May 28, 2026May 29, 2026A Manfro All Seasons

More Monkey Business With the Budget?

If as is being claimed by “Erik” at Fullerton City News is unequivocally stating that Fullerton City staff has been unilaterally backfilling departmental funds without approval by the City Council. This would be unethical and illegal.

Elected officials have to approve these sorts of transfers from the General Fund as well as periodic budget adjustments. Period. Erik claims this has been going on for at least seven years and the amounts are substantial.

Erik uses this situation to suggest a City sales tax bailout is the wrong way to reward the bureaucrats who perpetrated this possibly criminal hairball.

Here is his post:

I’ve Got 24,816,001 Reasons To Not Support A Sales Tax

City Hall Spent $24.8 Million Without Council Approval And Now Wants A Tax Increase

Erik

May 21, 2026

Budgets are estimates, it’s an unpredictable world, and not getting it perfect is understandable. Fullerton City Hall staff and the city council are supposed to work together to determine how much money should go to each fund / department but ultimately it is the city council who, being elected, gets the final say on how we prioritize and spend that money. When council does this properly the residents are happy and councilmembers get re-elected, run for higher office, etc. When they don’t get it right they lose elections, get recalled, and/or face public scorn. The city council is our control mechanism over how our money is spent.

When a council appropriation ends up being more than what was needed, the remaining money can return to the General Fund without issue. When a council appropriation is not enough, the correct action is to request an increase from the city council. Again, city council is our control mechanism over how our money is spent. Staff does not have the legal authority to increase spending, only council does.

This is spelled out in City Municipal Code 2.68.030:

Prior to June fifth of each year, the City Administrator shall submit a budget for the coming fiscal year to the City Council for adoption.

And the restrictions given in City Municipal Code 2.68.050 which states:

C. Transfers of appropriations between departments and funds, or use of salary and accounts, other than those exceptions authorized herein, may be made only by authority of the City Council.

D. Expenditures in excess of the budgeted amounts are prohibited. (Ord. 1485 § 5, 1967).

This should be clear and simple. Need more money? Go ask council for it. However, it appears City Hall chose not to follow this practice (or the law).

During a conference call with a municipal finance expert, I was directed to the ‘Budgetary Compliance’ Section of the City’s 2025 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). They summarized that when that section is present in the report it means that something has gone wrong and in this case it’s by a lot. The ‘Excess’ column of this section lists money that city staff spent in excess of the council-approved budget and for 2025 it totals $11,148,422.

Consider for a moment what this means. Our only way of having a say over how our taxpayer money is spent is through the city council. They are elected to represent us and our interests. The municipal code confirms this is their decision to make. Yet in FY25 unelected bureaucrats at City Hall simply ignored the city council and the voters they represent and went and spent whatever they wanted.

Police couldn’t manage on their budgeted $61.3M? They spent $63.9M.
Fire couldn’t operate on $34.6M? They spent $36.2M.
‘Capital Outlays’ went over by $6M. This one is especially troubling because there’s no clear explanation of what those funds were actually spent on.

Put another way, the city council budgeted a total of $132.9M to the General Fund but staff spent $144.1M … $11,148,422 of which was without council approval. You might notice on the Revenue side that we brought in $8.9M more than anticipated and should have had a $5.4M surplus. But staff’s $11,148,422 unauthorized spending pushed us from a large surplus to a $5.7M deficit.

This is a complete disregard of good financial practice by City Hall. While some overspending covers legitimate needs, the lack of prior approval violates the process residents rely on, a process that does not include staff spending whatever they want and stashing it on page 105 of next year’s ACFR. Their actions were in direct violation of the city municipal code and are a slap in our faces.

But wait… it gets worse. Much worse. If this were a one-time thing I could almost understand. But, Dear Readers, City Hall staff has disregarded city council approved budgets every single year for the past decade. See for yourself:

gdfgdfgd — 2023: $455,176. And they were nice enough to put in a reminder that this was not legal spending.

