Fullerton City Council – Page 74 – Friends For Fullerton's Future

August 31, 2009January 4, 2010Big Brother

Jones and Mayer Lose Another One for Fullerton

Our city attorney just lost what is hopefully the final round in Fullerton’s red light camera case. A superior court judge denied the city’s request to re-hear the appeal of People vs. Franco, which was originally lost when the city attorney failed to show up at court last.

If you’ve been following along, you know that the red light cameras were a disaster from the very beginning. Fullerton’s contracted city attorney at Jones and Mayer allowed our city council to sign an obviously illegal contract for red light cameras to be installed throughout Fullerton. Thousands upon thousands of illegal tickets were given out until one recipient finally stood up and challenged the contract in court. Last year a judge found that Fullerton’s deal with the bankrupt Nestor Traffic Systems illegally gave the operator an incentive to boost ticket issuance by the cameras.

The most painful part of this story is that we kept getting those expensive legal bills throughout the entire red light camera circus, all the while being encouraged to continue fighting for this lost cause.

Someone close to this case wrote in to suggest that the city should sue Jones & Mayer for malpractice. If that’s an option, we certainly won’t hear about it from Richard D. Jones himself. How much longer will Fullerton pay for this bad advice? Will anyone be held accountable for this series of screw-ups? When was the last time that our contract with J&M was reviewed? It’s time for the council to admit that they were led astray and publicly address these issues with our city attorney.

August 18, 2009August 19, 2009Fullerton City Council

County Deploys Certified Helmet Fitters

by Travis13 Comments

There’s an item on tonight’s council agenda that highlights the ridiculous overhead that government do-gooders can add to otherwise trivial tasks. In this case, the Orange County Health Care Agency wants to give out 300 helmets to poor kids in Fullerton. Sounds like a simple task, right? Buy 300 helmets and give them out, hoping that kids will smash their melons a bit less frequently.

But that’s not how government operates – in this case, the county hires Helmet Fitting trainers to train Helmet Fitters to fit helmets on juvenile fittee’s. Before that can happen, Helmet Fitter trainee’s must be Helmet Fitter certified, presumably by some kind of Helmet Fitting certification authority.

But we can’t have certified Helmet Fitters running around without releasing the city from Helmet Fitting risk. And we can’t have Helmet Fitters fitting helmets without filling out a Helmet Consent Form. In case you think I’m making this up, here is the text from the grant request:

This grant provides 300 helmets for distribution to low income children under age 18 living in Fullerton. Parks and Recreation staff and volunteers will be trained and certified as Helmet Fitters by the County of Orange Health Care Agency. Prior to receiving a helmet, each recipient and/or parent of recipient will receive helmet safety education by the certified Helmet Fitter, complete the Voluntary Release Assumption of Risk and Indemnity Agreement form and the Helmet Consent Form

This obvious make-work project would be comical if it wasn’t a complete waste of city and county resources. If this task must be done, please give the helmets to some non-profit who can tackle it without all of the overhead.

August 4, 2009January 9, 2010Fullerton City Council

Ironic Twist to “Euclid Commons”; City Wants To Make A Deal With Disabled Housing Foe

by The Fullerton Shadow16 Comments

2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR

Property: 626 & 700 S. Euclid Street
Agency Negotiator: Rob Zur Schmiede
Negotiating Parties: Paul Kott, Pierre J. Nicolas Trust
Under Negotiations: Price and terms

Affordable housing, like politics apparently makes for strange bedfellows. Take the case of Euclid Commons, a proposed affordable housing site that the City wants to buy. The agent for the owner is none other than Paul Kott, an Anaheim realtor and apparently a giant NIMBY, to boot.

About three years ago the City of Anaheim proposed a housing development for disabled folks near Kott’s offices on Lincoln Avenue, a pretty worthy goal you would think. But guess who marshaled neighborhood opposition that caused the city council back down? That’s right, Paul Kott.

Lest anyone think we make this stuff up, we thoughtfully provide a link to the LA Times article from 2006, here.

And speaking of money, here’s the money quote:

“Residents of the neighborhood, called Westmont, said a letter from real estate agent Paul Kott alerted them to the city’s plans for the vacant lot at Wilshire Avenue and Pearl Street. Kott, whose office is a few hundred yards from the site, wrote in his letter that “parolees, child molesters and mentally ill” could soon live nearby.”

Hey, Fullerton CC, nice guys you want to do business with!

