I Aint a Swallerin That Archives - Page 28 of 49 - Friends For Fullerton's Future

August 9, 2017August 10, 2017Behind Closed Doors

Paying for Todd Spitzer’s Lunatic Behavior

Everyday the people who run the County of Orange blow through so much dough that the amount of waste is incomprehensible to the layman. It’s incomprehensible to the County Board of Supervisors too, because of course, it’s not their money.

Funny plastic handcuffs graphic borrowed from Voice of OC

But then there are the examples, though relatively small, that truly give us cause to doubt the reason and the integrity of our County government. Thus the Todd Spitzer Wahoo’s Fish Taco incident that brought about a lawsuit that the County lost, putting us taxpayers on the hook for the legal fees of the other side. Fees of $121,396 to be precise. Here’s the payout as reported by Voice of OC, who just happens to be the other party in the lawsuit.

Chairman of the Board of Supervisors Todd Spitzer gets emotional while reflecting on an incident more than 5 months ago at Wahoo’s Fish Tacos in Lake Forest. He handcuffed Jeobay Castellano and called police when the man would not stop trying to proselytize even when Spitzer told him he was a Christian.
///ADDITIONAL INFO: – Photo by MINDY SCHAUER, THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER –

Here’s the backstory: In April, 2015, 3rd District Supervisor (and now DA candidate) Todd Spitzer, took a loaded gun into the aforementioned restaurant and slapped handcuffs on a harmless proselytizer who was annoying him. A few moths later, word leaked out about this bizarre behavior and Spitzer, trying to put a positive spin on his weird behavior engaged the services of the County’s PR person, Jean Pasco to help craft a press release that would make Spitzer look good and (ironically) cast the offending evangelist as mentally unstable. The memos and the PR draft never saw the light of day.

Nelson wears his game face, but the game was already over…

The Voice of OC got wind of the e-mails between Spitzer and Pasco and made a public records act request to get them. Request denied. Then The Voice sued to get the documents and the Supervisors, including our own Shawn Nelson, endorsed the ludicrous idea that these documents could somehow be legitimately withheld from public scrutiny. Voice won in court, got their documents and ran their story. And then this week the taxpayers of Orange County got stuck with Voice’s legal tab – over $120,000. Again the Supervisors, including Nelson, voted to make us pay for their idiotic decision to protect one of their own club from…us.

The politicians are always telling us about their dedication to public service. But if anybody ever needed a perfect example of how they will use our money to protect themselves and their employees, he need look no farther than the Todd Spitzer Wahoo’s Fish Taco Tale.

July 31, 2017July 31, 2017Behind Closed Doors

Say, Whatever Happened to Fullerton’s Downtown Core and Corridors Specific Plan and the $1,000,000 in State Money that Paid for It?

by Disillusioned Ex-Hippy39 Comments

Most government projects have three things in common: they are bad ideas promoted by bureaucrats, they are obscenely expensive, and there is no accountability attached to them.

In Fullerton we have lots of examples over the years that touch all three bases. But if ever one needed a veritable poster child for government fiascoes, the ill-conceived “Downtown Core and Corridors” Specific Plan would be it.

Back in 2010, the City of Fullerton put in an application for a “project” to Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s “Strategic Growth Council” an assemblage of bureaucrats and political appointees selected by the governor to promote sustainability and responsibility in urban (and suburban planning). On the face of it, the idea was to promote development that would be eco-friendly – somehow, someway. Lo and Behold! Fullerton received a $1,000,000 grant to create the Downtown Core and Corridors Specific Plan, a massive overlay zone. In 2013 a committee was appointed to make this look like a community driven enterprise, but as so often happens the committee was led along by the consultants and staff who were being paid, and paid well, out of the grant money. Some members of this committee only went to one meeting, the last one, in May 2014, a meeting consumed by passing out certificates of participation to committee members for all their hard work.