Prior to 2021 accounting used a different format for the annual financial report known as the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and the format is a little different, but the pattern of spending beyond authorization continues.

Starting in 2019 to present, staff has helped themselves to $24,816,001 of our taxpayer dollars beyond what our duly-elected council representatives legally allocated them. This money was taken without permission, outside of our established legal process, repeated every single year in recent history. This is an outrage.

Our current unrestricted cash reserves are $19.8M which, with a general fund of $144.1M gives us the current 14% reserve level. This is well below the council target of 17% and translates to 1-1/2 months. Had staff followed the budget all these years, our reserves could be as high as $44.6M which comes out to a 31% reserve level or 3-1/2 months. Or some of that could have gone to paving more streets.

But alas, it is already spent and gone and those who spent it are telling you to just give them more money via a sales tax increase. You should ask your councilmember how they feel about this, do they still trust City Hall, and what are they going to do about it?

We are being robbed.

Back to Harpoonville. This sounds pretty serious and I sure hope the crack accountants we have hired to check the books to explore a few facts:

How were these transactions booked and who authorized them?
Were the transactions simply glossed over in annual CAFRs and budgets without saying who approved them?
When, if ever did the Fullerton City Council approve these transfers? Were any of them ratified after the transfers were made?

We have already seen the City play fast and loose with Redevelopment Successor Agency funds as well as other non-discretionary funds to pad the invalid General Fund. That was bad. And in retrospect, maybe those transfers were just part of an overall pattern of misfeasance.

May 1, 2026May 1, 2026Ahmad Zahra

Derek Smith and the Anaheim Cabal

by The Fullerton Harpoon11 Comments

Backscratching is fun – with other people’s money…

This blog has introduced Mr. Derek Smith to our friends. He is the appointee of “Doctor” Ahmad Zahra to the so-called Budget Sustainability Committee. His qualifications? Well, none are apparent. But we do know that Smith is (or was) the political lobbyist for the union that organizes cannabis store employees.

We already knew that Smith’s union was bankrolling a PAC for the benefit of Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo’s scampaign in 2024 to the tune of $60,000, $4000 of which went to The Councilwoman Shana Charles Self-improvement Fund.

And now thanks to detailed reporting by Mr. Duane J. Roberts, a true citizen journalist, we know that the union in question, UFCW Local 324, was up to it’s neck in schemes to bring legal cannabis to Anaheim. Roberts’ post is a must-read, for it details the close alliance between Anaheim’s crooked cabal and the union. For several years Smith and his union worked closely with disgraced Anaheim Chamber of Commerce head Todd Ament, Anaheim fixer Jeff Flint, and the Mayor, Harry Sidhu.

Ament, Flint, and Sidhu (graphic by Duane J. Roberts)

For the cabal the dope incentive was money, and lots of it. Money that would go to the cabal leaders, the Chamber of Commerce, and campaign funds of the later-convicted Mayor. For Derek Smith’s union, the promise of a Labor Peace Agreement (LPA) that would eventually cover even part-time workers was the goal.

First this association of strange bedfellows tried to get the City Council to go along. Then they began the process to put the issue on the ballot, with proposals written by the cabal, and then by the lobbyist for the Long Beach dope cartel; they were submitted by a UFCW Local 324 employee, and then a local realtor and insurance salesman, Belal Dalati, respectively. Both were eventually retracted, but not without threats, according to Roberts.

Left unreported by Roberts was the role of Melahat Rafiei, the acknowledged queen bee of OC dope lobbying, and a player deeply involved with Anaheim’s cabal. She later went to jail after she was busted by the FBI for wire fraud; Harry Sidhu did a prison stint, too for destroying evidence; Todd Ament pleaded guilty to fraud and his buddy Jeff Flint left town – for a while. Nice people, right?

While none of the Anaheim MJ activities were illegal, at least as far as can be discerned, the whole episode gives off a real bad smell; and in the middle of it was Derek Smith’s union.

