want every woman in Fullerton to take a look at the twisted mess our former police chief is.
– The Fullerton Shadow
Yesterday, the She-Bear, ex-Fullerton Police Chief and current city council embarrassment, Pat McKinley, lumbered into Brea. His mission was to help the sweet ladies of the Soroptimist’s local defend themselves in dangerous situations.
Of course when he signed up for the gig, his hosts were probably unaware that as police chief of Fullerton he hired a serial sexual predator, Albert Rincon, who, even after numerous incidents of assault victim complaints, was permitted by McKinley to keep patrolling the streets of Fullerton. We know what he was patrolling for. Rincon’s MO was to falsely arrest, handcuff, then grope his victims in the backseat of an FPD patrol car.
Naturally, some womenfolk took umbrage at McKinley’s bald-faced hypocrisy, and showed up to ask the questions McKinley had been hoping like hell nobody would ever ask. To say that She-Bear stepped in his own poop would be the understatement of the year. He’s not going to be able to scrape this off his shoe anytime soon. Here’s some of the video:
He said what??!! “Those ladies weren’t people like this”??!! So now Pat McKinley gets to pick and choose which women deserve sexual battery at the hands of his hand-picked police officers?
And somehow this creep keeps a straight face as he urges women to use their “she bear” instincts to avoid the type of pervert cop he kept on the street, despite the fact that bent cops like Albert Rincon are armed with tasers and guns and are amply protected by the tarnished badges incompetents like McKinley not only give them, but let them keep.
The final insult? According to McKinley, Rincon didn’t sexually assault anybody. It was only “inappropriate touching.” Not a good thing, but “it ain’t a dangerous thing.” Well that may be a novel defense for rapists in the future!
I don’t know about you, but I say it’s time for this dangerous sadist to go.
On Tuesday night good ol’ Larry all but admitted that there was indeed a 10% tax on your water. Of course he tried to diffuse the ugly truth by saying that 1) he likes paying the tax (could be true – he’s a damned fool); and, 2) the tax helps keep his grass green and his flowers happy because he’s a water hog (the first part is a falsehood; the second, yes, I believe he likes to waste water). Naturally, he was just parroting the nonsense of his hero Doc HeeHaw who also claimed some part of the 10% went to water delivery – an outright lie.
Anyway, I think that if he had a shred of honor, Bennett would now make good on his promise to pay your monthly water bill. But if you want to ask him you’d better hurry up. Larry will only pay the first person to e-mail him!
Poor Larry Bennett. As spokeshole and Chief Liar for the moribund Recall No campaign he is upset that folks are disrespecting his Heroes on the council.
But get this: Larry doesn’t want his water rates reduced! He likes the illegal 10% tax and even wants to keep it because he somehow believes this will keep his grass green.
Of course, it’s funny to watch Bennett admit, sort of, that there is a $2.5 million problem after he challenged water rate payers to find the illegal tax on their bill; and it’s hard to tell if Bennett is just pimping for the Three Flat Tires or if he really believes that the illegal in-lieu fee has something to do with delivering water to his flower beds. However you slice it, this assclown is a first class tool.
And it’s pretty clear he doesn’t like annoying public comments that hold his Three Blithering Boneheads accountable for their miscreance and incompetence.
The opponents of the Fullerton Recall, just like their predecessors in 1994, keep yammering about the “proper” use of the recall process. According to these worthy folks, the power of recall is only to be exercised in cases where an office holder has perpetrated malfeasance in office. Their argument is self-serving. And wrong. Here is what the State Constitution actually says, clearly and succinctly:
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 2 VOTING, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, AND RECALL SEC. 13.
Recall is the power of the electors to remove an elective officer.
And that’s it. The rest is all about the technical procedure of doing it. There is no discussion of when recall is appropriate or when it may be used. None. From this terse definition we may reasonably infer that any use of recall is appropriate when the electorate deems it to be so. But what about malfeasance in office? That’s why we have a criminal code!
Of course it hardly needs to be pointed out that the Fullerton Recall has several great reasons to get rid of the Three Dithering Dinosaurs, including failure to lead, creating and tolerating a Culture of Corruption in the FPD, backing an illegal tax on your water for 15 years, and of course, let us not forget, all those insider deals to cronies and campaign contributors in which they gave away streets, sidewalks and government subsidies worth millions.
Anyway, next time you hear somebody like Molly McClanahan or Jan Flory cluck-clucking about this, be sure to to ask them if they’ve ever even bothered to read the State’s Constitution.
The following communication landed in the FFFF hopper yesterday complaining about the recall, etc. It is just so deliciously disjointed, illogical, misinformed, and well, crackpotty that it deserves to be shared with the friends.
I resent having literature sent to my home on the recall. I think this is nothing but a witch hunt. The Support the Fullerton Recall/Water Tax paper sent to my home doesn’t mention the other board members. This tax was voted in 15 years ago and how many council members and city managers knew about this? Why are you only mentioning the three? What about the others? I think if you have enough money to be sending slanted info the citizens of Fullerton, you could certainly use it to a better advantage. I feel terrible about the Kelly case, but I don’t think only 3 board members need to be blamed. From the beginning you have pointed fingers to the three. What did they not vote on that you find they need to be recalled for? Don’t we all have our own opinions and have the right to express them. We might not all agree, but that doesn’t constitute a recall. I think you should call off the hounds and get on with the business at hand. What has the council voted against that has Tony Bushala upset about? Does it have something to do with redevelopment money? Let’s hear about that.
It’s very interesting that this unfortunate soul has been told by somebody that the illegal water tax was actually “voted in” 15 years ago.
