Fullerton City Council Archives - Page 67 of 77 - Friends For Fullerton's Future

January 15, 2010July 14, 2010Behind Closed Doors

Fullerton Decision-makers Lied To. So What’s New?

Last year just before Christmas the Fullerton City Council voted 3-1 to approve the idiotic Richman housing project, a staff-driven boondoggle that makes zero planning, housing, or economic sense. We wrote about it here.

We also wrote about the review of the same fiasco-in-the-making by the Planning Commission here, in which we lauded Commissioner Bruce Whitaker for his solitary stance in opposing it. As the YouTube clip shows, Whitaker objected on economic grounds citing the project’s dubious fiscal foundation.

This position was immediately questioned by Commissioner Lansburg who inquired about it of the city attorney, Tom Duarte:

Commissioner Lansburg: is it within the Commission’s purview to look at this from a financial standpoint or are we only to look at this from a planning standpoint?

The city attorney Mr. Duarte answered: In the commissions purview its a land use issue, the city council will look at the financial impact.

Well, the project was passed by a Commission majority, with only Whitaker dissenting.

Subsequently Commission Chairman Dexter Savage addressed the following communication to staff, seeking clarification of the issue.

And now, Lo and Behold, the issue has been agendized by the City Council; and just look at staff’s response: economic considerations are indeed within the purview of a planning commission in many respects, and are nowhere prohibited.

This response begs several questions. Why did the city’s attorney misinform the commission? Is he incompetent, or was he motivated to press the approval of a project near and dear to the hearts of the city staff, without any reference to the law.

Why did the staff present like (John Godlewski) not correct him? He countersigned the above memorandum contradicting Duarte, yet was at the meeting and said nothing.

The facts can really only be interpreted in one way. Both the attorney and staff were more interested in the approval of the project, no matter how bad, than in the service of the public interest, or the truth, or the law.

Now the entire matter has been brought to the City Council for its enlightenment as agenda item #16 at the January 19, meeting. But it’s really to late for the Richman project – a Redevelopment/housing staff concocted project that has all the tell-tale signs of a disaster in the making.

And Friends: there you have it.

January 13, 2010January 13, 2010Boohooism

Minard Duncan and the Doctrine of Unaccountability

by Mr. Peabody9 Comments

A few days ago on this post about Pam Keller’s blank Collaborative calendar, we received a visit from FSD trustee Minard Duncan. As is usual, Minard’s visit was vacuous and inane. Just about what you’d expect from an educrat. Minard admitted his comments were just made to “rile” us up.

But what was really interesting was when Minard dropped this spud on the Friends, unwittingly revealing a mindset that reveals all the things wrong with Fullerton’s elected representatives:

School board members do not have any power as individuals. It takes three board members out of a five member board agreeing on an issue to have authority. We are the boss of the district superintendent and no one else but not as individuals only as a collective board.

See, Minard indicates that authority (power) is only to be exercised by a majority, and, moreover, through the conduit of a Superintendent – thus effectively removing the “elected” from actually having to do much of anything except hire a single underling and ratify his decisions. And of course the consequence of Minard-think is that the responsibility and accountability attendant upon elected office is conveniently dissipated through delegation to a host of protected bureaucrats who are never held accountable either.

But whoever thought that the absence of a majority meant that a boardmember was somehow robbed of any of the authority vested in him by the electorate? While it takes a board majority to act affirmatively on a specific issue, the authority of an elected is indivisible. Minard is not just a third of a potential majority, nor does he represent only a theoretical one fifth of the property tax payers and parents – although he doesn’t seem to grasp this idea.

It is each boardmember’s responsibility to concern himself with everything that goes on in his district and to take responsibility for it.

Minard-think leads to the complete dereliction of responsibility that seems to obtain not only at the FSD, but also at Fullerton City Hall, too, where electeds delegate responsibility right along with the authority they invest in their City Manager. And of course as any honest council watcher knows, the Council, through laziness and/or inclination, is completely in thrall to the Chief Bureaucrat who is supposed to be working for them. It’s rather like the Stockholm Syndrome.

And you know what? A lot of electeds and their bureaucratic masters sure seem to like it that way.