Anybody who thinks Ahmad Zahra was ignorant of what was going on in Anaheim and with Rafiei (whom he recommended to at least one Fullerton businessman as a necessary contact) is pretty credulous. And his appointment of Derek Smith to the budget committee comes into sharper focus.

All that transparency can give a lad a headache…

The fact that the self-righteous clamorers who have decried the appointment of Tony Bushala to this committee have diligently ignored the appointment of Smith is telling. Bushala’s political involvement is a disqualification; Smith’s political history is assiduously ignored – just like the Fullerton Observer Sisters relentlessly ignored the Scott Markowitz conspiracy and the massive contribution by Derek Smith’s union to a pro-Jaramillo political action committee.

Both Zahra and Charles are beholden to the dope lobby, but they still need another vote to revive the 2020 marijuana ordinance approved by Jan Flory, Jesus Quirk-Silva, and Ahmad Zahra. They won’t get it this year.

April 3, 2026April 7, 2026Ahmad Zahra

Fullerton’s Big Log

by The Fullerton Harpoon112 Comments

No, it’s not the Fullerton Observer itself, but it is a story related by Stikia Kennedy on that unfortunate publication’s blog. The post seems to have vanished, as is sometimes the case when it suits the publisher/CEO. In this instance it caught the attention of Mr. F.L. Olmstead before it was dispatched; and he sent it to me.

It seems that a local resident named Jensen Hallstrom has been jumping a short wrought iron fence to make homemade repairs to the big slab of redwood dedicated to veterans. It’s in Hillcrest Park not far from the Isaac Walton lodge.

Mr. Hallstrom has been seen at local City Council meetings sharing his personal efforts to repair damaged and missing names. That was was a big mistake, for apparently he has been issued a cease and desist letter from the City, to and from his trespass and his activity.

Not asking real questions is a great way to avoid getting real answers…

Ever the intrepid partisan, Shakira Kennedy seizes upon this David and Goliath tale to spin a yarn about it is somehow the result of the ethics of the Council majority, honesty, transparency and yakkity yak yak yak. It doesn’t seem to have occurred to Kennedy that Fullerton parks staff just hates it when private citizens do unsupervised stuff in City parks, and no political interference is necessary. That fight’s been going on for 35 years, without a peep by two generations of Observers.

Anyhow, Mr. Hallstrom should also know better. He got into a squabble with the City a few years back over the impromptu and unauthorized “native garden” he planted along the Hiltscher Trail. This latest effort seems to suggest a fundamental immaturity on his part.

Shiitake Kennedy’s older sister Sharon even put in an appearance in the comments to decry the event and wonder aloud if Jones and Mayer didn’t have anything better to do than to get the City involved in more legal activity in which they get to bill more hours.

Now that’s ironic. Did either of the Kennedy’s raise an objection about the legal costs associated with the idiotic lawsuit against this blog that was approved by a liberal Council majority? Did any Observers call out the enormous waste of legal fees involved in the foolish and Air Combat lawsuit caused by an incompetent Airport Director who couldn’t understand his own lease? Of course not.

Accountability doesn’t apply to the left-leaning Democrats favored by the Kennedy Sisters whose gaze becomes myopic when dealing with the likes of Ahmad Zahra, Jan Flory, Jesus Quirk Silva and their ilk.

Why this post was pulled is anybody’s guess. Maybe it will mysteriously pop up in the Register.

March 31, 2026April 2, 2026Boohooism

Jan Flory, Victim

by Mr. Peabody51 Comments

Sometimes you think you couldn’t make something up that is so ludicrous as to seem impossible.

And so it is with the case of Jan Flory vs. Fred Jung’s ballot statement that was determined on March 27th.

Not the outcome, per se, in which Jung had to change his designation from “Fullerton Mayor/Business owner” to “Fullerton Mayor/Businessman;” and had to remove from his statement the silly claim of opening 9 new parks and balancing a budget left unbalanced by predecessors.

