Sweet flower Elijah Manassero has just lost his temper. Did he miss his midday nap? Does he have a full diaper? Who can say? What I do know is that he has scribbled another of his diatribes for the Fullerton Observer Sisters, piling on their desperate narrative that the owners of Les Amis are victims of some sort of conspiracy in City Hall.
Les Amis sans meubles…
The City finally removed Les Amis stuff from City property a few weeks ago after the aforesaid business spent a decade and a half dodging rent, stalling, trying to weasel out of signed agreements and of course, encroaching onto public space without permit or agreement on several occasions.
The defenders of the indefensible are trying to ignore all the facts of the Les Amis history of scofflawry, and pretend that the substantial 2022 rent increases by the City were insufferable, and hence non-payment justified. And anything that happened before this gossamer pretext is wished into Fullerton Boohoo’s collective cornfield.
Off you go. We’ll hear nothing of the kind…
Tender fleur Elijah calls his article a “history,” but conveniently omits most of Les Amis‘ real histoire, and like a typical Observer reporter shares unsubstantiated conversations related to him by Ms. Jinan Montecristo – the alleged victim in all this – as gospel. Young pup Elijah mentions nothing before 2022, of course, and even Les Amis recent spotty history of non-payment goes unmentioned.
Young Elijah pops up in the garden…
Fragile and fresh Elijah has tried to speak with nobody inside of City Hall to get the true litany of Les Amis bad behavior. That would be uncomfortable. He accepts as true what he has been told by the noaccounts of Montecristo without reservation. Did he get any facts from Mayor Fred Jung about the removal of the Les Amis detritus? Nope. Might he have been told that the upcoming discussion of lease rates in the future has nothing to do with lease obligations in the past and due now? Of course. Did he he inquire about the fact that maybe the removal of the stuff happened at 6:30 am so as not to block the adjacent alleyway during business hours? No. That would interfere with the conspiracy narrative.
Found another victim! Of me!
Since the young fleur Manassero visits and cites this blog all the time, he knows very well that his mentor and manipulator, Ahmad Zahra, voted to implement the 2022 rates; and he knows that the Montecristo clan said nothing about it at the June 21, 2022 public hearing. He has obviously decided that these facts aren’t necessary to convey his nonsensical narrative. Why clutter up your prosaic propaganda with embarrassing information?
And why should Fullerton expect anything resembling honesty, integrity, or basic journalistic ethics from The Fullerton Observers and its proprietors – the Kennedy Sister, Sharon and Sitka.
A helpful Friend sent in this California High Speed Rail (CHSR) propaganda video. It’s about what will happen in Fullerton if the LA-Anaheim line goes in – a giant boondoggle within a fantastically bigger boondoggle. It’s mindbogglingly stupid.
So Fullerton’s Transportation Center is going to have massive negative impacts for years as CHSR builds ramps and tunnels, removes and relocates south platform parking, shuts down Walnut Avenue, and who knows what all else?
And get this: Fullerton isn’t even a “preferred” site for a stop. That decision has already been made.
The silly sales pitch is laughable: all this disruption will make it easier for northbound commuter trains to get to the north platform without crossing all the tracks – nonsense because they can use the south platform with a little logistical planning.
I suppose we can get some satisfaction that this massive disaster will possibly never be built. There’s no justification for HSR between LA and Anaheim, except that cooked up by people like our old friend, lobbyist and conman Kurt Pringle working for who knows whom. Pringle’s grand contribution to this mess has already been the embarrassment of ARTIC, the $200,000,000 station that is no station at all, but sold to the silly and gullible as a necessary component of the Big Idea.
The travel time between LA and Anaheim for HSR is essentially the same as current Metrolink service. The short distance from Union Station, and Deadman’s Curve in Fullerton militate against high speed travel through densely populated areas.
But never let facts and commonsense stop the CHSR propaganda machine; after all, propaganda is almost all the CHSR has produced so far, plus a few grossly overpriced overpasses around Fresno. Not much to show for 18 years of effort, and billions wasted. Not a single track has been laid; not a single train car delivered.