January 5, 2010January 5, 2010Behind Closed Doors

A Good Article, By George!

by Mr. Peabody4 Comments

I've never even been to Fullerton — Fullerton? Where's that?

Although George Will can be stuffy and, well, fat-headed on occasion, there is nothing off the mark about his opinion piece in the Washington Post the other day about the Atlantic Yards eminent domain scandal occurring in Brooklyn, New York. Read it here.

Sounds kind of familiar, doesn’t it? Trumped up findings of blight that justify the creation of a government-as-developer zone. In Fullerton we have the proposed Redevelopment expansion – leveraged off a completely fraudulent finding of blight. There are no massive projects in the expansion area – yet, but the idea of securing property tax increment and using the expansion to extend the life of the existing Redevelopment project area foreshadows all sorts of problems with government overreach and the misdirection of public revenue.

January 5, 2010January 5, 2010Fullerton BooHoo

Pam Keller: Funneling Grant Money Into Liberal Activism for Fun and Profit

by The Fullerton Shadow23 Comments

We’ve burned quite a few pixels explaining how Pam Keller’s is using her non-profit, The Fullerton Collaborative, as a vehicle to peddle influence, fund political activists, and profit Keller herself through excessively convoluted financial relationships.

But some of our loyal Friends still don’t get it.

That’s admittedly understandable, since the entire contraption is remarkably complicated. But to help everyone wrap his or her cerebral cortex around the many conflicts of interest, we present this valuable flow chart to demonstrate where The Fullerton Collaborative’s money comes from and where it goes. Naturally the nexus of the whole tangled web is Pam Keller. And that’s the big problem.

Fullerton-Collaborative-Illustrated — Click for an eye-opening experience...

Enjoy following the arrows. After perusing this chart there really is no excuse for not being concerned about the manifest conflicts of interests on the part of our City Council woman Pam Keller.

Unless, of course, you are part of the web.

January 4, 2010January 4, 2010Behind Closed Doors

“Fiscal Conservative” Pam Keller Blows More Than $1200 Bucks At Local League Of Cities Meeting

by The Desert Rat40 Comments

If it's in my interest, it's in the public's interest, too! — If it's in my interest, it's in the public interest, too!

Hoo Boy! So this is how a self-proclaimed fiscal conservative squanders our money.

In the fall of 2008 Pam Keller attended the California League of Cities Annual Meeting, a useless agglomeration of bureaucrats and bureaucrat lovin’ electeds who like to micromanage everybody’s life while we pay for it.

The event was held at the Hyatt Regency Long Beach, a luxury hotel, exactly 26.1 miles from Fullerton. The distance is so vast that Pam decided to stay at the hotel for three nights and amassed a bill of $1236.10. Check out the payment vouchers, the hotel invoice, and even a handwritten request for nine buck’s reimbursement for parking, here.

Seems Pam also took along a guest, and, among other treats, they may have availed themselves of a trip to the LB Aquarium that was included in the deal.

Even if we disregard the questionable usefulness of attending one of these taxpayer funded boondoggles, what on earth was the need for Keller to stay at a hotel whose drive-time distance Mapquest lists at a mere 28 minutes?

And I have to wonder how all of Keller’s lefty knee-jerk supporters could possibly countenance this sort of profligacy of public money. $1,200 could be used collaboratively to feed a lot of homeless people, right?

Now to be perfectly fair (I am a very fair person), Fullerton’s two RINOs, Don Bankhead and Dick Jones also attended this conference and also racked up big bills. At least Jones went alone.

Friends, this is likely not the only Keller taxpayer-funded junket and rest assured, we will be providing examples of others in the very near future if we find them.

December 24, 2009December 28, 2009Boohooism

In Fullerton It’s Only Over When Staff Says Its Over

by Jan Florys Dog6 Comments

I don't mind being led around just so long as I don't know where I'm going. — I don't mind being led around just as long as I don't know where they're taking me!

A few items in 2009 have caused me to reflect on the way things go in Fullerton, the way things have always gone, in fact. My poodle friends have a saying: la plus ca change, la plus c’est la meme chose. Man, that’s Fullerton all over!