No, Friends, the crazy, and unintentionally hilarious part was the last minute filing by Ms. Flory’s attorney meant to dodge a stay on the original writ of mandate. In this latest filing, Mr. Brett Murdock (who could not have possibly have composed it with a straight face) demanded immediate relief because Jung’s statement would cause poor Flory “irreparable harm.”

It’s pretty funny reading, all based on the premise that government is a business, and that business is hers:

“Petitioner Jan Flory is engaged in the business of government and politics“

A reputation is a terrible thing to waste…

The supposedly “practically libelous in nature” part is due to the implication that Flory – whose name does not even appear in Jung’s ballot statement – didn’t balance the budget during her fourth laborious canter around the Fullerton City Council track. This supposed assertion of her incompetence is said to impugn her professional political reputation; this so, so funny because every Friend is aware of Flory’s dismal record of incompetence and deceit on the City Council – from the years of Water Fund fraud, refusal to reform a culture of corruption at the FPD, Redevelopment disasters, and of course deficit spending, just to mention a few issues.

I have always hated you, and I always will…

And then there’s the specious and even more hilarious Murdock argument that if Jung were to win based on his ballot statement, it would deprive Flory of opportunities to possibly serve on one of the many County commissions and boards, some of which might offer remuneration:

“If published in the official election material, Jung is more likely to win the election. As a political opponent, Petitioner is unlikely to be appointed by the Supervisor to any of the County’s 85, (sic) boards, commissions and committees; whereas as a highly-qualified and prominent supporter of Traut, she may well earn an appointment.

Membership on a board or commission not only comes with political advantages, but pecuniary advantages as the County “pays certain board and commission members stipends for attending meetings.”

Other benefits—for which “it would be extremely difficult to ascertain the amount”—could accrue to prominent supporters of a winning candidate, including opportunities to be hired as staff counsel or prestige in the community as a lawyer or lobbyist.”

I can’t imagine which “community” would consider Flory as a lawyer – she quit her lawyering, good or bad, years and years ago. Flory the octogenarian lobbyist if Traut gets elected? Who’s kidding who? Her victimhood is based on not being able to be a political hack?

All of this adds up to very little, really, except to spread a little unintended humor to the good people of Fullerton.

February 10, 2026February 10, 2026Ahmad Zahra

Shana Charles In Bed With the Dope Cartel?

by The Fullerton Harpoon6 Comments

FFFF has taken advantage of numerous opportunities to relate the doings of the cannabis lobby in Fullerton.

The train of thought was weak but it sure was short…

We have all seen how Ahmad Zahra has endorsed the the idea of a cannabis dispensary on almost any commercial corner in Fullerton; how the sad mental train wreck of Jesus Quirk-Silva was eager to spread the pain to all of Fullerton’s representative districts. That’s old news, from 2020.

News of more recent vintage is that in 2024 the dope lobby, fronted by the grocery store workers union pitched in to elect Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo with an astounding $60,000, dumped into a pro Jaramillo political action committee.

How come? Because this union also represents the cannabis dispensary works in Orange County. I note that the origin and intent of this contribution was never discussed in the pages of the Fullerton Observer.

Of that $60,000, $4000 was shuffled to Andre Charles, who styles himself a political consultant. What he does between elections remains a mystery, as does the service he provided Team Jaramillo for that $4000. But Andre’s sketchy employment history is of little concern, except that the source of his conjugal bliss is none other than Mrs. Shana Charles, a Fullerton City Council member and a vociferous advocate for public health.

Ms. Shana, as FFFF has noted, is running for re-election in Fullerton’s District 3 this fall. She has kicked off a re-election campaign and has begun the task of fundraising. Her second biggest contribution was $1500, and came from came from the very same dope workers union that fronted the Cannabis Kitty PAC. A coincidence? I doubt it.

Mrs. Flory’s education was complete. The designated driver was on the way.

The marijuana dispensary lobby needs three votes to revive the ill-formed dope ordinance of 2020 approved just before the election of that year by Ahmad Zahra, Jesus Quirk-Silva, and the possibly sober Jan Flory (pictured above). That ordinance was revoked a few months later and the lobby determined that it was worth a huge monetary investment in Fullerton politics.

