Fullerton City Council Archives - Page 53 of 77 - Friends For Fullerton's Future

January 7, 2012January 6, 2012Behind Closed Doors

Joe, Lou, and Mike; Does Anybody Know What’s Going On?

Here’s a couple of interesting e-mails from the final day of July, 2011, between Acting City Manager Joe Felz and soon to be MIA Police Chief Sellers.

SellersbyEdcarrascoweekly — The options were running out...

On the surface it seems that Acting City Manager Joe Felz is unhappy with Lou Ponsi for writing “Very Old” news. But maybe he is really upset that the public gets to hear (again) that the cops who killed Kelly Thomas had been out on the streets for over three weeks like nothing had happened; or that maybe Sharon Quirk looks like she is actually in charge. Sellers seems to be concerned with the latter, and he can already see the writing on the wall.

“Hopefully the remaining three council members don’t feel left out” is code for: “Make sure the Three Dead Tree Sumps get lined up, fast!”

“Lou is Not a bad guy from what I understand,” means that Sylvia Palmer and Andrew Goodrich have previously informed Felz that Ponsi is a reliable regurgitator of their crap.

By the way, is anybody else appalled by the weird punctuation and capitalization deployed by these $200,000+ per year bureaucrats?

December 27, 2011December 27, 2011Fullerton City Council

It’s a Long Way to San Clemente

by admin92 Comments

This letter just came in from councilman Bruce Whitaker, who seems to be a bit peeved that the wayward FPD is still slithering along without a leader. The pictures are courtesy of FFFF. Enjoy!

In less than a week, the City of Fullerton will be more than one year derelict in enforcing performance of a critical requirement outlined in its employment agreement with current Chief of Police, Michael Sellers.

I have frequently asserted in print, television and radio interviews that Sellers is in violation of a residency requirement (point #11) which states “Sellers will make a bona fide effort to relocate his primary residence to Fullerton no later than December 2010.”

Chief Sellers Good Times — 'Twas the best of times...

Though hired two and a half years ago, Sellers continues to reside in San Clemente where his home is 43 miles from the Fullerton Police Station. Of California’s 69 cities with a population of 100,000 or more, Fullerton is the ONLY city whose police chief resides more than 40 miles away. The vast majority of California cities are served by chiefs who reside within the city they serve.

In my opinion, the clear intent of the council at that time was to compel Sellers to relocate to Fullerton, no later than December 2010. Merely making “an effort” would provide no value or benefit whatsoever, the intent was for him to live here. The Chief’s being less than an hour away was not just preferred, but essential. Since leadership in an emergency, and understanding fully the community one serves are core, critical requirements . . . without agreeing to this point, would Sellers even have been hired in the first place?

A strong case can be made that since San Clemente home values are 74% higher than in Fullerton there is no financial barrier for Sellers refusal to comply. In any event, it is Sellers burden to prove that he has met requirements in the employment agreement. Despite my efforts, an aggressive legal interpretation, one which would protect Fullerton taxpayers interests has not surfaced.

San Clemente Sunset — Fullerton? Just a distant memory now.

It is nearly 2012 and Sellers remains the Chief of Police, a current employee of the City of Fullerton. Immediate action is required to enforce this contract which even a year later is still being violated without consequence. It should have long ago been rendered “null and void.” It remains for the council majority to explain how “giving away public money” is a preferable course of inaction.

-Bruce Whitaker

December 23, 2011December 23, 2011Behind Closed Doors

Your Tithe is Man-dated At The Altar of The Almighty Bureaucrat

by The Desert Rat20 Comments

cath1-29 — The upkeep just kept getting more expensive...

Everybody who goes to church is familiar with the concept of tithing – literally giving one tenth of your income to support the church and its good works. Of course the act is voluntary.

The people who pay for water from the Fullerton Water Works have been paying a tithe, too. You see, since 1970 the Citycrats have decreed that ten percent of the cost of a monopoly supplying you with water will be added to your bill, and then be immediately re-directed to the City’s General Fund.

