Dick Jones Archives - Page 17 of 50 - Friends For Fullerton's Future

February 16, 2012February 16, 2012Dead heads

The Mighty Peculiar Tale of Officer Joe Wolfe

By now everyone is at least casually familiar with the personage of FPD cop Joe Wolfe, who along with Manny Ramos, happened to be the first to confront the homeless schizophrenic man, Kelly Thomas, in the Fullerton Transportation Center, on the sultry night of July 5th, 2011.

Allegedly responding to a call claiming somebody was breaking into cars, Wolfe and Ramos were near enough to get to the scene first. Some folks think this was not a coincidence.

According to the DA, Wolfe searched Thomas’ backpack at the rear of a patrol car as Ramos hovered over Thomas around front – a mere 10-15 feet away. The fact that this implausibly lengthy “search” took place during Ramos’ physical and verbal intimidation of Kelly gave the DA his justification for Wolfe’s subsequent behavior.

What happened next (according to the DA) is that Kelly, who finally realized he was being queued up for an ass kicking one way or another, got up, and backed away from Ramos, hands and palms up; Ramos had pulled out his baton. And who was there to meet Thomas with drawn night stick, having circled around behind the patrol car and who suddenly seemed very much aware of what was going on?

Right. Officer Joe Wolfe.

This corpulent cop, who was so thoroughly engrossed in picking through Thomas’ scant belongings that he supposedly had no knowledge of what was happening a few feet away, suddenly became as nimble as Nijinski, allegedly slamming Kelly in the leg with his night stick, and with Ramos, tackling Thomas. As Ramos held Thomas by the neck and punched him, Wolfe was on top too, kicking and punching as the beat down and the pile on began.

We are asked (by the DA) to believe that Wolfe was completely unaware of Ramos verbally threatening Thomas, and donning his latex gloves; and that he was merely coming to Ramos’ rescue. Could it have happened that way? I guess so, but it really strains credulity to believe that Wolfe was not aware of the provacative behavior of Ramos, even if there were no pre-arranged set up of Kelly involved. And the DA provided no credible explanation for the sheer violence of his physical assault: we are left with the inevitable conclusion that Wolfe meant to do Kelly great bodily harm.

How many times did Wolfe hit Thomas before the one-eyed cop Jay Cicinelli arrived on the scene to finish him off? Only those privileged cops (and city councilmen) who have seen the video know.

Many questions remain unanswered about the role of Mr. Wolfe on the night in question, and despite the DA’s effort to absolve Wolfe of complicity in the killing, many observers, including me, remain unconvinced.

One thing we do know for sure: Joe Wolfe joins an ever growing list of Fullerton cops who can’t be let loose on the street or trusted to testify in court. He has been on paid leave since August. And until the Gennaco report on the Thomas killing comes out, there he will stay.

February 15, 2012February 15, 2012Dead heads

What Does $130,000 A Year Buy You These days?

by Joe Sipowicz90 Comments

Goodrich — I am a wordsmith. Shakespeare didn't rewrite Romulet and Julio, did he?

In the case of the FPD public information officer, not much, apparently.

It happens that FPD has some sort of class on how to love your local cops, and below, I share two on-line descriptions of the class. Check out the 2009 version vs. the 2012 version. All of the Pat McKinley quotes were replaced word-for-word with alleged quotations by Dan Hughes!

How’s that for a nice copy and paste job from a $130,000 per year employee, FPD spokesphincter Andrew Goodrich?

Check it out:

2012
http://www.cityoffullerton.com/civica/press/display.asp?layout=1&Entry=2594

The 10-week course “will expose participants to the many faces of police work in their community,” explained Fullerton Police Acting Chief Dan Hughes. “Participants will gain an overall knowledge of the Fullerton Police Department, how it’s organized, how it serves the community, and they will learn about the men and women behind the badge.”

Hughes emphasized the course is not meant to train people to become police officers; rather, “it is intended to improve communication and understanding between the community and the department.”

MCKinley3 — Gee, that sounds like something I might have said...