In Fullerton, no screw-up, no cluster f, no civic disaster ever goes away if the city staff doesn’t want it to. They’ll dig in their heels and start the ol’ push-back as soon as it looks like something they really want is about to get torpedoed.

Consider the absolutely horrible decision to relocate the McDonald’s outlet at a jaw-dropping cost of six million bucks. Not even the most compliant council could swallow that one, and ours pulled the plug on it (so we thought, foolish us!) last summer. But within a a few weeks, the Redevelopment staff cooked up a “new” plan for the brainless “Fox Block” scheme. And guess what? It too, involved relocating McDonald’s – just not all the way to the corner. Geez, wasn’t anybody paying attention? That episode was so bad that it really crossed the line of insubordination. But did anybody on the council say a word? ‘Course not. This is Fullerton!

Of course the real problem is is the sort of people that we keep electing to the City Council. The mentally lame, the incompetent, the inert; people who by political and personal inclination identify with the bureaucracy instead of the citizens and taxpayers of Fullerton; people who dodge responsibility. Of the current crop, only Shawn Nelson really seems to take offense at being lied to and led around by the nose like a prize bull. And speaking of bull, Sharon Quirk seems to have finally realized that her advisors have their own agendas that more likely than not are incongruous with the interests of the rest of us. Well, that’s some progress, anyway.

What will 2010 bring? More of the same, no doubt. This is Fullerton. If there’s any hope for us the brain-dead gerontocracy must go. And by gerontocracy I mean the ossified geriatric thinking displayed by councilmembers of all ages, and the interests they represent. Of course Bankhead must go. Jones, too. And Keller. But if they’re replaced with stooges like Marty Burbank or Pat McKinley what the hell’s the difference?

Well let’s throw out a few issues to track to see how bad, or good, things will be in 2010 as far as accountability goes:

Will the council finally once and for all end the Fox Block scam?

Will Keller, Quirk, and Nelson stick to their promise to put the issue of term limits on the June ballot?

Will the council quit wasting time and energy on the idiotic Transportation Center master plan?

Will the council give up on the bogus Redevelopment expansion?

Will the council ditch the moronic “at-large” members of commissions altogether?

Will the council demand accountability on the UP park scandal before they sink another dime into more Redevelopment of it? Will they tell the city manager to quit making unilateral policy decisions?

Will the council have the courage (very little required really) to forget the useless UP ROW “trail”?

Will the council quit subsidizing and encouraging illegal behavior by downtown bars and dance halls?

Well, really, the list is endless and the Friends could no doubt supply their own favorites. Bon chance!

December 14, 2009December 30, 2009Behind Closed Doors

On the Agenda: December 15th, 2009

by Christian4 Comments

The Fullerton City Council has just released their agenda for December 15, 2009 and it’s a fat package!

Something near and dear to me is baseball so I take a little more interest when the subject shows up on the agenda. Item 2 of the closed session is a conference with the real property negotiator concerning 304 W. Commonwealth Avenue. It would appear that the Orange County Flyers of Fullerton want to move to downtown Fullerton to be closer to City Hall. In fact they want to have the baseball field across the street where many a young man played pony league baseball. The Duane Winters Field just might be the sight of the next Golden Baseball League Championship. In March 2007 the team gave up being the Fullerton Flyers because the new partners wanted to be more marketable. Hmm, sounds like an Arty Moreno stunt! So the changed to the Orange County Flyers. I have a t-shirt that says “Top 10 Reason’s To Be a Fan: …Reason #4: They aren’t the L.A. Flyers of Fullerton.” That’s true; they’re the O.C. Flyers. So, will Parks and Rec Director, Joe Felz, give them the field? We’ll see…

Also in the closed session is another real property whiz-bang. Rob Zur Schmiede is working on 655 W. Valencia. In 2007 this was a 63 unit condo by John Laing and the project was in plan check. 3+ years later, what could they be discussing? Price and terms with C&C Development’s Barry Cottle, according to the agenda.

In the open session you can look forward to a presentation by MWD and a few awards to people like Quirk-Silva, Dick Waltz, and – drum roll please – The Golden Bell Award, Fullerton Union High School District and (another drum roll please) Fullerton School District! How ya like dem apples?