In the early days, when water was dirt cheap it was a way to help pay for certain indirect costs of employees who were considered overhead support for the water works. It was called an “in-lieu franchise fee” like the ones the City charges other utilities to operate in Fullerton. Still, there was an immediate problem that nobody addressed: it was bad management, and bad accounting, and opened the door for all sorts of abuse. Decades later, in 1997, Proposition 218 was passed that specifically addressed the scam of governments charging “fees” that were nothing more than hidden taxes – just like Fullerton’s 10% in-lieu fee. It was now required that fee amounts be established through objective supportable analysis that was conducted transparently, in the light of public scrutiny. No longer could governments legally charge for more than any service was worth.

But Fullerton did. For 15 years the City continued to charge, then rake off a ten percent tribute from the Water Fund that went to pay for things like pensions and pay raises for all Fullerton city employees, stuff that had nothing to do with providing water to you. Not only did the city councils know about the scam, they heartily approved the slight-of-hand, year after year.

Meantime, the cost of water skyrocketed, increasing nearly 350% between 1997 and now, jacking up the illegal tax from $700,000 a year in 1997 to over $2.5 million a year now. That’s a rate of about 23% a year, just in case you’re inclined to keep track. A staggering total of almost $27 million has been surreptitiously extorted from you since Proposition 218 went into effect.

Those who support this cheapjack end run think it’s right and proper for you to pay this tithe without your knowing it, and without your consent. After all they’ve had plenty of opportunity to insist, at least, that notification of the 10% diversion be made on each water bill. But they never have. And that’s because their first priority is continue funding six-figure pensions, automatic raises for employees, and all the other things that constitute business as usual in their Church of The Almighty Bureaucrat. It’s their church, and as far as the High Priests and pharisees are concerned, you taxpayers can just sit in the back pew, way, way back there in the dark, and keep your mouths shut.

December 19, 2011Fullerton City Council

On the Agenda – December 20, 2011

by Christian92 Comments

Hang on to your common sense- you may need to share some at the upcoming City Council meeting.

Here is a brief look at what the City will be looking at on Tuesday’s agenda.

Rusty Kennedy will be there to justify his job as the head of OC Human Relations plus there will be presentations to the Boys & Girls Club and CalGRIP.

In Closed Session the Council will be discussing various pending litigations, police/fire management labor negotiations, and the condemnation of 201 East Bastanchury for the widening of Bastanchury.

The consent calendar is full of baffling buffoonery.

Item 2 looks to give City Manager Joe Felz a contract and full salary of $212,000 per year. He gets lots of perks as well like a one year severance, City-owned car, no benchmarks for success, and future raises tied to the raises of his subordinates. That’s just goofy, not to mention poorly timed.

Item 3 is the Group Insurance Program contract renewal. The premiums, as expected, are going up but staff wants you to think this is ok because they aren’t going up as much as they thought they would which looks on paper like savings. The City should do like most employers and place a cap on the employer contribution in the form of a fixed dollar amount, not a percentage. For Pete’s sake, isn’t there one person in City Hall who gives a rat’s ass about the taxpayers?

Item 4 is ends a special tax in Amerige Heights but then in item 14, the City looks to impose another tax on Amerige Heights. The City just loves to tax.

Item 5 will cause most eyes to glaze over. The Measure M2 Expenditure Report tries to show where the money went -or more aptly stated- where it didn’t go.

Item 6 is a request from the City to the Orange County Transportation Authority. City staff would like to enclose the Brea Creek Channel in front of Hillcrest Park and create an additional northbound lane on Harbor Blvd from Berkley to Brea Blvd. The total cost is estimated at $2,850,060.

Item 7 is a contract award for elevator design for the pedestrian overpass at the Transportation Center.

Item 8: The City will accept a 26 year old offer of dedication for right-of-way along State College at the BNSF railroad crossing and grade separation.