2009
http://activerain.com/blogsview/896479/fullerton-police-citizens-academy-join-today-

The 10-week course, which will be held from March 11 through May 13, “exposes participants to the many facets of police work in their community,” explained Fullerton Police Chief Pat McKinley. “Participants will gain an overall knowledge of the Fullerton Police Department, how it’s organized, and how it serves the community, and they will learn about the men and women behind the badge.”

McKinley emphasized the course is not meant to train people to become police officers; rather, “it is intended to open communication between the community and the department.”

Either Goodrich is the laziest $130,000 man alive, or Danny Hughes is channeling the ghost of Pat McPension!

FPD Bonus Question. “communication and understanding between the community and the department” means:

1. We will not flatulate in your face because we think you are unconscious.

2. We will not break into your house by mistake, hold you at gunpoint and refuse to apologize.

3. We will not beat you up, arrest you and then lie on the witness stand about how we came to find you in our jail the next day.

4. We will not throw you in jail for five months because we are just too damn lazy to catch the right dude.

5. We will not handcuff and sexually assault you in the back of our patrol cars.

6. We will not swipe your wallet after we kick the crap out of you.

7. We will not encourage you to commit suicide in our jail. Nor will we try to destroy the evidence thereof.

8. We will not rip you off by committing credit card fraud.

9. We will not steal your iPad at an airport security checkpoint. Or any place else for that matter.

10. We will not instigate a fake crime report, beat the living shit out of you, electrocute you, drive your facial bones into your brain, sit on your chest as you asphyxiate in your own blood, stand around as you die, and then laugh about it the next day as we go back to work.

11. None of the above.

February 14, 2012Behind Closed Doors

Nine Months Later And You’re Still Paying the Illegal Water Tax

by The Desert Rat15 Comments

It has been said that the only two certainties are death and taxes.

That sure seems to be the case when you consider Fullerton’s illegal 10% tax on water that you are forced to pay with each bill. The cowards haven’t even got the guts to add it as a line item on the bill. Wouldn’t want nosy citizens asking embarrassing questions, now would we?

Nine months ago the City was challenged on the legality of the notorious “in-lieu fee” that adds over $2,500,000 to the City General Fund coffers every year. What did they do? They decided to study. And study. And study some more.

3 Dead Batteries — The Three Dead Batteries.

Well, the study isn’t done yet. But guess what? You still pay that tax. An honest government would have gotten a definitive legal opinion from a competent attorney (ahem) and immediately reported to the public. Not in Fullerton, where the idea seems to be to keep soaking the public until some judge, or a recall election makes them fix the problem. In the meantime they’ve collected two million bucks to pay for things like councilmen Don Bankhead and Pat McKinley’s six-figure pensions.

But everything’s just fine. Go back to sleep again.

February 13, 2012February 13, 2012Dick Jones

So Who Should Run to Replace The Three Dead Batteries?

by Jan Florys Dog197 Comments

There’s just no doubt about it. Fullerton is at least twenty, maybe thirty years past needing new leadership. Well, hell, really any sort of leadership at all.

Thanks to the generosity of Tony Bushala and the hard work of the Fullerton Recall team, the once seemingly impossible is going to happen: The Good Old Boys Club is going to be unceremoniously shown the door. For good.

So who do you think should run to replace the Three Tired Tree Sloths?

Share your preferred candidates and be sure to explain why. Good, clean fun for all!

February 13, 2012"Dick" Ackerman

Why Does Dick Ackerman Hate Fullerton?

by Grover Cleveland29 Comments

I want to know why Dick Ackerman hates Fullerton so much. You may wonder at the question, but to me the fact that he does is inescapable.

The Dickster used to live in Fullerton many years ago, and sat on the city council. His claim to fame was excluding Democrat Molly McClanahan from the mayorship year after year.

Subsequently Ackerman has never seemed to want to let go of Fullerton, possibly because he saw the opportunity to ascend the political ladder on our backs. After getting elected to the State Assembly and then the State Senate, Fullerton was ever on his mind. When the Legislature redrew district boundaries in 2001, Ackerman’s 33rd Senate District shifted way south, which was convenient for Ackerman who had already moved to Irvine. And Fullerton made the trip south, too.

dicks-monster-417x500 — Dick's appendage..