Will Fullerton put up some resistance, even token resistance? We’ll see if anybody on our City Council has some courage. It’s a damn good issue to go to bat for; which means probably not.
So it looks as if the City of Fullerton has finally decided to quit playing pat-a-cake with Jinan and young Oliver Montecristo. The owners of the restaurant Les Amis who kept encroaching on public property without approval or permits, and who serially dodged paying tens of thousands of dollars to the City in rent, are having their “improvements” on public property removed by the City.
Les Amis and unpermitted stuff…
Here’s the notification to the City Council from acting City Manager, Eddie Manfro:
Mayor Jung and City Council Members,
I was informed this morning that Public Works crews have removed the outdoor dining encroachments at Les Amis restaurant this morning. This follows the 90 day extension that she was granted by City Manager Eric Levitt. Following her payment of $3,900 on July 23, 2025, no further payments have been received.
According to Director Bise, Les Amis was provided with a 48 hour notice prior to removal of the encroachments. Public Works will hold it for 30 days in case they wish to keep it for their future use (but not for installation in the public space).
A copy of Mr. Levitt’s 90 day extension is attached for reference. Thank you.
Eddie
A yard sale is a small business!!
No doubt the suddenly “pro-business” folks at the Fullerton Observer, and “doctors” Zahra and Charles will continue to spin this into a David and Goliath story: little David being the scofflaws who have paid almost nothing to the City in rent for 15 years and who blatantly refused to follow City rules about squatting on public premises.
Poor Oliver
The last City Manager, Eric Leavitt actually gave the Montecristo mob yet another 90 days to make good on their debts and encroachments. Les Amis got a two day notice and still refused to do anything. So Public Works did. And the City has generously volunteered to keep the Montecristo junk on hand for a month in case they want it for some reason.
Les Amis sans meubles…
I really hope Jinan and Oliver get a bill for cost of removing their junk from the public right-of-way, although I doubt if they’d pay it.
And speaking of ever so earnest Oliver, I look forward to his appearance at the next City Council meeting blaming Mayor Jung for his own mother’s failure to pay her bills and play by the rules.
Got noise? Lots of noise? The two “doctors” on the Fullerton City Council and their followers like the Kennedy Sisters and tender young Elijah want you to believe this is vibrancy and culture and small business success!
Friends can file this story under a number of different categories: political puppetry, gross hypocrisy, unmitigated gall, comical self-righteousness, offense is the best defense; pick any one you like.
Pay no attention to the overdue bills…
At last Tuesday’s Fullerton City Council meeting we were treated to another diatribe by a guy named Oliver Montecristo attacking Fred Jung, Nick Dunlap and Jamie Valencia. We have already met Oliver, here. Oliver wants everyone to believe that Jung and his colleagues are anti-small business, a new line of attack by Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles, two muppets who have never run a business in their lives.
I sometimes fight for transparency!
It’s pretty clear that Oliver is one of the minions in Zahra’s stable of impressionable young fellas. His other protégé, lively young Elijah Manassero, has taken up the myth of the City’s persecution of Olly’s mom, and the family restaurant, Les Amis. The rents on City property are so darn high! The Kennedy Sisters at the Fullerton Observer have also taken up the Les Amis cause.
The only problem is that the Montecristo clan led by mom, Jinan, have a notorious record of not paying their bills, and encroaching on public property without authorization or permits. Check it out:
Feb 2011 Jinan Montecristo d.b.a. Les Amis Restaurant & Lounge (Jinan) applied for an outdoor dining encroachment agreement.
Aug 2011 After several reviews of the site plan, staff provided a draft encroachment agreement to Jinan for consideration
Sept 2011 Jinan issued a letter to staff challenging the lease rates. Les Amis installed fencing and started operating within the public right-of-way without executed agreement (south patio).