Item 9 is an approval to build room additions at the Airport. On a side note, why do they always go low-bid? The lowest bidder is often lowest because they do not understand what is involved and how to deliver the quality needed.

Next up, item 10 is a service agreement for the Richman sewer replacement from Commonwealth to Fullerton Creek and then to Woods Avenue. The design and preparation of plans is estimated to cost $132,869.

A slew of parking restrictions fall under items 11 through 13. They include no parking on Arroyo, 20-minute parking on Euclid, and early morning restrictions along Wilshire Avenue.

As previously mentioned, item 14 is a Mello-Roos tax in Amerige Heights. Expect Councilman Bruce Whitaker to vote NO!

Amerige Court is back with another amendment to the development agreement on item 15. This will give the developer another 2 years to get their act together. Thank the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency.

Item 16 is the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Fullerton (a.k.a. YOU) and the Fullerton Management Association (a.k.a. middle management and upper management). They get the same basic package as the other employees: reinstated pay, 7% contribution to their pension, and lots of holidays off.

Item 17 is the resolution that gives department heads the same basic package as the other employees: reinstated pay, 7% contribution to their pension, and lots of holidays off.

Item 18 seeks to merge Engineering and Maintenance Services which will save about $300,000. This will formalize Engineering Director Don Hoppe’s promotion to Public Works Director. Considering what Hoppe has done with our roads, one can only hope we aren’t being penny wise and pound foolish.

Item 19 is an overhaul of West Fullerton. It scraps old bus benches and targets vandalism and lighting. These issues have been brought up more than a few times at community meetings.

Item 20 is a request for federal funding for affordable housing and City-administered welfare programs. Among those receiving money, Code Enforcement (a.k.a. Community Preservation) looks to receive $337,500. A relatively small amount, $150,600, will go to cover “public service activities” like Nutrition Services Program ($5,000), Boys and Girls Club After School Program and the Club’s Youth Gang Prevention ($44,000), Long Term Care Ombudsman Service ($17,200), Fullerton Fair Housing Services ($20,000), New Vista Shelter Life Skills Training ($9,600), Meals on Wheels home delivery ($30,800), Cold Weather Armory Shelter ($8,000), Women’s Transitional Living Center Shelter Program ($8,000), and the YMCA’s Richman Center Youth Achievers ($8,000).

December 15, 2011Fullerton City Council

Fullerton’s Water Rep to Step Down

by Greg Sebourn26 Comments

Amid Fullerton’s water rate debacle the City’s representative on the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California announced Tuesday that he is stepping down. After representing the City of Fullerton for 24 years on the MWD Board of Directors, Jim Blake says he is done.

It is rumored that Fullerton’s retired city manager Chris Meyer is looking to be appointed as Blake’s replacement but that will require a majority vote by the Fullerton City Council. Since City Council Members Bankhead and Jones appointed Meyer as City Manager in 2002, there is little doubt that they wouldn’t give him the MWD nod as well.

However, with Fullerton’s water rates under scrutiny and an illegal tax being batted about City Hall for justification, you have to wonder how much of the water mess can be attributed to Meyer- not to mention the rest of the City’s countless woes.

An appointment of Meyer to the MWD Board might bring further outcry to City Hall, something the new Mayor might wish to avoid. Since August the Council members have been cussed at, cursed at, sworn up and down, and yelled at. They are now being held accountable for their general lack of leadership by a campaign to recall three members, Mayor Pro Tem Pat McKinley, and members Don Bankhead and F. Dick Jones.

Many believe that the appointment should be filled by a current council member so that they can be held responsible by Fullerton voters for their actions on the Board. Currently, Blake is answerable only to the Fullerton City Council.

If the appointment is to be held by a non-council member, then the process should be open to ALL candidates equally like any other council appointment to a commission or committee.

Whoever is appointed will be tasked with a massive budgetary shortfall that rivals Sacramento’s. The appointee will be asked for double-digit rate hikes and even more spending. They need to know the water industry and even more about public policy and long-term investment solutions. They need to know Fullerton and not just through the myopic eyes of service clubs.