Notice how Fullerton was gerrymandered into a district that extends into south county – virtually to the Pacific Ocean, connected by the thinnest of geographical tendons a few hundred feet wide. It would appear that Dick just couldn’t bear to be separated from his pals in the Fullerton Rotary and the long series of political clowns like F. “Dick” Jones that he helped to foist on us.

After a dismal Sacramento career that included self-serving budget deals and courting lobbyists in Hawaii under cover of a fake charity, Ackerman was mercifully termed out. But the Dick was a long way from finished with Fullerton.

AcknFlack4-430x500 — Forget the fact that my only job experience was to siphon personal income from Dick's political funds.

In 2009 an embarrassing opening occurred for the 72nd Assembly District. Not one to let an opportunity for political greasing to pass him by, Ackerman set up his wife Linda to run in a special election to represent Fullerton. Forget for a moment that Linda A was less qualified than a ling cod.

There was a bigger problem: the Ackermans lived in a secret, gated community – in Irvine! No problem for the ethically challenged Dick, who found a compliant stooge in Fullerton willing to pretend the Ackerman lived in his spare room! A rancid collection of repuglicans including Ed Royce, Don Bankhead, Dick Jones, and Pat McKinley, lined up to endorse this cheap fraud.

ackerman-swig-500x340 — Nothing says F-U like a beer in the face!

During this campaign Ackerman even tried legal intimidation against Fullerton citizen bloggers on FFFF. Off course we told him to shove it up is lower alimentary canal.

After the saddest, sleaziest campaign imaginable, the Ackerwoman got her posterior kicked by Chris Norby, and the Ackermans almost immediately re-registered to vote, citing as their address the Irvine mini-mansion they never left.

After this attempted swindle, any man with an iota of shame would have left Fullerton forever, but possessing an iota of shame precludes The Dickster. In 2010 Dick was back meddling in Fullerton politics on the Pat McPension bandwagon. Was it a quid pro quo? Who cares? It was definitely a way to create a solid council majority which could be lobbied hard for his new client – St. Antons Partners – that eyed the huge pile of cash the Three Tree Sloths had lined up for Ackerman.

In August 2011, the lobbyist Ackerman called in his markers and got his client jumped from number eight on the list to the top spot for a hyper-dense, massively subsidized public housing project of the type Ackerman railed against when he was seeking election in Fullerton. What a difference 20 years makes.

Comically, at almost the same time Ackerman was also tagged as a defender for inept and corrupt stasis everywhere as he taught a seminar on how to handle people like the good folks in Fullerton who had finally had enough of their government selling out to special interests like him.

And finally, Ackerman continues to wage war against the people of Fullerton, against competent government, against accountability and responsibility; he protects his investment by organizing to fight the Recall of his Three Dim Dinosaurs.

But Ackerman’s ship has sailed. His anti-recall campaign has been an expensive and unmitigated disaster. And when the Recall succeeds, Ackerman will finally be finished in Fullerton. His endorsement will be less than useless and his lobbying for government subsidies will fall on deaf ears. He can spend the rest of his days around the bar, telling anybody who will listen about how important he used to be.

February 11, 2012February 11, 2012"Dick" Ackerman

Why Are Larry Bennett and The Three Dead Batteries Afraid to Debate?

by Joe Sipowicz71 Comments

Back in November the Fullerton Recall proponent Chris Thompson issued a challenge to anti-recall spokescloaca Larry Bennett to a debate. Bennett claimed that he had to wait for his superiors (presumably “Dick” Ackerman and Dave Ellis) to get back from Thanksgiving Break.

After that, crickets.

Crickets – until the Recall signatures were validated by the Registrar of Voters and the Fullerton Is For Sale Gang knew it was in deep shit. The very next day Bennett appeared out of the blue, just dying to “debate.” But not live, no, but in a creepy, censored, on-line environment in which he could get nonsense written by Ellis and Ackerman in front of the public. Any one, really.

jones-gone-wild1 — Anger management failed...

As Dick Jones would say: Nuh, uh!