In the meantime, the intent of the creators of the specific plan became crystal clear: opportunity for massive new housing projects along Fullerton’s busiest streets, development that would not even have to undergo the scrutiny facing normal projects so long as the permissive guidelines of the specific plan were met. Naturally, lots of people objected to the continued over-development of Fullerton, and the utter disconnect with what the Strategic Growth Council was ostensibly promoting. Perhaps the most obnoxious thing about the specific plan proposal was the way it was being used, unapproved by any policy maker, to promote other massive apartment projects already in the entitlement process.

And then a funny thing happened. The Downtown Core and Corridors Specific Plan vanished into thin air. Although recommended by the Planning Commission in August of 2014, the plan and its Environmental Impact Report never went to the city council for approval. 2015 passed; and so did 2016 without the plan being approved. Even modifications rumored to have been proposed by the now-departed Planning Director Karen Haluza never materialized for council review or approval.

Some cynical people believe the plan was postponed in 2014 because of the council election, an election that returned development uber alles councilmembers Greg Sebourn and Bud Chaffee. And they believe that the subsequent attempt to erase the plan from the municipal memory was perpetrated by none other than the hapless city manager, Joe Felz and lobbyist councilperson Jennifer Fitzgerald, (so the story goes) two individuals who had every incentive to shake down potential developers one by one, rather than granting a broad entitlement for new and gargantuan development. Felz had a massive budget deficit to fill, and Fitzgerald had massive lobbying opportunities from potential Pringle and Associate clients.

What is undeniable is that three long years have passed and no action has been taken to either approve or deny the specific plan. The grant money approved by the State has been a complete waste – a travesty so embarrassing to everybody concerned that no one seems to want to demand an explanation for this fiasco. Neither the city bureaucrats or council, nor the State has any incentive to advertise this disaster, and you can bet there never will be an accounting.

July 30, 2017July 30, 2017About Us

Clean and Green: Recycling Bad Ideas

by Sean Paden4 Comments

On Tuesday (August 1), the City Council will be voting on the “Clean and Green” initiative, which calls for an affirmation of the City of Fullerton’s Climate Action Plan (available here).

What is the Climate Action Plan, you ask? Well, it was a report prepared in February 2012 to make sure Fullerton does its part to stop “sea level rise, changes in the amount of water supply available, wildfires and other extreme weather events.” Good thing too, because Fullerton’s 130,000 or so residents make up a whopping two thousandths of one percent of the population on Earth (0.02%), so Fullerton clearly needs to spent valuable staff time and expenses combating this threat.

Putting together an Unfunded Liability Action Plan? No way, that’s crazy talk!

(more…)

July 15, 2017July 15, 2017Bad Cops

See No Evil to Head Fullerton Police Department

by Sean Paden9 Comments

On July 18, 2017, the Fullerton City Council will vote on whether to approve staff recommendation to hire David Hendricks as Chief of Police of the Fullerton Police Department.

According to his resume, posted online with the staff report, Hendricks has served in the Internal Affairs Division of the LBDP and has “managed approximately 400 Internal Affairs investigations per year.” Per he resume, he also “(p)resented preliminary and formalized complaint cases to the Chief of Police and executive team” and “(r)eviewed police officer use of force/ identify patterns or problems.”

Given that Hendricks has been directly involved in investigating use of force claims and Internal Affairs divisions, it would have been extremely helpful to know what his thoughts on this 2013 beating of Porfiro Santos-Lopez, while lying on his back:

Or his thoughts on the $2.5 million settlement, reached after a plaintiff jury verdict, to two cousins who had filed an excessive force lawsuit arising out of a police beating by Officers David Faris and Michael Hynes, which was caught on camera in 2010.

Or his thoughts on the infamous incident in 2013 where a man named Doug Zerbo was shot to death by police officers while holding a water nozzle, an incident for which the taxpayers had to cough up a $6.5 million judgment.

Actually, thanks to Transparent California, we already know the answer. Both Officers involved in the $2.5 million settlement are still employed with the Long Beach Police Department as of 2016, as is Victor Ortiz, one of the two officers responsible for the spray nozzle shooting death and subsequent $6.5 million lawsuit.