Fullerton deserves an accountable and credible representative on the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.

December 13, 2011December 13, 2011Fullerton City Council

The Definition of a Cover-Up

by Travis170 Comments

FFFF had a chance to sit down with councilmember Bruce Whitaker to let him explain how the police department and city management deliberately withheld critical information and misled elected decision makers in the immediate aftermath of the Kelly Thomas death.

As you listen, be sure to reflect on the atmosphere of fear and distrust that permeated Fullerton in the weeks immediately following the murder; remember that we were told to remain calm and patient, and that we were to trust our leaders who supposedly had access to all the information that we did not.

Later we found out that our leaders knew nothing, and the city let accused killers roam free with badges and guns while we were kept in the dark.

November 27, 2011December 8, 2011"Dick" Ackerman

Who Will Be the Next Mayor of Fullerton? (Improved with Fun Pictures!)

by Joe Sipowicz53 Comments

Friends, it’s that time of year when the Fullerton City Council selects one of its number to be the voice and face of Fullerton to the community, and beyond.

Some folks say the title of Mayor is really only just a name for another voting member of the council; the person who just manages (or mismanages, as the case may be) the meetings, and signs documents approved by a council majority.

JonesMouthOpenFor Business — Ah resemble that remark, bah golly!

But consider this: how might the world, the nation, the State and the County have perceived Fullerton, if, as the Kelly Thomas police murder saga unfolded, Fullerton’s mayor had been other than the cantankerous southern-fried buffoon who, by all appearances treated the whole event as an annoying inconvenience on his way to a ribbon-cutting.

Which brings us to the December 6th vote. Last year Pat McKinley weaseled out on supporting Sharon Quirk-Silva for the number two spot, as he, at the behest of the repuglican establishment, joined Bankhead and Jones in keeping the Democrat Quirk-Silva out of the rotation.

Three-Councilmen — What happens when age overtakes IQ.

Well, as they say, that was then. Under normal circumstances the Ed Royce/Dick Ackerman crowd would love to cut her out again. But this year is different all right, and the Slush Fund Gang can’t afford to alienate any more voters, especially a significant liberal-leaning crowd who may very well relish yet another reason to sign a petition, and then vote to recall the Three Blind Brontosaurii.

The fact that many of these folks also qualified a referendum on the Coyote Hills development issue will cause The Three Silent Sloths’ handlers cause to pause: when the Recall signatures qualify the Fullerton lefties will have two swings to reverse the Chevron entitlements approved by Jones, Bankhead, and McKinley.

tricky dick — Heh heh, I'm pretty savvy. If you don't count that Ackerwoman campaign.

Ackerman isn’t stupid (although he has recently made some horrendous underestimations of the electorate). The anti-recall campaign has made a deliberate attempt to woo Fullerton’s liberal/schools/feel-good cadre by attacking a real conservative, FSD Trustee Chris Thompson. Well, okay, maybe Ackerman isn’t smart at all: Thompson out-polled every other candidate in every Fullerton ballot in 2010, so let’s see how that works out for The Dickster.

Still, wait and observe how Quirk-Silva is quietly selected as Mayor by the same bastards that refused her the Mayor Pro Tem job just a year ago.We may even hear lame explanations about last year’s vote

How would that be for cynicism of the lowest kind?

Upon further consideration, I believe this post should address the solitary figure of Bruce Whitaker, a principled conservative who is worth ten armies of Jonses, Bankheads, and McPensions. By virtue of his intelligence, stability, and ethics, Whitaker should be the next Mayor Pro Tem, and Mayor in 2013. If that happens I’ll unscrew my right arm and throw it across the room. The Three Silent Slugs will never let that happen. And one more great reason to Recall them.