Bennett it’s time you stood up in front of a live audience and explained all the lies on your pathetic website and your dopey mailers. Then you can explain to the people of Fullerton about the record of the Somnolent Sloths you are so proud of. You can explain all about the Culture of Corruption in the FPD – well documented by one case of malfeasance after another, culminating in the death of a man. You can explain the land giveaways your boys made to campaign contributors, and the the illegal attempt to expand Redevelopment. You can tell them all about the illegal 10% water tax that they have imposed on the water rate payers of Fullerton for 15 years.

Better yet, Larry why don’t you thaw out one of your boys to do the talking for himself? Bankhead? Jones? McKinley? You claim these three are experienced, wise, honorable men. Surely such paragons of virtue can speak up for their own record, right?

February 10, 2012Behind Closed Doors

Did FPD Leak Personnel Information to Larry Bennett?

by The Fullerton Harpoon74 Comments

Chimps In Charge — Hey, you over there on the left. You can talk now!

By now we are all familiar with the impenetrable shroud in which law enforcement has wrapped itself, with the knowledge and support of supine politicians across the state who have taken its campaign money and endorsements.

In Fullerton this official Code of Silence is used by the Three Dithering Dinosaurs – Don Bankhead, Dick Jones, and Pat McKinley – to excuse their deplorable failure of leadership in the aftermath of the Kelly Thomas killing. They couldn’t say anything, it was all about personnel stuff.

But what do we have here? Listen carefully to anti-recaller Larry Bennett on an October 19, 2011 Inside OC program:

Hey, wait just a minute! That bit about the “iPad woman” doesn’t sound quite right.Here’s a snippet from Lou Ponsi’s article in the Register on the matter, just yesterday, citing FPD spokesdoughnut Andrew Goodrich:

Mejia was placed on paid administrative leave after returning from Florida and has not been a member of the department since Oct. 28, said Sgt. Andrew Goodrich. The city can’t say the reason Mejia is no longer employed with the department, Goodrich said

October 28th, 2011. So why did civilian Larry Bennett say Mejia had already been fired (past tense) nine days before, and how did he come to have any information about that at all?

Was Bennett just lying? Could be. The truth hasn’t tumbled out of his mouth for at least six months. But let’s consider something else, implausible, but not impossible – that he was actually telling the truth of what he knew.

If that’s the case then it’s obvious that the cop personnel Code of Silence was violated by somebody in the FPD itself, as some one who knew what was going on with Mejia (any guesses?), told Bankhead, Jones, or McKinley what was happening, and one of them leaked it to Bennett; and then Bennett shared it with a TV audience! Either that, or somebody in the FDP went directly to Bennett with the news so he could beat the drum for a decisive, pro-active department: No Culture of Corruption here!

Well, selective leaks are nothing new for Andrew Goodrich. Police love to share information about suspects unless those suspects happen to be cops. In this instance it sure looks like the cop curtain of secrecy was opened just a bit in the service of trying to make the department and the Three Tired Tubers look decisive.

So next time you hear about the need for secrecy in all police personnel matters, remember this story of hypocrisy. Some things aren’t as secret as others.

February 9, 2012February 10, 2012Dead heads

Fullerton Cop Cops Plea in Clumsy Computer Theft Caper

by Joe Sipowicz73 Comments

Fullerton cop Kellly Mejia finally had her day in court and pled guilty to swiping an iPad in a Miami airport TSA security check point. She got a slap on the wrist from the judge: a “theft class,” a dinky fine, some community services hours and best of all will get this expunged if she she keeps her nose clean for a whole year.

Lou Ponsi of the Register cites FPD spokessphincter Andrew Goodrich who claims Mejia was fired at the end of October after being on paid leave since May. Ponsi is obliging in pointing out that Mejia is a former Fullerton cop, glossing over the fact that she was a Fullerton cop when she committed her crime.

Of course we peons are not permitted to know what she was actually fired for, since the public is not privy to police personnel matters no matter how egregious a cop’s offense may have been; whatever Mejia was canned for, presumably it wasn’t for committing larceny in Florida, since she hadn’t pled guilty of anything yet on October 28th. Was there something even worse the we shall never know about?

Andy?

