Bankhead Forgot to Submit an Argument Against Term Limits

Weather's gettin' colder...

Measure M will be on the ballot in November, but the arguments presented in the official voter materials will be a bit one-sided.

Nobody submitted an argument against the measure to enact term limits against Fullerton city council members.

Was anti-term limit incumbent Dinosaur Don Bankhead asleep at the switch, or was he actaully smart enough to disassociate him self with that position during an election campaign? Who knows?

I really like spinkles on my frogurt...

Sharon Quirk-Silva authored the opinion in support of the measure, which summarizes them as:

  • Term limits increase the number of competitive elections
  • Term limits bring in more opportunities to serve in public office
  • Term limits disfavor seniority
  • Term limits promote fresh ideas

Of course, she missed the most important purpose of term limits: they will end the seemingly endless political careers of staff yes-men: folks like Don Bankhead and Dick Jones, who have tormented taxpayers for decades by voting for almost every single boondoggle and corporate welfare project put in front of them.

Whadya know. A promise was kept...

And for that we thank SQS for sticking by the promise she made way back in January of 2009.

On The Agenda – August 3rd, 2010

Get this!  The Fullerton City Council’s ONLY Regular Business for Tuesday’s meeting is…drum role please…to designate a voting representative and alternates for the League of Cities annual conference!! View the agenda.

That’s it, right?  No.  That is the only “Regular Business” item but I didn’t mention the Consent Calendar.

Item 4 of the Consent Calendar is a $2,705,000 bond for irrigation at the Fullerton Municipal Golf Course. You read that correctly; $2.7 million for golf course sprinklers! Apparently “staff” has identified this as the most “shovel-ready” infrastructure project.

The background on this item is interesting for those following President Obama’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA).  The Act includes provisions for bonds issued by agencies in designated “Recovery Zones” and Fullerton has been designated as one of those Recovery Zones or RZ.

The eligible uses for RZ Economic Development Bond proceeds according to the staff report include: 1) capital expenditures for the acquisition or development of property within a Recovery Zone by a public entity; 2) expenditures for public infrastructure and construction of public facilities; and 3) expenditures for job training and education programs.

This is when the veins on my neck begin to pulse and I run the risk of bursting a blood vessel!  Our Congress has given local agencies certain bonding authority to raise money to fix their infrastructure and our beloved City Hall staff decides to use this authority to grow our indebtedness and fix golf course sprinklers!

I may not be much of a golfer but I do know they charge as much as $35 per person to play.  If that isn’t enough to cover the cost, I suggest they charge more or get out of the golfing business altogether.

I hope our council has the wherewithal to vote NO on this but I doubt it.  It is spending like this that makes me want to run for city council.  But the race is already full of rich would-be spenders chomping at taxpayers’ checkbook with pen in hand.  How will Bankhead vote?  How would McKinley or Burbank vote?  Tomorrow we will get to see how Bankhead, with 22 years of experience on the council, will vote.  I am quite certain he will vote YES and waist $2.7 million watering the grass while ignoring our roads, sewers, water system, and sidewalks.

Oh but the grass will be green and a council member will get to go to the League of Cities Conference in September all on our dime.  Not a bad gig if you can get it.

“Public Art” on the Lemon Street Overpass; Are The Inmates Running The Asylum?

No, that’s not just crazy talk.

I was just sent the next Public Art Commission’s agenda in which City Staff is proposing that over $100,000 be spent “restoring” those dubious murals that adorn the Lemon Street pedestrian overpass. Here’s the text of the staff report:

ATTACHMENT A
Staff Recommendation for Public Art

After reviewing reports and treatment proposals from contracted professional art historians and conservators, staff has a recommendation for how to proceed with the Lemon Park Murals.  The goal of this recommendation is to make progress on the restoration of these important historical pieces of public art in a way that is fiscally responsible and takes into account the directive of the Public Art Committee to continually produce new works while maintaining the City’s rich existing collection.  We therefore propose that restoration take place over 5 years.  The proposed preliminary plan is as follows:

Year One:

Fall, 2010

Work with the Public Art Committee to revise the list of potential locations for new/restored work to be produced over the next 5 years.