Total compensation of the officers in question, give or take about $9.1 million.

As for the Portofino-Lopez beating, it was described by the Internal Affairs Department itself as a “by the book” arrest in 2013.

The Fullerton Police Department needs reform. The head of an internal affairs division that has a proven track record of excusing and soft peddling officer misconduct charges is not the solution.

July 14, 2017July 15, 2017Bad Cops

Was a Fake “Degree” Used To Get the Job As Our New Police Chief?

by Joe Sipowicz90 Comments

Mr. Hendricks, your cap and gown are in the mail…

Mr. David Hendricks, currently employed by the Long Beach Police Department was recently tapped to by someone, somewhere, somehow to become our new police chief. Here’s the July 12th press release from the City’s website:

Apart from several obnoxious things about this press release (including the tacit presumption that this recommendation for appointment – that was made by who knows who – will be rubber stamped by the City Council), we will consider the information contained in the final sentence, to wit: a Masters of Public Administration degree from something called “Andrew Jackson University” in Birmingham, Alabama.

The FFFF Academic Accreditation team immediately sprang into action, and what they discovered doesn’t suggest academic accomplishment of any sort. Andrew Jackson University was created by a couple of lawyers in the mid-90s who decided that hardworking folk needed an online opportunity to pursue advanced education. Or so the story went. But those familiar with the for-profit diploma mill industry know the story well: these establishments are created to separate saps from their money, and often to separate taxpayers from unpaid student loans underwritten by the government.

Andrew Jackson University – unaccredited by anybody – has now been bought and sold twice since its inception and its “location,” if nothing other than a PO box, has been changed successively from San Francisco to Salt Lake City. It is now called “New Charter University” and is owned by financial investors.

FFFF reached out to knowledgeable experts in this field to learn more about such institutions.

Erasmus Alberus, Professor Emeritus of Academic Ethics at the University of Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan told FFFF “these institutions exist merely to give the impression that those who have paid the requisite tuition have attained some sort of academic accomplishment. They haven’t. The purpose is to enhance career and income possibilities through this impression.”

Even more scathing was the assessment of Sabrina Plath, Director of Professional Development at the Thorstein Veblen Center in Valparaiso, Indiana. Says Ms. Plath: It is an ongoing scandal how mail order diplomas are used to leverage career promotion, and salary and benefit enhancement, especially at the expense of the public.”

And so these questions remain to be answered: who was impressed enough by a graduate of Andrew Jackson University that he is recommended for hire as our new police chief with salary and benefits approaching $300,000 a year? Was this laughable non-degree from a phony academic institution a material fact in his selection? Did anybody even care?

Good luck trying to find out. But if you care about this, and if you care about the fact that a press release announced this recommendation before the City Council even decided on a candidate, go to the meeting on the 18th and enjoy the fun.

July 3, 2017July 3, 2017Chronic Failure

Fitzgerald Casts Toxic Vote for Pringle Client

by The Worm19 Comments

There’s a five-mile expanding industrial waste plume under Fullerton – mostly the result of industrial run-off from mid-century industrialists. The OC Water District says that it has already begun to contaminate Fullerton’s water supply, projecting that the damage will eventually be catastrophic if not addressed immediately.

As one of the largest polluters, Northrop Gruman has been defending an OCWD case against it for years.

Last month the OCWD asked the Fullerton council to support a request to bring the EPA in to resolve the issue. That would be bad news for Northrop, but good news for Fullerton residents.

Take a look at the video of the council discussion. The topic seems to be of particular interest to Fitzgerald, who is unusually familiar with the characters involved, although she seems to take on an adversarial posture against the OCWD representative. Ultimately the council agreed to send off the letter, 4 to 1. Fitzgerald voted against the recommendation that would help protect taxpayers from paying the price. I wonder why? No I don’t.

What Fitzgerald failed to mention is that Northrop Gruman is or was a client of her employer, Curt Pringle and Associates. Here’s an exposé from the Voice of OC in 2012.