Court Case No.: F11011505	State Case No.: 132011CF0115050001XX
Name: MEJIA, KELLY JANETH		Date of Birth: 04/10/1986
Date Filed: 05/09/2011	Date Closed:	Warrant Type:
Assessment Amount: $603.00	Balance Due: $0.00	Stay Due Date: 02/07/2012
Hearing Date: 02/07/2013	Hearing Time: 09:00	Hearing Type: R
Court Room: REGJB – JUSTICE BUILDING, ROOM No.: 2-3
Address: 1351 N.W. 12 ST
Previous Case:	Next Case:
Judge: COLODNY, YVONNE	Defense Attorney: AMSEL, ROBERT
Bfile Section: F021	File Location: COURT	Box Number:

Charges:

Seq No.	Charge	Charge Type	Disposition
1	GRAND THEFT 3RD DEG	FELONY	FINDING OF GUILT

Additional Info:

Probation Start Date:	Probation End Date:
Probation Length:	Probation Type:
Defendant in Jail: N	Defendant Release to: CASH/NOEMY MEJIA DE FERNANDEZ,
Bond Amount: $5,000.00	Bond Status:
Bond Type: CASH BOND	Bond Issue Date: 05/03/2011

Dockets:

Seq. No.

Date

Book/Page

Docket

02/08/2012

TRIAL PROS. ASSIGNED: GRIFFIN, HEATHER

02/08/2012

DEFERRED PROSECUTION AGREEMENT & SPEEDY TRIAL WAIVER

02/08/2012

MEMO RE: DEFERRED PROSECUTION PROGRAM ACCEPTED

02/07/2012

COURT FEE PAYMENT 603.00 RECEIPT # 3480008

02/07/2012

REPORT RE: (BY) CLERK SET FOR 02/08/2012 AT 09:00

02/07/2012

MOTION TO VACATE JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE FILED 02/07/2012 ORAL SET FOR 02/07/2012 AT 12:30 GRANTED

02/07/2012

REPORT RE: SENTENCING SET FOR 02/07/2013 AT 09:00

02/06/2012

REPORT RE: PLEA SET FOR 02/07/2012 AT 09:01

02/06/2012

MEMORANDUM OF COSTS AMOUNT 603.00

02/06/2012

STAY GRANTED – DUE 02/07/2012

02/06/2012

DESCRIPTION	ASSESSED	PAID	BALANCE
CRIME STOPPE	20.00	20.00	0.00
ADD’L FINE/F	225.00	225.00	0.00
CRM COMP TR	50.00	50.00	0.00
STATE LETTF	3.00	3.00	0.00
COUNTY LETTF	2.00	2.00	0.00
ADD’L COURT	65.00	65.00	0.00
REPLCMNT SUR	85.00	85.00	0.00
CRIME PREV F	50.00	50.00	0.00
TEEN COURT F	3.00	3.00	0.00
PROSECUTION	100.00	100.00	0.00
TOTAL:	603.00	603.00	0.00
LAST ASSESSED: 02/06/2012		LAST PAYMENT: 02/07/2012

02/06/2012

CLOSING JUDGE GLICK, LEONARD E

01/09/2012

E-SUBPOENA: TORRES, HECTOR ID: 030-02366 FOR: TRIAL ON 02/06/2012 AT 09:00 ISSUED BY: CJIS
SENT: 01/09/2012 RECD/NOTFD: 01/09/2012 ACKN: 01/09/2012 S

01/09/2012

E-SUBPOENA: CORREA, GILBERT ID: 030-02120 FOR: TRIAL ON 02/06/2012 AT 09:00 ISSUED BY: CJIS
SENT: 01/09/2012 RECD/NOTFD: 01/09/2012 ACKN: 01/10/2012 S

01/09/2012

E-SUBPOENA: JACOBS, DAVID ID: 030-01666 FOR: TRIAL ON 02/06/2012 AT 09:00 ISSUED BY: CJIS
SENT: 01/09/2012 RECD/NOTFD: 01/09/2012 ACKN: 01/09/2012 S

01/05/2012

TRIAL HEARING SCHEDULED FOR 02/06/2012 AT 09:00

11/21/2011

MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE FILED 11/21/2011 SET FOR 11/21/2011 AT 14:09 GRANTED DEFS