Spring, 2011

Restore “Zoot Suit Riots.” using the services of a professional mural restoration team.  The cleaning, consolidation of paint and coating layers, graffiti removal, reintegration (touch-ups) and protection is estimated to total $18,000.  “Zoot Suit Riots” is an ideal starting place for mural restoration because the historical significance of the subject matter and its strong aesthetic appeal, and key location.

NOTE: Lemon Park and Maple Community Center renovation project will be under construction in the period beginning between summer – fall 2011.  The construction period is estimated at 9 months.  The start date for construction will be pending Lemon Park Committee review/recommendation, although it is likely to start in the fall of 2011, to avoid disrupting summer youth programs at the park.

Spring – Summer (production), 2011

Neighborhood youth will be recruited (coordinated with City summer youth programs at Maple Center) to design and execute a new mural that expresses the themes of cultural pride and community solidarity originally intended by the mural entitled “Fullerton.”  The existing mural, which is much degraded and heavily vandalized, will be thoroughly documented and covered with a protective varnish, then painted over.  The new mural will be processed through the standard application and review procedure by the Public Art Committee. It will be produced by neighborhood teens under the supervision of a professional artist and with input from the Lemon Park Ad Hoc Advisory Committee, and will take its place thematically and visually in the suite of paintings that makes up the entire park.

Fall, 2011
The Public Art Committee will oversee the production of a new, permanent public art piece at the main stage in the downtown plaza.

Year Two:

2012

Restoration of “The Virgin of Guadalupe” and “Girl with Car. Estimated cost (combined) of $32,000.

Based on progress on the Transportation Center Master Plan, we will install a new piece of public art in the pedestrian corridor between Spadra restaurant and the bus depot.  Suggestions for this area include three-dimensional awning type installations that invite access to the transportation center and visually expand the downtown and event area south of Commonwealth.

Year Three:

2013

Restore “Calle Elm” and “Come Back Again” by a professional mural restoration team. Combined cost of $24,640

Produce a new piece based on Public Art Committee recommendations

Year  Four:

2014
Restore “La Adelita” and “Cross with Crown of Thorns.” Estimate (combined) cost of $26,000

Produce a new piece based on Public Art Committee recommendations.

Year Five:

2015

After four years of restoration we will have some idea how the Lemon/Maple murals are faring and how the new mural produced in year one has been received by the community.  With this experience the Committee can develop recommendations for “Brown Car.”  This mural has been vandalized numerous times and sustained considerable additional damage since the November, 2008 preliminary report.  Based on the current rate of destructive activity, staff does not believe that the estimated $21,000 required for a thorough restoration would be fiscally responsible.  Two possibilities present themselves:  we could invest in moderate restoration and additional anti graffiti coating to keep the mural intact for as long as possible despite what seems to be relentless vandalism.  Or we could document the piece, cover it, and create a new mural under the direction of a professional artist and with the input of community groups such as the Lemon Park Ad Hoc Advisory Committee.  Both options present obstacles and opportunities and it is hoped that our experience restoring the other pieces of the original suite over the preceding 4 years will equip us to make a wise choice in 2015.

Note:  The murals “The Town I Live In”  “Niños del Mundo” and “La Mujer Latina” are in relatively good condition at this time and are not included in this 5-year restoration plan.  They will be maintained as needed (graffiti removed, coatings restored, etc.)

Public Art Committee Agenda
July 26, 2010

These paintings have been the source of some controversy for quite some time. Critics question the gang references as well as the deterioration and gang graffiti they seem to invite. Others doubt the artistic value.

Although some folks in the community have suddenly taken a proprietary interest in the murals, this interest doesn’t seem to extend to actually paying to clean them up.

In 1995 the restoration of the Kassler Mural on the side of the Plummer Auditorium only cost about $25,000 – of which half was made up of a matching Redevelopment grant. Hundreds upon hundreds of volunteer hours were spent stripping and cleaning that work of art. That participation proved the value to the community.