November 23, 2011February 7, 2012Arts & Architecture

Another Redevelopment Fiasco That Refuses to Die

by admin49 Comments

Friends of Fullerton’s future have read many pages on this site dedicated to cataloguing the manifest failures of Redevelopment and all the attendant boondoggles it brings with it. Blind support for these disasters is one of the reasons The Three Blind Brontosauruses are being recalled. One of the biggest disasters-in-the-making is the lamentable “Amerige Court” project, another gigantic monster to be plopped down into Fullerton, and a totally staff-created and driven mess.

Naturally Bankhead and Jones have supported this gross example of corporate welfare that we end up paying for. McKinley is bound to go along for the ride. When he does we’ll be sure to let you know about it. Here is an update.

By Judith Kaluzny as published in The Fullerton Observer

The Amerige Court proposal is not dead yet. The council will vote December 5, 2011, whether to extend a Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) first approved February 7, 2006, the third amended version having been approved by council March 4, 2008.

Since then, two extensions requested by developer Pelican Laing /Fullerton LLC (a Delaware corporation) were granted by staff June 2010 by Rob Zur Schmiede, executive director of the Redevelopment Agency (RDA), and April 1, 2011, by Joeseph Felz, acting executive director.

Meantime, the Laing portion of the Pelican-Laing developers, had been purchased in June 2006 by a company in the mideast country of Dubai, and Laing subsequently filed for bankruptcy in February 2009.

“Amerige Court,” described as “mixed-use development with up to 124 residential units and as much as 30,000 square feet of commercial area” was to be located on the north and south parking lots in the 100 block of West Amerige. At one time, the project was to be nine stories high on the south side of Amerige, with a five story parking structure on the north side of the street.

A Draft Environmental Impact Report was prepared in 2008 and concluded that there were “no potentially significant impacts that cannot be mitigated.”

Richard Hamm of Pelican Properties said recently, “It has been impossible to make any progress with the project since the State has attempted to end redevelopment. Of course, the economy has not helped.

“We have four companies waiting in the wings to join us in Amerige Court. We want to get the extension to the DDA as well as a few details worked out with Redevelopment before going forward with a new partner. Amerige Court is still a great opportunity. Downtown Fullerton is still a great place (despite the recent events).

Points in the original contract included:

-Giving $5.5 million from a $6 million bond issue to Pelican Properties to build the parking garage. The bonds were to be paid back by the residents and businesses in the new development. That will cause the businesses to cost $1.93 per square foot more than any other retail space downtown according to the city’s consultant, Keyser Marsten Associates, which advised the city to do “more due diligence” before they entered into this contract.

-The land Pelican will be given the by the city was not appraised, but agreed as being worth $8 to $8.5 million.

-A guarantee of 10% profit to Pelican on the project. Pelican can submit a new budget before escrow closes. If that does not show they will get a 10% profit, they can withdraw from the project. However, at that point, the redevelopment agency can volunteer to pay the required profit to Pelican. The Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency can do this without further input from the city council/redevelopment agency.

-Tearing down the historic properties on the southeast corner of Malden and Amerige Avenues.

[The DDA and amendments are a maze of turgid language: The Third Amendment provides for a “future amendment,” but if “a Future Amendment is not approved by Developer and the Agency Board (city council) by April 5, 2009, or such later date as may be approved by the parties in the sole and absolute discretion of each of them, either party shall have the right to terminate the DDA… .”

[The third amended DDA also includes the following language: “However, the Entitlements have not been approved as Agency has not approved the Project or any other project for the Property. The parties acknowledge that this Third Amendment does not constitute the third amendment that was contemplated under the Second Amendment.”]

Begun in 2001 with a “rendering” commissioned by Paul Dudley, then Director of Development, and shown to city council members in closed session, it has been said that this was a scheme to get more parking for the bars/restaurants downtown. (In December 2002, restaurants downtown were exempted from having to provide parking or to obtain conditional use permits.)

