The No Account of Montecristo

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 Spins Around, Goes Nowhere

As close to a somersault as we could find…

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.

Sound and Fury. Noise Ordinance Finally Approved. Downtown Is Dying.

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.

Boutique Bungling Bears Bounty

And by “bears bounty,” I mean the boutique hotel scam pulls Fullerton into ever deeper shitwater.

By now we all know how stupid, inept, and problematic the so-called “Tracks at Fullerton” has been.

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.

Zahra Goes Unicorn Hunting With His Pea Shooter

Be vewy, vewy quiet…

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. 

  1. 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?
  1. 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.
  1. 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. 

Thank you. 

Sincerely,

AHMAD ZAHRA

Council Member, District 5

City of Fullerton – Tel: (714) 738-6311

303 W. Commonwealth Ave., Fullerton, CA 92832

www.cityoffullerton.com / Follow me on Facebook

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

Diane Vena Weeps

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.

No, Friends, you can’t make this shit up.

Time for Fred Jung’s Iron Fist

Yeah. It’s about time. For decades Fullerton’s citizenry have picked up the tab for one bad idea after another. So if Mayor Jung really did say he wanted the City run with an iron fist, let’s get going with the plug pulling.

It’s a total waste of money, but it sure is short…

The Trail to Nowhere

The abysmal Trail to Nowhere, a bad idea that was germinating for 14 years before the grant was finally approved at the end of 2023. City staff has never told the truth about this fiasco, and because of incurious and stupid councilmembers, they never had to. I can simply say that it would accomplish none of things its backers promise, mostly because the wishful thinking behind it was so untruthful from the start. No users, possible contamination, no linkage to anything, no destination at either end. Just a waste of 2.1 million bucks.

Oh, and yeah – the milestones for design submittal to the State and start of construction were blown past 9 months ago and still no status update from anybody.

Enhanced with genuine brick veneer!

The Boutique Hotel

The boutique hotel next to the train station started out as just a stupid idea by then Mayor-for-Hire Jennifer Fitzgerald. Then as the likelihood of failure increased, the City kept doubling down on dumb, adding density to density until an appended apartment block raised the density to at least 2.5 times the already dense limit in the Transportation Center Specific Plan. No one seemed to care, because those plans are only occasionally adhered to.

Nobody bothered to ask why useful City property had to be deemed “surplus.” Bruce Whitaker didn’t.

And last we looked the whole thing had been turned over to a couple of con men who paid 1.4 million for a property whose new entitlements made it worth ten times that much. Fullerton, being Fullerton. Those guys haven’t met any of their milestones and must certainly be in default. Not a peep out of City Hall, of course. I’ll bet my last dollar Sunayana Thomas is desperately looking for a new “developer” to assign the mess to, without a backward glance.

Forgotten but not quite gone…

The Florentine/Marovic Sidewalk Heist

This 20 year+ scandal is still alive and kicking thanks to the stupid and cowardly attitude of staff/city council toward first, the Florentine Syndicate, and now, a new scofflaw, Mario Marovic. Somehow, the City let Marovic do remodeling construction work on our building on our sidewalk – an illegal trespass if ever there was one. Then the City let him open his newly remodeled place with promises to remove the “pop-out” as a condition of re-opening.

Zahra Congratulates Marovic for his lawsuit…against us.

Naturally, Marovic gave the City a big fuck you on that agreement, as he no doubt planned to do all along. He had six moths to start and nine months to finish. That was two fucking years ago, and Marovic is drawing income from our property the whole time. Nowadays this matter is safely hidden in closed session, where the painful subject of accountability for this quagmire can be safely discussed away from embarrassing public revelation.

Fortunately for the cast of characters involved there are so many culpable people in this story that blame can be diluted to the point where nobody feels the least bit compelled to explain what happened over two plus decades, just so long as the municipal humiliation goes away once and for all.

So, yes. Let the Fullerton Observer sisters and their ilk boohoo about iron fists and poor, intimidated staff. Fullerton has been in need of some accountability, even a tiny bit, for a long, long time.

Saska Steps On Own Weenie

Why write about news when you can try to make your own! (Photo by Julie Leopo/Voice of OC)

Oops. The crack Observer editor Skasia, younger member of the Kennedy Coven, has done it again.

This proud pillar of the 4th Estate decided a recap of the now dismantled Walk on Wilshire public hearing comments was in order, given that the vast majority of them yammered in favor of keeping it.

The look of vacant self-satisfaction…

Therefore it was necessary to regurgitate the usual cut and paste mishmash of what people actually said.

Anti-WoW speaker #7 was one of them. Here’s what The Observer recollects:

7)  Layla, identifying herself as the landlord of the Wilshire Promenade called into the council saying ‘The street closure has negatively impacted our tenants, and 88 Cigar Bar, Slice, and ShabuShabu. We as landlords can’t make money – we need to drive through traffic. If it remains as is or is expanded we won’t make it.”  (Fullerton Promenade Apartments is one of 252 apartment complexes owned by the largest operator of apartment complexes on the West Coast – the $18.5 billion Essex Property Trust, Inc.)