January 11, 2026January 11, 2026A Step in the Right Direction

A Modest Proposal: the Case for Cannabis Dispensaries in Fullerton

by Disillusioned Ex-Hippy33 Comments

The other day my FFFF colleague, Fullerton Harpoon, published a post on a possible move on the part of Fullerton’s annoying liberal claque to drum up support for legalizing cannabis dispensaries in town.

It’s really hard to get worked up over Doc HeeHaw’s illegal “hip hop drug guy,” and Fullerton Harpoon was quite right in pointing out the absurdity of the “it costs so much to crack down on illegal stores” as a good argument for legal dispensaries when the real reason to have them is to generate large amounts of cannabis sales taxes and fee revenue.

With the Fullerton budget in parlous condition, cannabis revenue derived from an intelligent program isn’t such an unreasonable idea.

Let’s quickly dive back into history when we examine the previous cannabis dispensary ordinance and its revocation in 2020 and 2021.

Throughout 2020 public discussion was held regarding a potential cannabis dispensary ordinance. Public input was clear people wanted a 1000 foot buffer from “sensitive receptors” such as schools, parks, and houses. In fact the consultant’s map that reflected this desire became known as “the People’s Map.”

That was the map approved for recommendation by Fullerton’s Planning Commission. But a funny thing happened on the way to the City Council.

The ordinance was pushed through by the Council 3-2, in the waning months of 2020, even though an election promised a new councilmembers. Jan Flory, Jesus Quirk-Silva, and of course Ahmad Zahra voted yes. Jennifer Fitzgerald and Bruce Whitaker voted no.

The problem that many saw was that in the modified plan there was now generous latitude of potential locations, even to have a dispensary 100 feet from a residential zone. This latitude was undoubtedly the result of dope lobby pressure on Zahra and Quirk-Silva to increase their opportunities as much as possible, and to “share the pain” as Quirk-Silva put it. The public could shove it where the sun didn’t shine.

The other obvious problem was that the ordinance invested the authority to approve cannabis licenses in the hands of the City Manager, who at the time was the incompetent Ken Domer; the decisions would be shrouded in secrecy instead of transparently, in public

The People’s Map had been sandbagged by Flory, Zahra and Quirk-Silva.

In December 2020 and in the early months of 2021 the two new councilmembers – Fred Jung and Nick Dunlap joined Whitaker in pulling the plug on the ordinance. No one has tried to resurrect the issue – yet.

So I have a modest proposal. Why not go back to the People’s Map? Why not go back to the earlier suggestions that would have banned these stores within 1000 feet of anybody’s residence? In addition, why not require street visibility from a Primary or Secondary arterial so everything is in plain view? Sure, almost all of the cannabis businesses would be in southwest Fullerton – Council District 5, so what? That’s the reality of Fullerton’s zoning code.

As far as other revenue options go, two proposed special sales taxes on the 2026 ballot might not pass as they require 2/3 majority; even if the council waffles toward reverting to a general sales tax there would have to be 4 council votes to put it on the ballot. Are they there? Without these revenue sources the practical financial aspect of cannabis-generated revenue appears useful.

The same argument against a special or general sales tax increase is always there: why should everybody be asked to make a sacrifice for the city’s welfare when the City Council and the hundreds of municipal employees, whose salaries and benefits paid for by the public, have sacrificed nothing?

And here’s a final thought: why not restrict cannabis revenue to specific deployment – such as roads, sidewalks and street lights?

Difficult decisions such as who gets licenses and how many there should be remain. I’m not confident in our existing bureaucracy to regulate this use successfully, but to me an intelligent rethink of the issue that minimizes citizen concerns is not a bad idea at all.