August 4, 2009August 4, 2009Dick Jones

Euclid Commons: What Is It?

by The Fullerton Harpoon8 Comments

Yesterday we ran a post on the duplicitous way the City started the ball rolling behind closed doors on a big housing project that promises CEQA impacts on its neighbors. In fact decisions are already being taken that should have been done under the illumination of a public hearing.

The project even has a name, “Euclid Commons” that makes us wish to make a quick pit stop at the West Harbor Alley Improvement Project vomitorium. A couple of comments provided descriptions of what was being proposed that seemed to differ considerably and so we provide la tabula rasa for our Friends to chime in and see if any clarifications are forthcoming.

The issue of starting negotiations is being addressed tonight (Aug 4th) behind closed doors since the public can’t be trusted to even know that a project is now officially (if secretly) sanctioned by the City Council. There will be “reporting out” but no public comment. Really, what have they got to hide?

August 3, 2009December 30, 2009Behind Closed Doors

HEY WHAT’S WITH ALL THE SECRECY; THIS IS A DEMOCRACY, RIGHT?

by admin32 Comments

closeddoor

Here’s an item on tomorrow’s agenda to be addressed by the City Council behind closed doors:

2. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR

Property: 626 & 700 S. Euclid Street
Agency Negotiator: Rob Zur Schmiede
Negotiating Parties: Paul Kott, Pierre J. Nicolas Trust
Under Negotiations: Price and terms

Why is the Redevelopment Agency negotiating to buy this property? — This is a big deal. Where's the public hearing?

Let’s get this straight. The Redevelopment staff (aka Rob Zur Schmiede) is asking for council permission to begin negotiations for a huge piece of property off Euclid, presumably to build low income housing. He’s trying to do it behind closed doors under the cover of the “closed session” where he can get the ball rolling on a project that has NEVER been authorized by anybody. The key phrase here is “price and terms” which justifies the secrecy but that in reality is being used as a fig leaf to hide the fact that the council is giving tacit approval to a project that has never been offically authorized by them, in public – even in concept. In fact the very nature of the request is the first in what will be a long series of incremental approvals. In fact, this process is called incrementalization for that very reason.

Well, WE object to these shennanigans even though it happens all the time. Authorization to negotiate price and terms is premature, and at this juncture issues that are not covered by under Brown Act exclusions are already occuring. What is involved is a secret commencement of the process that will lead to land use entitlements and rezoning. This is wrong, wrong wrong. This is obviously going to be a major project with major policy and CEQA implications.

The City Council should agendize this issue for a public hearing immediately with proper notification to all the neighbors. If they choose to go ahead with this (likely monstrosity), THEN they can schedule their “price and terms” meeting in the cozy confines of the backroom!

July 30, 2009December 28, 2009Fullerton City Council

Team Cuts; What Are Your Team’s Priorities?

by admin6 Comments

Former Mayor Clesceri walk & talk at Chambers State of City Luncheon — Former Mayor Clesceri does a walk & talk at a Chamber of Commerce/State of City Luncheon, of course sponsored by the City of Fullerton

What associations and organizations does the City of Fullerton support financially that should be cut before cutting a librarian, a police officer or a life guard? How much money does the city spend every year on contracts with lobbyists?

Isn’t it time to examine some of these relationships and analyze their effectiveness?

July 23, 2009July 29, 2009Fullerton City Council

When is “No” better than “Yes”?

by admin5 Comments

Hopefully, saying “yes” to something means you understand what you are saying yes to. How many times have we said “yes” when we really have no idea what the results of that “yes” really meant? Hopefully not many.

How many times has our city council said “yes” when they really had no idea what they were saying “yes” to.

When is “No” better than “Yes”? Always, when you don’t know what you are talking about.

fox-missing-slide-500x324 — How to kill a Fox

When is it too late to be smart? Never.

Remember, it’s never too late to be smart. Just say “no” when you are not 100% sure about the results of what you are saying “yes” to.

Urban Futures has no idea of Fullertons Future — Urban Futures has no idea about Fullerton's Future

Voting “yes” may comfort insecure or uninformed politicians, but it inevitably leads to disaster.

July 16, 2009January 4, 2010Dick Jones

City Council Left in Dark Over Fate of Park; Say, Who In Hell Elected That Guy, Anyway?

by The Fullerton Harpoon8 Comments

While watching the youtube clip of David Espinosa tee off on the Union Pacific Park and the comment by City Manager Chris Meyer that the park was being shut down, we got to thinking. The Mayor was clearly not told by anybody that the park was being closed down – observe the standard “we’ll fix it, thanks, move along” comment by Bankhead followed by Meyer’s explanation.