11/21/2011

REPORT RE: TRIAL DATE SET FOR 01/05/2012 AT 09:00

11/21/2011

REPORT RE: PLEA SET FOR 01/05/2012 AT 09:00

11/16/2011

MOTION TO/FOR: TO CONTINUE

11/15/2011

NOTICE OF HEARING 11/17/11

10/24/2011

E-SUBPOENA: TORRES, HECTOR ID: 030-02366 FOR: TRIAL ON 11/21/2011 AT 09:00 ISSUED BY: CJIS
SENT: 10/24/2011 RECD/NOTFD: 10/24/2011 ACKN: 10/24/2011 S

10/24/2011

E-SUBPOENA: CORREA, GILBERT ID: 030-02120 FOR: TRIAL ON 11/21/2011 AT 09:00 ISSUED BY: CJIS
SENT: 10/24/2011 RECD/NOTFD: 10/24/2011 ACKN: 10/24/2011 S

10/24/2011

E-SUBPOENA: JACOBS, DAVID ID: 030-01666 FOR: TRIAL ON 11/21/2011 AT 09:00 ISSUED BY: CJIS
SENT: 10/24/2011 RECD/NOTFD: 10/24/2011 ACKN: 10/24/2011 S
SENT: RECD/NOTFD: ACKN: 10/24/2011 S

08/29/2011

MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE FILED 08/29/2011 SET FOR 08/29/2011 AT 09:31 GRANTED STIP

08/29/2011

TRIAL HEARING SCHEDULED FOR 11/21/2011 AT 09:00

08/23/2011

MOTION TO/FOR: TO CONTINUE TRIAL

08/01/2011

E-SUBPOENA: TORRES, HECTOR ID: 030-02366 FOR: TRIAL ON 08/29/2011 AT 09:00 ISSUED BY: CJIS
SENT: 08/01/2011 RECD/NOTFD: 08/01/2011 ACKN: 08/01/2011 S

08/01/2011

E-SUBPOENA: CORREA, GILBERT ID: 030-02120 FOR: TRIAL ON 08/29/2011 AT 09:00 ISSUED BY: CJIS
SENT: 08/01/2011 RECD/NOTFD: 08/01/2011 ACKN: 08/02/2011 S

08/01/2011

E-SUBPOENA: JACOBS, DAVID ID: 030-01666 FOR: TRIAL ON 08/29/2011 AT 09:00 ISSUED BY: CJIS
SENT: 08/01/2011 RECD/NOTFD: 08/01/2011 ACKN: 08/01/2011 S

06/02/2011

TRIAL UNIT ASSIGNED: FELONY DIVISION 21

06/02/2011

TRIAL PROS. ASSIGNED: ABRAMS, IVAN

06/01/2011

DISC EXHIBIT: STATE’S DEMAND FOR DEFN DISCV/DEMAND FOR ALIBI

06/01/2011

TRIAL HEARING SCHEDULED FOR 08/29/2011 AT 09:00

06/01/2011

INFORMATION FILED

05/09/2011

BOND RECEIVED POWER/RECEIPT # 46776

05/06/2011

DEMAND FOR VIEW OF EVIDENCE

05/06/2011

DEMAND FOR DISCOVERY

05/06/2011

WRITTEN PLEA OF NOT GUILTY

05/06/2011

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE ROBERT G. AMSEL

05/03/2011

INTAKE UNIT ASSIGNED: FSU – CASE SCREENING

05/03/2011

INTAKE PROS. ASSIGNED: BETTENDORF-PL, KRISTI-KF

05/03/2011

ARRAIGNMENT HEARING SCHEDULED FOR 06/01/2011 AT 09:00

05/03/2011

CAB AMT/ 5000 ISSUED 05/03/2011 POWER/46776

Well, just another in an embarrassing series of black eyes for the FPD who steadfastly maintain that there is no Culture of Corruption in the FPD, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Good luck with that “theft class,” Kelly.

February 8, 2012"Dick" Ackerman

Note to Larry Bennett: Defrost The Three Tired Turkey Dinners And Bring It on!

by Joe Sipowicz134 Comments

Here’s a fascinating excerpt from the No Recall bozos’ website. It seems that some assclown named Larry Bennett finally responded today to a November, 2011 challenge by Chris Thompson for a debate. What a difference three months makes! Last anybody heard from Bennett, he was waiting for Dick Ackerman to return from Thanksgiving vacation to tell him what to do.