In a later article about her various conflicts of interest, Fitzgerald claims that Pringle’s firm never worked directly for Northrop, but that they were hired through an attorney who worked for Northrop. I guess we’re supposed to believe that this degree of separation clears up her conflict of interest. It doesn’t. I wonder where else this strategy is employed?

Anyway, we’re also supposed to believe that the relationship between Pringle and Northop terminated in 2012. Maybe it did. Who can be sure? But for some reason Fitzgerald is still oddly passionate about Northrup Gruman, fighting against efforts to make them pay for the clean up of their own waste that threatens the health and safety of Fullerton residents.

Why is Jennifer Fitzgerald voting in favor of a Curt Pringle client, in direct opposition to the Fullerton residents who she is supposed to be representing? This is a severe and blatant conflict of interest – one that has lasting health consequences for all of Fullerton.

June 22, 2017I Aint a Swallerin That

Crime Wave Continues

by Deadeye15 Comments

Rumors of increased criminal activity are wafting out of city hall again. A few employees of the Public Works department are in hot water for some sort of embezzlement/kick-back scheme down at the city yard. Criminal charges are in the offing.

It’s not clear to us who was involved or what was stolen. City leaders are keeping quiet right now, but hopefully they will inform the public soon.

If you have any information to contribute, please drop us a line. Discretion is our thing.

June 8, 2017A Step in the Right Direction

Enough Excuses, this Recall is Newman’s Own Fault

by Sean Paden31 Comments

Here’s a thought experiment for you.

Let’s say you bought a house in Fullerton at the peak of the housing market. The market has mostly recovered but the house is only worth what you originally paid. However, when you receive your tax bill, the Franchise Tax Board assesses it higher, so there is more than a $1,000 difference in what you think you should pay and what you are actually charged. So you send a letter to the Franchise Tax Board disputing the charge and explaining why you believe your bill should be lower.

According to our State Senator Josh Newman, what you just did was costly and unnecessary. You see, that letter disputing the $1000+ charge cost 49 cents to mail, and the letter isn’t guaranteed to get you that refund you want.

That’s pretty much the takeaway from this recent editorial from Mr. Newman, which ran on Page 2 of our local Fullerton Observer Newspaper. Senator Newman’s response to the anger over his vote to raise taxes by over $52 billion over ten years in an already overtaxed state is pure misdirection, asking his supporters to instead ask recall proponents “why they’d waste $2.5 million on a recall petition rather than put 34 more teachers in our schools, 16 more firefighters in our communities, or 13 more cops on our streets.”

Of course the answer is really simple: Because $52 billion is more money than $2.5 million. About $51.9975 billion more.

Don’t think about the $1000 tax you shouldn’t have to pay. Think about the two bubble gum balls you could buy with this money instead.

Elsewhere in the editorial, Senator Newman does get around to justifying his vote and that the increased spending on roads was necessary due to the poor condition they are in. Nobody in Fullerton would dispute that, but the reason for the problem is grossly out of whack spending priorities, not a lack of revenue.

Take the examples Newman cites himself. He bemoans the fact that the alleged $2.5 million recall cost could put 13 more cops on our street and not the fact that, by his own admission, putting a single police officer on our streets costs over $192,000 per year in the first place due to the grossly unsustainable public employee benefits we dole out. He bemoans the horrible condition of our roads and not the fact that the 18 cent per gallon tax we already pay has been diverted into the fiscal vortex that is high speed rail – and even when Caltrans does spend money on roads, overpayment and delays have come to be accepted as inevitable.

This is why your constituents are angry, Senator Newman, and this is why they are listening to (as you put it) “shock jocks” and signing the recall petition in droves. We are tired of excuses and we are tired of politicians who choose to represent the interest in Sacramento that want to keep this unsustainable benefit machine chugging along at the taxpayers’ expense.