Dec 2011 Staff send revised encroachment agreement for consideration
June 2012 Jinan was issued an Administrative Restaurant Use Permit (ARUP), which included an ancillary outdoor patio. Among other things, the conditions of the ARUP required a valid encroachment agreement pursuant to the Outdoor Dining Guidelines established by the City Council.
July 2012 Staff send revised encroachment agreement for consideration
Dec 2015 Jinan submitted building permit to expand into the north portion of the building.
Feb 2016 Staff inform Jinan that she owed $28,659.60 for use of the public right-of-way of private benefit (9/2011 – 2/2016).
May 2016 Modification of an Amended ARUP was approved, expanding existing restaurant into adjacent tenant space. Jinan executed an encroachment agreement for outdoor dining (south patio only; $510/month; $6,120 annually). The agreement also required payment for 12-month prior occupancy ($6,120; negotiated down from $28,659.60).
Aug 2016 Jinan issues a letter to staff indicated they are “unable to fulfill financial obligations” due to “hardship”.
April 2017 Jinan was issued a letter from the City attorney to pay outstanding balance on account.
May 2017 Encroachment Agreement expired.
Aug 2017 Les Amis expanded into the north patio area without a permit/agreement for outdoor dining.
Nov 2018 Jinan was issued a letter from the City attorney, indicating they are in violation of their ARUP, failed to pay the lease outlined in the executed agreement, and are required to remove encroachments (north and south patio) by Dec. 14, 2018. Jinan subsequently expressed interest in continued use of both patios. Outstanding balance was $24,643.70 at the time.
Dec 2018 Jinan signed resolution of breach of outdoor dining encroachment agreement and FMC. Resolution waived outstanding balance on Patio 2 (north patio; $5,263.70), resulting in $19,380 of remaining account balance.
Jan 2019 Staff sent two encroachment agreement(s) for consideration. Jinan expressed interest in removing Patio 1 (south patio) and expanding Patio 2 (north patio)
March 2019 Jinan executed Encroachment Agreement for new north patio only. New Agreement was for $913.75/month ($510 for north patio; $403.75 for prior occupancy fee ($19,300 amortized over 48 months))
Permit was issued for removal of fencing around south patio and installation for north patio expansion per executed agreement.
May 2020 City Council paused collecting lease revenue from all outdoor dining encroachments due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Outstanding balance for all outdoor dining agreements was also waived. Les Amis waived balance was approximately $13,647.50.
June 2022 Council approved new lease rates for outdoor dining on public property.
Aug 2022 Les Amis reinstalled south patio without permits and/or an agreement.
Sept 2022 Jinan submitted application to reinstall south patio.
Aug 2023 Staff reinitiated collecting lease from all existing agreements.
Oct 2024 Jinan defaulted on payments from August 2023 to October 2024, accumulating a dept of $13,468.71. Jinan signed an agreement for a 12-month payment plan to pay the outstanding debt of $13,468.71.
NOTE: this did not include prior occupancy for the reinstalled south patio.
Nov 2024 Jinan executed two superseding encroachment agreements for outdoor dining with the new lease areas and rates.
April 2025 Jinan defaulted on payments, accumulating an outstanding balance of $26,650.96. Staff terminated the agreements, cancelled the payment plan, issued several notices of violations, and required removal of all encroachments. Jinan expressed financial hardship and requested the City revisit the lease rate. Jinan also paid $1,200 toward the payment plan and expressed interest in purchasing the property. The city paused removal to explore options.
July 2025 Jinan was once again requested to remove all unpermitted encroachments. Jinan paid $3,900 toward the payment plan. City Manager agree to extend the time for compliance or a change in the Outdoor Dining policy for 60 days. To date, Jinan has an outstanding balance of $31,185.10 ($5,494.06 payment plan; $25,691.04 encroachment agreements)
Yikes! What a history of screwing the taxpayers. Almost 15 years worth. Poor, small-businessman Oliver was in fourth grade when it started.
Not paying your debts to the public is the best way to become a Sharon Quirk Woman of the Year!