December 31, 2025December 31, 2025Ahmad Zahra

At the Fullerton Observer Raising Awkward Facts Gets You Nowhere

by The Fullerton Harpoon42 Comments

One of our commenters recently pointed out the “reply” string on a Fullerton Observer post supposedly written by a guy named Kevin Curriston, a chap who doesn’t appear to be the literary type. Some of comments are pretty good. Naturally Sharon, the elder Kennedy Sister, leaps into the breach to validate the theme of the essay. Amy the Angry Little Bird is on hand too, to lend her support.

A guy named Brian calls bullshit on the supposition that 40 public commenters represent anybody but a small percentage of Fullertonions.

That premise is not well-received in Fullerton Boohooville.

I particularly like Brian’s wicked request for Kennedy to share some of Zahra’s vast filmography.

A Mr. Matt Leslie reminds everybody that Zahra’s flipped on his first real decision and in doing so disenfranched a whole bunch of people when he appointed Jan Flory to complete Jesus Quirk-Silva’s term.

Here’s the reply thread, reproduced:

15 replies »

Matt LeslieDecember 27, 2025 at 9:48 amThe author neglects to inform readers that Council member Ahmad Zahra did not attend this important meeting. Although it seems unlikely that other council members would have supported him for mayor, he had the opportunity to support Shana Charles for the position, but was not present to do so.Ed Response: Councilmember Zahra had a work trip out of town so did not attend the meeting.
- BrianDecember 29, 2025 at 2:39 pmI see you seem to know a lot about council member Zahra, just what does he do for a living?
  - Sharon KDecember 29, 2025 at 4:35 pmZahra is a filmmaker. Currently the only Councilmember who doesn’t work is Jung. You can discover this kind of thing through the form 700 financial filings of each Councilmember. – though I notice Valencia has failed to file. Not sure why.
    - BrianDecember 29, 2025 at 6:46 pmWow, that is fascinating. Can you point me in the direction of some of his work?
AmyDecember 29, 2025 at 8:12 amDunlap and Jung continue to gaslight the public and delude themselves by saying that public commenters are not representative.Every meeting brings new attendees infuriated by the actions of the majority, but Jung, Dunlap, and Valencia keep telling themselves the public’s voices don’t count. It seems they can’t bring themselves to accept that anyone could possibly disagree with their blatant corruption and repeated defiance of the wishes of the public.
- BrianDecember 29, 2025 at 2:27 pmI’d imagine if you took two seconds to step outside your bubble, you may realize that in a town of 140,000+, 30 or 40 people don’t even represent a decimal of a percentage. And just because you comment, it doesn’t make your comments true. Much like this publication and the liberties it takes with the truth all the time.
  - Sharon KDecember 29, 2025 at 4:56 pmBrian – sounds like you are talking to yourself on that critique.
    Most people are busy with their lives and don’t pay that much attention. And of course over half of our town’s 140,000 or so residents are children. Others have jobs that interfere with council meeting hours, etc. Some don’t think it is possible to fight city hall. Some are just not interested. Having 40 people show up at a council meeting and speak on an issue is huge.
    If people didn’t come out we wouldn’t have any trails in town; there would be a polluting flour mill across from Amerige Heights; the toxic park and McColl dump site would not be cleaned up; our museum center would be high rise office building; we wouldn’t have saved FOX or Coyote Hills and much much more.
    Some politicians – just out for themselves and narrow special interests – can fool people for awhile but eventually the truth of their actions come out
  - AmyDecember 29, 2025 at 5:33 pmThose who disagree are welcome to attend a city council meeting, but for some reason they have not.Jung received unanimous opposition to his taking of the mayorship at the last meeting. Dozens of public comments unanimously supported creating a fund for immigrant support against ICE raids and kidnappings. Dozens still attended to beg city council not to kill the Walk on Wilshire – twice; the paltry number of voices in opposition were those financially aligned with Jung and Bushala. If opposition exists, it has yet to show up to city council meetings.
    - BrianDecember 29, 2025 at 6:44 pmLike I said, just because you comment, doesn’t make your comments true. With this statement you proved my point again.
      Full of inaccuracies. Do better.