Make sure you fill out your blue card before you yell at the council – which you will want to do…

There are a few appointments being made to the Library Board of Trustees. Your favorite Mayor, Don “Don’t Mess With Me” Bankhead and Shawn “See Ya Later Alligator” Nelson. Their terms are to expire December 31, 2012 – if they last that long.

We have a busy consent calendar to cover so hang on tight. In the mix is the amended landscaping ordinance, group insurance for city employees, the employee’s deferred compensation, more sewer replacement, a bunch of Redevelopment stuff, air pollution, SALE OF THE ORANGE COUNTY FAIR GROUNDS (seriously – item 11), Raymond Avenue grade separation, Fire Management Association agreement, Bastanchury/Valencia Mesa bike path. There is too much for me to cover here so I’ll expand a little on just a few.

First, there for Redevelopment. Item 6’s title should tell you everything you need to know… “Redevelopment Agency’s Annual Determination That Planning And Administrative Expenses Are Necessary For The Production, Improvement, or Preservation of Low and Moderate Income Housing”. Yep that’s all you need to know so don’t look into it or question it. I suggest that if you ever had a beef with Redevelopment, this is a chance for you to SCREAM at your elected officials. This “determination” is the justification for wasting your money. Because if that isn’t enough reason, read item 7, the Redevelopment Agency’s annual report. This the RA’s justification for existence to the State and Feds. If it doesn’t dazzle you with brilliance, rest assured, it will baffle you with bullshit!

Ok, enough with the Redevelopment Agency, let’s get down to real business. According to item 8, it’s time to modify the signals at Orangethorpe and Highland, as well as re-stripe the area and add some signs.

Air pollution shows up 9^th on the list. It’s actually a MSRC grant for $450,000 for a compressed natural gas station. I wonder how much money we will throw at it to get the gas station operational. How much will we sell the gas for? Are there enough customers to make it profitable or are we, the tax payers, suppose to subsidize CNG vehicle owners? I’m sure the details are all there waiting to be found.

Don Hoppe gets an appointment as the Public Works Dispute Hearing Officer. Will he get paid extra for the job?

And then we have the Fairgrounds. It appears that the council would like to request the Governator to not sell the O.C. Fairgrounds. I’m sure Arnold will read the letter and quickly cancel the whole sale.

The Raymond Avenue Grade Separation is getting a change order for AECOM. Their fee is $2,450,000. It is unclear from the agenda or staff recommendation just how much the change order will cost us, if anything. According to the recommendation, there is $63,739,000 for the project. That’s a lot of money!

Skipping ahead to the Public Hearings we have some more Redevelopment doozies. The first one, item 15, is for 524 and 530 S. Richman Avenue where the Olson Company wants to erect 34 moderate income housing units. I believe the Honorable DR. Jones said we “…absolutely have to build these. It’s the law!” Well, sort of…not really.

Also, item 16 is the Five-Year Implementation Plan for Redevelopment Agency. The item is on the agenda so that a request can be made to have a public hearing on it and consider adopting the plan. What a racket!

Here is an interesting one. Item 17 is an appeal to install a nature/wildlife habitat along a portion of the Juanita Cooke Greenbelt (known to many who are not as up to date on official trail names as “The Equestrian Trail Behind the Court House that goes to Laguna Lake”). After looking at what they wanted to do and where, I’m not sure why the City didn’t take advantage of the situation. Here are a couple who want to improve the trail where it runs along their backyard. They wanted to make it wilder (I guess) on the slope NEXT TO the path. The fix could have been to enter into an agreement whereby they can install certain pre-approved plants in a pre-approved manner, the total costs of which would be paid by the applicant. The City could have the homeowners maintain it until such time as the agreement is cancelled in which case the homeowners could be on the hook for removal/restoration costs. The cop out from Parks that the trail has two paths and this would confuse people is silly. Are people really that stupid? Also, from what I have seen, the encroachment would be onto the slope. I don’t think the mountain bikers are on the slopes nor are the walkers or horses. So what’s the problem?