Over the years Jinan has deliberately dodged paying many tens of thousands of dollars in rent to the people of Fullerton. She has illegally encroached onto public property without agreements or permits in place on numerous occasions. The record is abundantly clear: the City has bent over backward for years and years to accommodate this woman; rather than evicting Janin from the City’s property and taking her to court for the rent due she has effectively stolen, they kept giving her more opportunities to rip us off. Pathetic, really.
Found another victim!
Well, Oliver may think the documentation of his family stiffing the public is all nonsense and that somehow he and mommy are victims, doncha know; however, no one except the inordinately stupid would believe it.
The cynical manipulators like Doc Zahra don’t believe it either, but Zahra won’t miss a chance to get some eager fool to stand up and harass the people who haven’t, and won’t make him Mayor.
Shana Charles has flipped her stance on noise regulations. I wrote about it, here the other day.
Previously, the councilwoman proposed a 10pm cutoff on amplified music with an 11pm cutoff on weekends. This is an ideal solution, as it supports residents’ needs for peace and quiet while still recognizing the importance of nightlife to the city’s “vibe.” However, Mayor Pro-Tem Charles has renounced her previous stance and instead, her recent vote indicates that she now stands behind louder music and promotes the disruption of residents.
Shana has failed to side with the reasonable ordinance that would benefit both residents and businesses. Her stance seems to favor only the business side, ignoring the needs of the residents who deserve a quiet environment, especially during late hours. The lack of respect for all of us who live here undermines trust in our local government and shows a disregard in our community’s well being.
Once again, an elected in Fullerton has flip-flopped. Big surprise.
Obviously, Shana doesn’t live near the loud music. The amplified music is constantly disrupting our sleep, even on weeknights when rest is necessary for school and work. This inconvenience is impossible to get used to and negatively impacts our focus, energy, and overall lifestyle. It never seems to quiet and is a constant headache to all of those who are affected.
Shana’s decision was hypocritical and disrespectful to all residents. It just looked political. It’s frustrating to see those in charge act for political reasons rather than in the best interests of the community. Some councilpersons’ choices continue to show a lack of accountability and awareness of how their actions impact everyone else. Decisions like these create disappointment and distrust, making it harder for residents to believe that those leading Fullerton truly care about the people they represent.
We need to hold Mayor Pro-Tem Charles accountable for her actions and recognize what the city really needs, not what Charles wants.
It could be worse. It could be Speed Metal! Wait. It is!
Last night the Fullerton City Council, at long last, approved a noise-related addition to the Municipal Code. The vote was 3-2: Jung, Dunlap, and Valencia for, Charles and Zahra voting no.
This effort has been going on for over ten years, has been diddled with by more than ten City Councilpersons (Flory twice), and five City Managers, acting and permanent.
The ordinance is pretty tame really, with decibel levels I think are way too high, but at least gauged at the property line where the goofy and distracting issue of “ambient noise” can be better put to rest. Hours of outdoor music have been addressed with common sense and respect for neighboring inhabitants.
Fines for violators are in place, and about time, too.
For the business…
It was amusing to watch Zahra and Charles pretend to be “pro-business.” We know the performance was disingenuous because of their cavalier attitude to non-bar businesses on Wilshire Avenue that suffered when that pair closed the street for their absurd “Walk on Wilshire.” They ignored the fact that downtown Fullerton runs in the red and is subsidized by the rest of us. Really their act was about voting against what they characterized as the wishes of “one businessman” regardless of the need for reform.
In what surely must be the dumbest thing said in recent years at a council meeting, Ahmad Zahra claimed as a fact that the “downtown is dying,” a really weird and irresponsible thing to utter. The Dismal Damascus Doctor offered exactly zero facts to support his stupid utterance.
Transparency, uber alles!
Naturally, our friend sweet young Elijah Manassero popped up to inform the council that most of the bar owners were already non-compliant with the new rules. His logic led him to conclude that therefore the new regulations were ill-advised. It didn’t seem to occur to the tender sprout that the continual bar-owner abuse of existing law was precisely why the new ordinance was needed. I have no idea what they’re teaching the young folk these days, but thinking doesn’t seem to be in the bundle, although I’m sure callow Elijah has loads and loads of self esteem.