So the question is: who really wants to “restore” the Lemon Bridge murals, and what are they willing to pay for it?

Conflict of Interest?

Smilin' all the way to the bank

Have you ever wondered how we got ourselves into this financial crisis? In California and in Fullerton we have an out of control public employee pension crisis – a crisis where thousands of retired public employee end up receiving mammoth retirement payouts, in some cases tens of thousands more than they ever made while they were actually working.

Well, one candidate for Fullerton City Council is a posterboy for this system run amok, and his name is Patrick McKinley.  Before the next time you cast your ballot, check to see that the person your are voting for is not a retired government worker that would be making any decisions affecting out of control public employee retirement pensions.

The Wishing Well, Once A Mayor’s Crib; Now A Bottomless Money Hole

The Wishing Well Apartments. Someone's wish just came true.

For those interested in obscure Fullerton history, Louis Valasquez lived in the Wishing Well apartments at 466 West Valencia Dr. while serving as the Mayor of Fullerton in 1979.

Those more curious about modern-day Redevelopment Agency boondoggles, may be interested to learn that this past week the Fullerton City Council voted to sell the Agency owned Wishing Well Apartments to an out of town “developer” for $100.

The Fullerton Redevelopment Agency purchased the ol’ Wishing Well for $1,993,433 and paid an additional $60,930 to kick out (relocate) all the tenants that resided in the 16 unit building. On top of that the Agency is going to give the out-of-towners an additional $184,347 to “rehab” the apartments, provided the developer rents the apartments to low income tenants. Here in Orange County “low income” is 50% of the median income – which for a family of 3 is $70,890. This means that people that make around $35,445 will be living in the Brand Spanking New Wishing Well. I’ll bet ya the previous tenants made less than $35,445 per year. So in reality the city kicked out the poor folks in order to replace them with richer poor folks.

Now that’s not very good is it?

And if the units were so dilapidated, why didn’t City Code Enforcement simply cite the landlord and require the units to be standard units?

I think I’ll do a follow-up post and focus on code enforcement failures under Don Bankhead’s and Dick Jones’s years of “leadership.”

Who Should Pay To Clean Up The Mess in Downtown Fullerton?

Welcome to Downtown Fullerton

Surely not the businesses that don’t sell booze.

Last year a few downtown Fullerton property and business owners lobbied the City Council to impose an tax assessment on downtown Fullerton. The purpose of this “Business Improvement District” was to raise money to clean up the mess introduced into Downtown by the numerous booze joints and illegal dance clubs.

The first step was predictable: hire yourself a “consultant” who will tell you what you want to hear. But the price tag was too steep and the promoters couldn’t get a clear majority of the Council to go along.

But apparently now Councilwoman Sharon Quirk-Silva has changed her mind about hiring a consultant to meet and greet and spread the BID propaganda.

The direction here is all too clear: build up some momentum toward the idea and then rely on the self-interested parties to vote their interest and hope that the other property owners don’t catch on.

Well I think this stinks. Why should all the downtown property owners pay to fix the problems caused by the bar owners and their out-of-control customers, not to mention a City policy that has enabled all these problems? And let’s not forget – former police chief and council candidate Patrick McKinley who liked to look the other way.

And why should the taxpayers keep footing the bill?

Time to Tow Jones & Mayer Away?

Attorneys are expensive for a reason… they’re supposed to be smarter than the rest of us. But once again our high-priced legal experts from Jones and Mayer have failed to impress.

In haste to find a new revenue generating scheme, the Fullerton Police Department worked with Jones & Mayer attorney Elena Gerli (of former bicycle nuisance fame) to draw up an ordinance that would raise towing fees and create a new “franchise opportunity” within the city. For Fullerton motorists, that translates to more fees for the same ‘ol service. But I digress.