The city will also be looking at parking permit fees in certain areas. (See item 18)

Moving on to Regular Business (I said this was a big package), we have a few reports on the City’s financials as well as the Airport. Also in the Regular Business is the Commission/Committee At-Large Appointment Process.

I urge you to read through all of the supporting documents for the agenda. That is where you might find some nuggets of truth that should be brought forth. I simply don’t have enough hours in the day to do it. Thanks for reading and feel free to point out other topics that I missed or are important to you!

December 7, 2009January 9, 2010Boohooism

BooHooing Job Assigned to Vince Buck

by The Fullerton Shadow12 Comments

We knew the first post-mayoral vote edition of the Yellowing Fullerton Observer was going to have a Page One sob story recounting how Pam Keller was robbed of her birthright. The only question was who was going to write the tale of woe. That duty fell upon Liberosaur Vince Buck, who’s been an uncompromising shill for the idiotic council lefties for years and years.

not known for agility — Not known for agility

Mr. Buck is not given to hysteria, so the tenor of the article is pretty calm. Still, the assertions therein were, as usual, appalling pea-brained: the woman was rejected by the boys; and it was her turn; Bankhead and Nelson voted they way they did for political reasons (Oh no, the horror!).

Of course Buck didn’t bother to correct the previous erroneous assertions of his editoress that other localities have a “rotation” – implying some mechanism for school yard-type “sharing” of the mayor-ship. He also didn’t share the choice irony that The Observer has endorsed the chowderheads Bankhead and Jones time and time and time again.

Vince Buck awaits the jello salad — Vince Buck awaits the salad

What was really funny was Buck’s claim that Nelson voted for Bankhead to get the latter’s endorsement for his upcoming Supervisorial campaign, while in the next breath he (accurately) reminds us of how little the Bankhead endorsement did for the Ackerwoman. Of course, we already knew that, and Nelson must, too! Bankhead’s endorsement is as worthless as Zimbabwean currency.

It just doesn’t seem to have occurred to poor, cliche-riddled Vince that maybe Nelson just really dislikes Pam Keller. And by dislike we mean a don’t-walk-ahead-of-him-down-a-dark-alley sort of dislike.

December 2, 2009December 2, 2009Dead heads

Dick Jones Holds Forth. Again.

by admin1 Comment

We really couldn’t help it. These golden Doc Heehaw moments are just too precious not to share with our Friends. Here he is trying to explain, in his classic barnyard blathering, why he wants to keep Don Bankhead mayor and Pam Keller out. Apparently Bankhead’s flatlining during meetings is no cause for alarm for the good doctor. Somehow Don is needed to help our “very, very good” city manager through the turbulent times ahead. Oh boy, what a team!

Be sure to enjoy the “raging financial torrent” babble-burst at about the 1:25 mark.

December 2, 2009December 2, 2009Dick Jones

Council Majority Pulls Plug on Pamette’s Posse; Proposes: Go Pound Pumice

by The Fullerton Shadow17 Comments

Well it happened last night. Joe and I made a quick trip out to Pechanga to blow our lottery winnings and so we missed it.

Wait 'til next year. If there is a next year.

Pam Keller was denied her turn in the Mayoral tether ball court, forgetting that to be Mayor you need three votes. Her posse must be sorely disappointed with the shut out. The Yellowing Fullerton Observer will no doubt be putting out a special edition decrying the end of civilization, and the barbarians at the gate, and whatever other nonsense they can cook up; maybe they can get some delish quotes from the gal with no “political whatevers.”

Anyway, Friends, get ready for a tsunami of self-righteous boohoo outrage.

Those little marshmallows really make the cocoa better...

Don Bankhead, who has been on the City Council since right before The Flood, will be mayor again next year. He voted for himself, as did Dick Jones and Shawn Nelson. We have been told that Ol’ Doc Jones coughed up a supremely sublime HeeHaw Moment that we will be sharing later. Apparently Nelson kept his mouth shut, which shows unusual perspicacity for a politician; we have to wonder if he isn’t still plenty pissed off at Keller for her attacks on him after he stood up for the citizens of Fullerton on the pension spike finagle last year.

As a consolation prize Keller got to stay mayor pro tem, a pretty useless ballot designation, but at least the word mayor is in it.