Now it will be time to see if the City Code Enforcement operation will employ the willingness and the competence to enforce the law. They have stubbornly refused to do so in the past, partly because councilmembers were running interference for the scofflaws. And part of the reason for staff’s reluctance might be because enforcement implies some sort of fault or failure, and in City Hall the decades long mess they made out of downtown Fullerton, has been characterized as a stunning and inarguable success.
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.
FFFF received a fun email the other day, pecked out by Fullerton 5th District Councilman Ahmad Zahra. It is directed to Fullerton Assistant City Attorney Baron Bettenhausen, a fellow that the Friends met yesterday. Ahmad writes on January 27th, and is obviously still in a grand funk about losing his precious Walk on Wilshire the previous week.
We’re #1.08!
The tone of the letter is pretty unfriendly since Zahra seems to believe Bettenhausen has left out something real important in the discussion of Jamie Valencia returning campaign contributions. Of course, as we have seen, none of this would have been necessary if Bettenhausen knew the law and had known about the FPPC decision in Palo Alto before January 21st.
But let’s let Ahmad speak for himself:
From: Ahmad Zahra <ahmad.zahra@cityoffullerton.com> Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2025 9:55 PM To: Baron J. Bettenhausen <bjb@jones-mayer.com>; Richard D. Jones <rdj@jones-mayer.com>; Eric Levitt <Eric.Levitt@cityoffullerton.com> Subject: Conflict of interest question
Caution: This is an external email and may be malicious. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments.
Baron, at the last council meeting, you had opined that CM Valencia could vote on the matter of Walk on Wilshire since she had returned the campaign contributions to Tony Bushala and Cigar Shop owner, both of whom have direct economic interests in the decision. Community members have shared with me some concerns regarding your rendered opinion and I’d like clarifications from you.
Was the FPPC consulted on this matter, as has been the practice in the past on complicated issues (example: CM Charles votes on CSUF)? If so, where is their opinion letter and why was it not presented at the time of the meeting?
There’s been a claim that the funds hadn’t been actually returned even if the return check was issued. This is a claim from a resident that raised concerns but no evidence was presented. But it does bring up the question, what evidence did CM Valencia present to you and why was that not made public? This is especially relevant because that reporting period for campaign committees isn’t until Jan 31st, occurring after the meeting itself with no chance for the public to verify any of this.
In your opinion that night, while you addressed the letter of the law, did you factor in the spirit of the law? It seems to easy for anyone to take contributions, use them, then conveniently return the funds before a vote. This is especially important to know as CM Valencia was fully aware of the WoW vote since apparently it was a question asked to her during the campaign.
I would appreciate a clarification on these questions and would request that an FPPC letter confirming your opinion on this matter be made available to the public to prevent any legal issues. Any correspondence to the FPPC should also include the concerns of the public for a comprehensive review.
I am also requesting that any action to execute the reopening of Wilshire be delayed until such legal questions are resolved to avoid any legal challenges to the city.
Note: I am writing this email in the interest of the public and thus deem it and any response to it in the public domain and not under any lawyer confidentiality privilege.
Oh dear me. Where to start. Naturally, Zahra wants to make up and nurture a scandal where there is none. He’s obviously been stirring up an element of outraged Fullerton Boohoo to keep the red herring going. He even uses the same language as the Kennedy Sisters: “there’s been a claim,” and “This is a claim from a resident that raised concerns but no evidence was presented.”
FFFF first addressed the non-applicability of the law in question way back on January 21st. We know Zahra reads FFFF, but maybe he didn’t catch that post.
Anyway, Zahra wants to know if the FPPC has been consulted about this horror of horrors. We now know that the FPPC previously ruled on the identical issue in a case in Palo Alto. FFFF relayed that information, here on February 10th. The answer is clear as a bell: the law doesn’t apply. Bettenhausen should have known this before January 21, and maybe even before Valencia gave back money she didn’t have to.