Now Bennett and Ackerman seem to think they’re in a position to dictate terms to the Recall campaign. No, dimwits, you’re not going to use the Best Blog in OC to peddle your bullshit. Publish it on your own joke of a website. And invite comments, you sad, pathetic puds. I dare you.

In the meantime, Larry, I’ve been told that the challenge from the Recall is still in place: a live debate between Recall Proponent Chris Thompson and you; or better yet, with one of the Three Dead Tree Stumps – if you can pull one of them out of cold storage long enough to defrost. Do you have the huevos? Do gastropods even have huevos? I doubt it. But pretty soon you’ll have no choice.

02/08/2012

Why Is Bushala Rejecting a Debate on his Blog?

TONY, WHY DID YOU REJECT A DEBATE ON YOUR OWN BLOG???

Dear Tony,

It appears that your $170,000 has bought a recall election in June. It is unfortunate that you have rejected my offer for an on-line debate using your favorite blog – Friends for Fullerton’s Future. Chris Thompson tells me that you are unwilling to modify the blog to remove the anonymity of bloggers and commenters because of the sensitive nature of some of your regular bloggers.

In case you would like to reconsider, this is my proposal:

I proposed that you and I engage in an online debate hosted on the Friends for Fullerton’s Future Blog Site. This online debate would be between you and I and available for viewing by the public. We would alternate posts where each of us is free to make our case and to challenge the opposing post. I’m sure you might want to talk about the death of Kelly Thomas, release of the video over the D.A. and Ron Thomas’ objection, pensions, the water tax, police discipline cases and the responsibility of our elected council members. We would want to explore the political involvement of yourself, how redevelopment has benefited your family, Chris Thompson and your political friends.

Our only conditions for the online debate is that the blog change its operations to provide to the Citizens of Fullerton the same level of transparency they demand of the individuals and institutions they attack. Specifically the bloggers who post to your site would post under their actual name. That way the Citizens of Fullerton would know who is making what charge and the responsibility for their comments would rightly be a matter of public record. Secondly, the commenter’s who wish to post to our debate items would do so using a Facebook profile. That would bring some accountability and civility to the debate. This format is used successfully by the Orange County Register, Times Community News publications, and many other political blogs.

I believe this will be a constructive debate that uses the blog you like to tout. I look forward to your reconsideration.

Regards,

Larry Bennett

Chairman, Protect Fullerton-Recall No

February 7, 2012February 7, 2012Arts & Architecture

Amerige Court—How to Give Away Public Land for $500

by The Fullerton Savage18 Comments

Last December The Fullerton Redevelopment Agency approved yet another extension to Pelican, the hapless developer of the gigantic Amerige Court project downtown. Readers will recall that this project was approved in 2008 over the objections of hundreds of people who saw it for what it was, yet another cheap looking, insipid copy of the retail/loft model that is supposed to revive downtowns.

This time the now unemployed redevelopment staff allowed the developer to plan to rent the housing units at first, even though when it was first approved years ago it was supposed to be all about classing up the area by inviting the landowning gentry to move in and stare down the lawless drunks of Fullerton’s bar culture.

So two months ago, despite several people speaking out against the fourth (!) amendment to the original agreement, and no one speaking in favor of it, the extension was granted. Bruce Whitaker and Sharon Quirk-Silva dissented, having had enough of developer excuses for why they haven’t been able to build anything, but Bankhead, McKinley, and Jones predictably went along with this giveaway of taxpayer owned land in the heart of the city.

Well, that was back before Redevelopment disappeared last week, so now they have to do it all over as the City Council tonight.

Show up to watch developer owned politicians try to give away your land once again, if you let them.

Last week we showed you why the Three Dinosaurs were so willing to perpetuate this disaster of a project.

When you take their money, you have to do their bidding. Besides, if you can give away public land to build a monstrous and unneeded architecturally appalling project that will add more traffic to the area and tear down some really old buildings to do it, why wouldn’t you? Especially when the half of the development partnership that’s still in business gives you $500 to keep you from being recalled?