Notice how at the end the end Skakia appends the obligatory and Observer biased contextual facts, implying that “Layla” represents a conglomerate of massive wealth – suggesting that this vast enterprise can afford to chum a few bucks for the common good of Fullerton Boohoo, because it is so…so something.

Over here, ya dummy…

The only problem is that “Layla” has absolutely nothing to do with the Promenade Apartment Block, but rather, works for an entity, “Fullerton Promenade,” that owns some buildings on the south side of Wilshire Avenue – precisely whose small business tenants were the most affected by the idiot closure. Layla even named her tenants!

And then there’s the Promenade Apartments

This is exactly the sort of spiteful, inaccurate boobery that characterizes the Fullerton Observer and its crew of incompetent ideologues. I hope Layla isn’t waiting for a correction and apology, because she won’t get either.

Fred Jung’s Iron Fist

Worse than Waterloo…

The metaphor of the iron hand in the velvet glove has been attributed to many, including Friend of Fullerton, Napoleon Bonaparte.

Has Fullerton Mayor Fred Jung forgotten about the velvet glove?

Gloves are so Nineteenth Century…

Here’s a fun exchange harvested from the hysterical comments at the Fullerton Observer, home of the unbalanced Kennedy Sisters.

I have zero idea who Barbara Steeves is, or if there even is one; but the commenter wants people to believe he/she is privy to what goes on behind closed doors at City Hall. She is challenged by “M” who rightly questions the veracity of her information – if she was there. And naturally Sharon the elder Kennedy sister helpfully interjects, reminding M that Fullerton is a small town, and everybody knows everybody.

I don’t know Fred Jung so I don’t know if this is the kind of phrase he would even utter. But I sure hope it is, and that he said it.

I’ll drink to that!

For years Fullerton citizens and taxpayers have picked up the tab for incompetent staff decisions, including foolish lawsuits, lots of money wasted on useless projects all surrounded by unaccountability and complacency. It’s true that all of the disasters and fiascos have been rubber stamped by incurious, stupid, and supine city councils. Nevertheless, city staff is composed, allegedly, by competent professionals who ought to be able to guide the councils away from quagmires, and not create any of their own. But if they could, they obviously don’t want to and don’t care, failure being ignored and even rewarded.

It’s way past time that staff members tell the truth. Our Community Development Director Sunayana Thomas seems incapable of an honest answer to a council question. And then there’s our marble-mouthed lawyer Dick Jones, of the I Can’t Believe It’s A Law Firm, who has doled out the worst legal advice imaginable for 25 years or more.

Here are some random Fullerton issues where an iron fist attitude might have avoided the usual complacency and stupidity:

Laguna Lake leak

Boutique hotel fiasco

Trail to Nowhere

Florentine forgery case

Florentine/Marovic Sidewalk Heist

Walk on Wilshire money pit

Silly Roundabouts

Losing Lawsuit against FFFF

Fraudulent water rate scam

Unneeded elevators at depot bridge

Drunken City Manager cover up

Useless bridge in Hillcrest Park

Incompetent construction of wood stairs in Hillcrest Park

$ 1,000,000 Core and Corridors Specific Plan

Consistently misguided park priorities

Poison Park fiasco

University Heights disaster

The ridiculous Fox Block monster

The Downtown economic sinkhole & noise code violations

Monster apartment blocks without enough parking

Etc., etc., etc.

We Get Mail. Walk on Wilshire Cult Fail

FFFF has received the following communication from a Wilshire Avenue resident who has asked for anonymity to avoid persecution from the Walk on Wilshire pressure group, stirred up by the Fullerton Observer:

The mob looked a lot bigger than it was…

This past Tuesday, Fullerton City Council permitted the reopening of Wilshire Avenue to auto traffic, removing the annoying impediment known locally as “Waste on Wilshire.” Starting January 31, the street will reopen to through vehicular traffic, marking the end of the Wilshire Avenue experiment in frustration, deception, and stupidity.

Yesterday, at the invitation of the Fullerton Observer, a handful of self righteous dopes gathered at the Waste. The Observer had encouraged them to show up and “join the peaceful gathering and protest the decision,” bringing “Save WoW” signs to show solidarity.

Their cult followers were asked to mislead passersby into believing this is an overwhelmingly unpopular decision driven by selfish or ego-centric motives. They framed the post as a “fight” against two corrupt of council members and a couple selfish businesses – implying that the WoWers represent a vast and unified community sentiment when, in reality, it was never more than a core handful of ideologues with nothing to lose.

While the Observer statement expresses appreciation for the supporters of the initiative and “incredible” individuals met throughout this process, it purposely suggests that only those who supported Walk on Wilshire are the only the ones truly connected to the community—ignoring those with valid concerns that didn’t align with the narrative of “saving” the space. 

Thank God Vivian Jaramillo was not elected to the City Council, otherwise the City would be looking at a lawsuit that would only end with a big payday to the City Attorney defending another losing lawsuit, leading to yet again, a big loss for the taxpayers of Fullerton.