      - AmyDecember 29, 2025 at 9:19 pmI don’t see how, but okay. I’m sure you know best.
    - Matt LeslieDecember 30, 2025 at 8:59 amAmy, I opposed Walk on Wilshire for several reasons, not because I was “aligned” with anyone. Please be careful not to be dismissive of the concerns of those with opinions contrary to your own.
      - AmyDecember 30, 2025 at 5:11 pmI fully respect your right to your opinion, but I do disagree that the bollards – comparable to those used on nearly every trail in OC – were an actual impediment to cyclists traversing the Walk on Wilshire and merited removal of the whole thing. I definitely wouldn’t go so far as to say any opinion I disagree with is invalid. That would be absurd. But the argument seemed so ridiculous as to be disingenuous to me. Perhaps I’m reading too much into it.That said, as one of the fewer than 10 detractors, you’re certaintly entitled to your opinion. I hope the dismantling of the Walk on Wilshire that so many enjoyed brought you great happiness and satisfaction.
  - FrankDecember 30, 2025 at 2:00 pmStep out of your bubble pal.
Sharon KDecember 29, 2025 at 9:05 pmBrian – if you are talking to me – you are right — I guessed that there are way more children than there are at least according to the stats I just looked up that say there are only 32,000 children under 18 in Fullerton.
But when you are figuring out percentages of people think about the fact that – according to the OC Registrar of Voters – only 7,432 voted for Jung; 9,546 for Dunlap and 3,489 for Valencia in the last election. That certainly does not make a majority. Some of those who voted for Jung, Dunlap are among those who have come to council and said they were unhappy with their votes on various things and felt fooled when the vote to keep Walk on Wilshire open – turned into an expansion suggested by the two – and then that vote was postponed until after the election and both Jung and Dunlap proceeded to vote no.
Really the point is that we residents of town want a fun place to live that we are proud of where people want to visit and small businesses can thrive. Dulling it down by reducing unique features, curtailing music, outdoor patios, walking paths, safe bike paths, etc does not make our town attractive to anyone. And everything turns into a big fight with residents begging for good decisions. And I am not alone in really hating their recent decision to not help residents targeted by ICE and other weird unfair decisions like not following fair rotation so every district gets chance to have their representative as mayor.
Matt LeslieDecember 30, 2025 at 10:51 amAnd, by the way, if you want to talk about steamrolling over public opinion go watch the videos of Ahmad Zahra’s first council meetings in 2018. Dr. Zahra first voiced support for a special election to fill a vacant council seat, a position in line with nearly all public speakers on the issue during meetings. But he quickly changed his position entirely, aligning himself with a council majority who disregarded expressed public opinion in favor of an election and instead voted to appoint a someone to the vacant seat.Zahra’s swing vote to appoint a council member instead of holding an election disenfranchised an entire district of the city, instead foisting upon them an unelected representative for the two full years remaining in the council term. This decision was of much greater significance, in my opinion, than choosing a mayor from among sitting council members (something the appointed council member got to do). Where was the concern for “the public” then?

December 17, 2025December 17, 2025A Step in the Right Direction

Mayor Jung, Again, For 2026

by Grover Cleveland39 Comments

Yes, Mayor Fred Jung will be Mayor Fred Jung again. It happened at the Fullerton City Council meeting last night.

The usual assortment of Fullerton Boohoo showed up at the meeting for their annual December moan-fest about how “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra should be Mayor of Fullerton because he is a combination of Albert Schweitzer, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and Jesus H. Christ. And also District 5, where Zahra has never got 50% of the vote, is somehow “disenfranchised” because Zahra can’t revel in the lofty title. Sputter, wheeze, etc. Ironically, one Zahra advocate explained as a qualification how the unemployed and family-less Zahra was always at photo-op events.

Comically, many of Zahra’s ardent followers couldn’t pronounce his name right, referring to him as “Za-ha-rah,” thus suggesting they don’t even know him.