Meyer went on to say that the problem of what to do with this “park” was being passed to the Community Services Commission for ponderment.

And we say: who in Hell gave Chris Meyer the authority to shut down a public park? Why wasn’t the Council asked to make this decision and how come they were never even told about it before the apparent revelation at the council meeting? Who gave Meyer the authority to assign this problem to anybody, let alone a lower committee without even informing the Council of his plans? Why wasn’t this issue agendized and discussed, in public, by the City Council?

These are mostly rhetorical questions, of course. The City’s staff wants to sweep this acute embarrassment under the municipal rug and the only way to do that is not to tell anybody. Even their bosses.

It also makes us wonder how much else in Fullerton has being undertaken by the City Manager on his own hook. It’s one thing to execute policy laid down by elected officials; it’s quite another thing to start taking on major policy decisions, and worse still, not tell anybody. Unfortunately this situation is symptomatic of two long-standing problems in Fullerton, two problems that fit together like pieces in a jigsaw puzzle.

First is the perfect willingness of our elected city council persons to abdicate their own policy-making responsibility and simply show up for the meetings, the Rotary lunches, the Chamber mixers, and the ribbon cuttings; second is the perfect willingness of the city managers to step into the authority void and run the show any damn way they please. It’s a perverse symbiosis.

This has got to stop. The results have been amply catalogued on the pages of this blog. And they aren’t very pretty.

July 13, 2009March 27, 2012Fullerton City Council

Victory for Outdoor Music in Downtown

by admin16 Comments

we play for food and drinks — If you don't like our sound you don't have to listen

On Tuesday night, July 7, 2009 the Fullerton City Council finally concluded the issue of Live Outdoor Amplified Noise. With a 4-1 vote (Pam Keller in opposition for some reason), council members decided that our current sound ordinance will suffice, moving forward into the future. Currently, acoustic music is allowed outside and louder live amplified music is not. Jones, Bankhead, Quirk and Nelson all voting that the outdoor use of acoustical instrumentation (without amplification) is A-OK, but the use of louder live amplified noise on downtown private patios on a regular basis is not the best thing for Downtown Fullerton.

It was stated in the sound study that was produced for the city at a cost of $16K that it is very unusual for cities to allow loud live amplified music outdoors on a regular basis. This obviously doesn’t include special events which are permitted under the current city code. It’s so unheard of that only 3 cities in the whole country where cited as allowing some kind of routine outdoor noise, 2 of them out-of-state. The vast majority of cities allow acoustic (non-amplified) music outdoors while the loud music belongs inside. What a great idea!

Cheers for the Council for making a wise decision and preserving the peace in Downtown!

Cheers for the Council for having the foresight to see that over the long run this will encourage positive development in the downtown and promote a healthy business climate for all types of diverse shops and residential dwellings to thrive in downtown.

If you think about it, some types of music just aren’t conducive to being peace and quiet, yet others are. So by sticking with the current ordinance, acoustic music like folk, jazz and blues are encouraged outside while the louder harder stuff is only allowed indoors.

Makes great sense—Good job City Council!

July 8, 2009September 11, 2009Downtown Fullerton

Quirk Kills Bad Burger Deal; Fox Block Kicks the Bucket

by Travis5 Comments

Residents witnessed another rousing victory for FFFF last night as Councilwoman Sharon Quirk wisely reversed direction on Fullerton’s famous $6 million dollar burger deal that would give away a brand new McDonald’s restaurant at taxpayers’ expense. Pam Keller sensed the inevitable failure of this project and also changed course, sending this turkey down in a 4-1 vote. Nelson and Jones had it right from the beginning, but Bankhead rode this one all the way to the grave.

burger-squashed — No thanks, we're not hungry anymore

Now that the taxpayer-funded McDonald’s move is dead, there isn’t much hope for the massive Fox Block redevelopment scheme – and that’s fine by us. The Fox Block had little to do with the popular restoration of the historic Fox Theatre and there was plenty of doubt the that the block would be financially viable even with millions in taxpayer subsidies. Throw in a little public deception about the height of the buildings, and it’s clear that this project needed to be flushed.

Even if you don’t approve of our approach here at FFFF, it’s hard to deny positive results. It’s good to see our representatives fix bad decisions and move forward. We know it’s tough to admit when you are wrong, but that’s part of responsible governance. Thank you, Quirk and Keller, for doing the right thing.