Ahmad made me wear this and took a picture.
Then Zahra’s deep sea fishing expedition turns to the completely baseless “actual claim” that although a check may have been written, it wasn’t cashed, challenging Valencia’s integrity and Bettenhausen’s lack of diligence.
Zahra’s final numbered point is really funny. He wonders why the “spirit” of the law is not being upheld. Poor Ahmad should be addressing his lament to the State Legislature instead of his own attorney, but, whatever.
Here goes…
Zahra wants the FPPC findings on the issue to be made public, and he requests that WoW remain open until such time as the FPPC responds. Zahra’s worried about legal challenges? From whom? The Kennedy Sisters and Diane Vena? Man, what a failed Hail Mary. WoW was unceremoniously removed a few days after Zahra’s demand letter. Thousands more laughed than did weep at it.
Poor Ahmad wraps up his missive by letting his own lawyer know that this email and any response are free from attorney-client confidentiality – in the public interest, of course. That’s good ’cause we got it, Ahmad, being members of the public, and all. Was there ever even a response by Bettenhausen in the end? Who cares
Friends may remember the name Diane Vena in connection to the 2024 phony Fullerton District 4 council candidacy of newly minted Republican, Scott Markowitz. Poor Diane signed his nominating papers for some as yet unconfessed reason, although Sharon, the elder Kennedy Sister has claimed it was the behest of a fantastical and unnamed “conservative friend.”
But I checked all the right boxes!
Of course the problem was that Poor Diane had already endorsed a candidate in that election – Vivian Jaramillo. Her endorsement, whatever it’s worth, was on Jaramillo’s website. She was obviously an ardent member of Team Jaramillo. Uh oh. That’s not very good is it?
Bringing it all back home…
Anyhow, Poor Diane also makes a frequent nuisance of herself at council meetings, and the meeting of February 4th was no different. Her public comment was just so wonderfully inane, delusional and daft. Add in some Grade A Fullerton Boohoo boohooing and you have something that is so elevated in near-artistic sublimity that it deserves special recognition. Seriously, I couldn’t write a better satirical piece on the now defunct “Walk on Wilshire” and the dumbass boohooing that supported it.
The following AI summation is reproduced from the Fullerton Observer:
Diane Vena: She wanted to express her thoughts on the closing of Walk and Wilshire. Honestly, her heart was heavy. That morning, she drove down a street that used to be something beautiful, but it had now been reduced to just an ordinary little street. She had come to love Walk on Wilshire, especially the lake area, and appreciated seeing how many others loved it too. She was there with a friend on Friday when they were dismantling everything; it might have been Thursday, but she couldn’t remember for sure. As she watched them take it all apart, she cried because she couldn’t help it. She disagreed with one of the previous speakers: many people paid taxes, and roads should serve all of us, including those who walked, those who could not drive, and those who simply preferred not to. She believed they had lost something beautiful. That morning, all she saw was about 200 feet of road with cars driving through, and there wasn’t much traffic or activity. Normally, that space would have been filled with people enjoying breakfast, walking their dogs, or simply strolling along. She saw it as a tragedy that they had lost such a vibrant community space.
Of course the pathos of the paradise lost is funny. But so is the recognition that now cars can and do use the reopened street. Poor lachrymose Diane’s tears are wasted, of course; but in her worldview somehow the street belongs to pedestrians, too.
Faites-vous attention, Claudette et Mimi…
I’m reminded of one of those bad paintings of Parisian boulevards with witless pedestrians wandering around in the middle of street.
Poor Diane misses the morning hustle and bustle no rational person ever saw: mythical dogs and masters meandering in the street; strollers strolling back and forth across the 200 length of roadway. It had been “beautiful,” but now was “ordinary.” But at least Poor Diane noticed car drivers using the street – the very purpose of a paved road, in fact. And she unwittingly admits that she was one of them.