But somehow the show seemed pretty muted, and sort of perfunctory; maybe it was because Zahra wasn’t even at the meeting and this meant that his getting three votes wasn’t in the cards.

Zahra minions spoke about the policy of mayoral rotation made years ago by other city councils that must be adhered to, even though the City Attorney had said a council majority could set it aside anytime they want, making the policy meaningless.

What will 2026 have in store for this one…

The endlessly self-impressed gasbag Shana Charles said it was also her turn to be mayor, cuz she had just been Mayor Pro Tem, and ya know, policy. She is running for re-election next years and probably thought, delusionally, that she had a shot at the Title. She didn’t.

In the end Valencia nominated Fred Jung who was appointed Mayor; Nick Dunlap was nominated, and appointed Mayor Pro Tem.

No one within the boohoo tribe has ever bothered to honestly figure out why the council majority has steadfastly refused to appoint Zahra to be mayor. It’s chalked up to selfish personality issues on their part, but we know the real reason. No one whom Zahra hasn’t fooled with his phony immigrant schtick and faux sincerity wants to hear his long-winded, self-praising bloviation and his promotion of his “brand.” They resent his constant condescension toward them, his performance of moral superiority, and his hysterical, behind the scenes behavior.

The same applies to the majority’s opinion of Shana Charles, with her smug, incompetent, speechifying. She loves the sound of her own voice, alright, but nobody else loves the bi-monthy waste of time that just interminably drags out meetings. Even Nick Dunlap, who nominated Charles to be mayor Pro Tem a year ago, has evidently had enough of her tedious monologues.

Speaking of Dunlap, he did excel himself before the vote, noting that the same 40 people (it’s probably closer to 20) who show up at council meetings do not represent the public or the community and that he had been elected to represent everybody. Well done, there, Mr. Dunlap. They won’t get it, but need to be reminded once in a while.

So Fred Jung gets to use the title “Mayor” during his campaign for County Supervisor which is a help in the odd world of local politics where almost nobody is paying attention to real accomplishments or real failures.

October 8, 2025October 8, 2025A Step in the Right Direction

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

by Mr. Peabody42 Comments

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.

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.

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.

April 11, 2025April 11, 2025Ahmad Zahra

We’re Number 30!

by The Desert Rat40 Comments

And last year we were number 29, among Orange County’s 34 cities based on per capita unrestricted net positions (UNP).

FFFF’s Bureau of Data & Statistics (FFFFBDS) was presented the following chart produced by the California Policy Center, a conservative think tank who tracks such things.

Ouch. Fullerton is way down there at the bottom – each citizen being in the red for $1050 – based on 2023 numbers from the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report. We are better off than Orange, Costa Mesa, Anaheim and Santa Ana.

Pretty soon Fullerton is going to have to pay the piper and we will be presented, once again, with a Measure S-type sales tax increase in the 13% range. The question is whether such a tax can pass at an election. A General Tax only needs 50%+1 but may be a tough sell; a special tax – for infrastructure, say – requires 67% a harder nut, but one where people can see what they’re getting.

Accountability? It was never on the agenda.

An infrastructures tax does noting to alleviate Fullerton’s chronic financial mismanagement under Fitzgerald, Flory, Zahra, Quirk-Silva and Charles. It’s very clear that the liberals on the Council want the tax that eluded them in 2020.

But what about Jung and Dunlap? They are no longer able to distance themselves from Fullerton’s fiscal cliff having now been around for over four years. What have they done to ameliorate the chronic shortfall? The answer is nothing. For years the sleepy Bruce Whitaker voted no on annual budgets and he never bothered to put much thought into solving the problem.

Then there’s newcomer Jamie Valencia who’s not responsible for any part of the problem – yet. Will she go for a tax on the ballot? Her public safety union supporters will push her. Does she even understand the magnitude of Fullerton’s mismanagement? I wonder.

Of course we may be grateful that Valencia’s opponent didn’t win. Then a sales tax would have been inevitable.