FFFF has argued for years that this grossly subsidized monstrosity should be killed outright. As I noted, above, the extension of this agreement will become another issue in the upcoming recall campaign: a perfect example of corporate welfare of the type that has characterized massive subsidized apartment blocks in downtown Fullerton already approved by Bankhead and Jones over the years.

November 18, 2011November 18, 2011Bruce Whitaker

Pat McPension Gets Leash Yanked

by The Desert Rat125 Comments

McPensiononshortleash — Releasing his inner She Bear may be problematic.

Yesterday, on another thread folks were asking about the upcoming vote for next year’s mayor. I’ll be doing a post on that, real soon. In the meantime enjoy this post by the Desert Rat that was originally published on December 13, 2010. It includes some valuable video in which you may watch the Three Deaf Dinosaurs in action.

– Joe Sipowicz

Well, that didn’t take long. Mr. Pat McPension, he of the $215,000 a year pension (yes, you read that right), exercised his second vote in office denying the Mayor Pro Tem job (if you believe in things like fair rotation) to Sharon Quirk-Silva. SQS’s problem is that she is a Democrat, and hence, in some people’s eyes, the embodiment of all evil.

Now why would Pat McPension stick it to a woman who actually endorsed him in his recent election bid? Well, if you don’t know that answer you haven’t been paying attention to Fullerton politics for the past 30 years.

Check out McPension’s opening statement for clues. Then watch the painful yank on his choke chain.

Aha! Lois Godfrey. Queen Bee of the Raymond Hills Repuglican Women, an organization dedicated to promoting RINO candidates just like Pat McPension. In fact her husband was the worst one of the bunch. These idiots actually think Doc Jones is a real conservative!

Now Lois and her electric blue-haired gaggle have been backing these zeroes since the 1980s when their patron saints were Dick Ackerman, Buck Catlin, and the hideous gargoyle, Linda LeQuire.

And of course let us not forget the role of Little Corporal, Ed Royce, for whom no candidate is too old or stupid to be foist upon Fullerton for his own purposes.

So McPension owes his dubious political accomplishment to these worthy repuglicans; and at the first opportunity they must have made it very clear to their new boy what was expected of him from those who got him elected.

Just for the Hell of it I added Sharon Quirk-Silva’s pretty dignified admonition to her colleagues after the vote. While I don’t agree with a lot of her politics, I will note for the benefit of the brain dead repuglicans whom I know read this blog:

Quirk voted against the illegal Redevelopment expansion. She voted against the worthless Richman housing project. She voted against the idiotic Transportation Center Master Boondoggle. Your repuglican heroes voted for all three!

So go stick that in your blue wigs and smoke it!

November 17, 2011Behind Closed Doors

How To Blow $17,000

by Mr. Peabody237 Comments

The Good Old Days — The good old days...

Item #3 on yesterday’s agenda was a request by Acting Chief-Until-Mike-Sellers-Pulls-His-Head-Out-and-Comes-Back-to-Work Hamilton to buy some spiffy raincoats for his lads. 200 to be precise, at a cost of $17,000. That’s $85 bucks a pop, and presumably Hamilton got a great discount for quantity.

These uber-raincoats meet some sort of Federal guideline for work in “federal-aid” highways right-of-ways (weren’t you losing sleep worrying about that?). And naturally the current coats are old and only “water resistant.” Typical. in government resource mismanagement is always used as an excuse for big, new, outlays.

But consider this: right now Fullerton’s entire police force numbers about 140 (give or take, depending on how many are on paid or unpaid administrative leave and can’t work on any highway, federal-aid or otherwise. Then there’s the fact that not all 140 are on duty at any one time. Then there’s the fact that only a fraction of the force will actually be on patrol when it’s actually raining and might be needed to stand around after a car crash. Finally there’s the obvious fact that these people really ought to be able to share a few dozen of the same infrequently used garments.

Please note that because the money is from asset seizure and not General Fund, the requestor is unashamed to make such a profligate request.

So how did our esteemed city council vote? Apparently it passed on the Consent Calendar nod 5-0.