In the event you are reading this yourself, Senator, I don’t say any of this with rancor and I still like you personally, but you are working against my interests and those of hundreds of thousands of your constituents in Sacramento and it has to stop. And babbling about millions while your policies are costing tens of billions isn’t going to save you.

May 10, 2017May 10, 2017Bruce Whitaker

Elevators to Nowhere – The Rising Cost Hits Fullerton Directly

by admin7 Comments

Here’s the final (for now) installment of the series by our Friend “Fullerton Engineer” documenting the sad history of the project to add a couple of elevators to the existing tower/bridge structure at the Depot. Remarkably, none of our elected representatives seems the least bit curious about the downward trajectory of this project, or the ultimate tap into our Facility Capital Repair Fund, a fund that was never intended to pay for new construction, particularly for projects never needed in the first place.

The best way of avoiding embarrassing information is not to ask embarrassing questions. It’s not their money.

It may have been expensive, but it sure was unnecessary…

It took over five years, but the astonishingly high cost of an elevator addition project at the Fullerton train station finally hit Fullerton taxpayers directly in 2017.

The project that the public never asked for and doesn’t need was initiated based not on necessisity, but on the availability of money from Sacramento; and later, OCTA came to the funding rescue. But the delays piled up – year after year, and OCTA would no longer pay the bill. So in March, the City Engineer, Don Hoppe, came hat in hand and asked the Fullerton taxpayers for money. Lots of it. Here’s the staff report.

Notice how the various and diverse issues are all thrown together into a single sum – $600,000. We see added cost for the railroad flagging for some unexplained reason; the curiosity of “unforeseen” utilities on a well-developed site; an unknown amount to pay for the escalated cost of the elevator subcontractor; and finally, an unspecified amount to cover “additional assistant (sic) in contract administration” a nebulous term, but a category clearly meant to cover the ongoing cost of someone in the Public Works department. The final item is particularly ironic given the amounts already contracted with private companies for construction support and management on this very small project.

The simple fact that these items are lumped together can only be explained by an attempt to obfuscate the nature and trues costs of the ongoing delay. And those delay costs are increasing even now, as the project seems to have stalled again.

— Fullerton Engineer

May 7, 2017May 7, 2017Behind Closed Doors

Elevators to Nowhere – Construction Begins! Oh, Wait. No It Doesn’t.

by admin10 Comments

Friends, here is another in a series of posts about Fullerton’s ill-fated “Elevators to Nowhere” series by “Fullerton Engineer”

In following the trajectory of the new elevator project at the Fullerton train station I have described a project that the public neither wanted nor needed, that had its genesis in the simple availability of “free money” way back in 2011 – six long years ago.

Although the design contract was let in 2013, the project was not bid until 2015 when the low bid came in 22% higher than anticipated. The construction contract was awarded anyway. With numerous ancillary “management” contracts, the project budget had grown to $4,000,000. By 2017 that figure had ballooned to an astonishing $4,600,000.

And yet construction didn’t start until February, 2016 and when it did it was only for some minor ADA toilet room modifications adjacent to the AMTRAK ticket office.

Woodcliff Billing #1

You can see in the project billing submitted by Woodcliff Corporation, the contractor, a few items related to bonds, mobilization and the bathroom work in February 2016 – a year after the contract bid. Nothing was billed against the elevator items at all, except for crediting the structural steel shop drawings for $55,000. Over 14 months later the structural steel has not been erected. In fact, the foundations for the steel structure haven’t even been built, as the site sits empty with minor demolition having taken place and some lighting conduit rerouted.

If any delay claims have been submitted by Woodcliff, those documents have not been shared, although delay claims are certainly coming, and escalation costs are already starting to accrue, although we don’t know how much because the costs were intentionally lumped together with other completely unrelated items in the March 2017 staff report.

As I noted in an earlier post the cause of all these delays is not known by the public because the Public Works staff doesn’t want the public to know that things have obviously gone wrong, very wrong; and, that the inexplicable and unexplained delays have finally cost the taxpayers of Fullerton directly. The money is no longer free.

— Fullerton Engineer