A series of tow operators gave detailed testimony that passing the ordinance would be a violation of several state laws. The City Attorney then gave a sketchy rebuttal (more on this subject in a future post) that failed to mitigate the council’s concerns, Sharon Quirk-Silva quickly took the lead in sending the attorney back to the drawing board and calling for a study session to prevent another legal mess for our city.

Was our attorney outsmarted by a group of tow truck drivers? It seems like it. We’ll find out in a few more weeks, but not until they’ve squeezed out another round of billable hours.

Why do I feel like we’ve been here before? Let’s see…  a bureaucracy’s insatiable desire to increase revenue combined with poor legal advice, leading to eventual lawsuits and thus diverting any potential “profits” into the welcoming arms of Jones and Mayer.

Ah yes, it’s the red light camera disaster all over again.

On the Agenda – July 6th, 2010

Happy 4th of July!  Coming off of a nice three-day weekend for city staff we are faced with a council meeting tonight wherein we can expect to see our millions of tax dollars senselessly squandered away. View the agenda.

If you haven’t seen the agenda, please do.  We start off with the usual property negotiations to gobble up more low-income housing so we can give it away to a private developer.

In open session we have the consent calendar which no sane person would actually consent to – but we already knew that.

Item 2 is the Public Works 7-year Capital Improvement Program wherein PW Director Hoppe concocts a way to spread some money over all of the broken infrastructure.  Doing so shows the Feds that we mean well but have no money.  The truth is if we wanted to, we could fix a few serious issues now and delay some of the more minor ones.  But we won’t.  We will wait and watch more roads crumble, precious water resources bubble up from broken water mains, and our sidewalks lifted up by city trees.  Worth noting is that the Harbor Boulevard slope failure that has been threatening pedestrians and motorists for more than a year has been pushed back until FY2012-13.  Oh well; what do you expect?  The 7-Year CIP covers $70,874,000 of tax dollars.

Item 3 is a wireless carrier lease for the Euclid Tank Farm for $1,577 per mo with 4% increase each year.

(more…)

Yellowing Submarine Advocates Tax Increase

Things are lookin' up!

Well of course they do. That’s what they know.

In the most recent edition of the squalid rag (page 1, 20% recycled paper) known as the Fullerton Observer, an unnamed editorial writer bemoans the fact that “City businesses fees” (sic) “may be outdated and too low.”

Well of course they are too low – for taxers like the Yellowing Observers, whether they are outdated or not.

Then there’s this gem: “While city (sic) employees and residents are being required to help out through layoffs, furloughs, increased fees, and reduced services, nothing has been asked of the business community.”

Huh? If anybody in Sharon Kennedy’s family had ever owned or run a business they would know that the business license is not a “fee,” it’s a thinly veiled tax, levied on businesses, and that it confers absolutely no service to the business owner. It’s just a revenue grab. Then of course the whole thing is pitched in the obligatory “look how small the increase per business is and look how many jobs it will keep!” routine.

If anybody is dumb enough to buy into I’d sure like to hear from them. And thanks Observer for a 2010 campaign issue! Let’s hear it. Whose for the new Observer tax increase?

Look Up In The Sky! It’s a Bird! It’s a Plane! No It’s a Pringle!

The boondoggle takes to the air

Don’t feel so bad. The consultants, lobbyists, con men,  and other assorted rip-off artists are pushing the multi-billion high speed rail in other places, too.  Here’s an article from the Fresno Bee that tells all about how the local gentry are trying to grab their share of the HSR gravy that they think will be a big deal for the raisin capital of the state.

You are becoming very sleepy...

The common denominator, of course, is Anaheim’s termed-out Mayor-For-Hire, the irrepressible Curt Pringle who figures to make big bucks as a “consultant” for this boondoggle when his days as a conflicted politician are over. The Fresno crowd wined and dined hizzoner and he was clearly impressed with the show of unanimity – much more than he’s getting down south these days. He even promised them a 2012 start for the project.

Come December Pringle will be out of office, and will no longer be able to pull the strings at OCTA either, although it sure looks like he’s getting his ducks in a row, puppet-wise there and at Anaheim’s City Hall.