I Aint a Swallerin That Archives - Page 39 of 49 - Friends For Fullerton's Future

April 24, 2012April 24, 2012A Step in the Right Direction

We Get Mail: Fence Sitting Cardboard Candidate?

I found this communication in our in-box yesterday:

An Open Letter to Doug Chaffee

April 23, 2012

Dear Mr. Chaffee:

I support the recall effort and will vote in favor of removing all three councilmen on June 5th. I support the statements made on the Notice of Intent to Recall, and I believe any candidate running to replace a recalled councilman should believe the same.

I saw this on Euclid today. The homeowner seems to be on both sides of the fence. It begs the question: Are you?

The rumor mill is spinning around town. It claims that you’re proud to receive Pat McKinley’s endorsement of your candidacy should the recall succeed; and worse publicly stated as much during a fundraising event at the Pint House several weeks ago. If this is true, this is not compatible with the Notice of Intent to Recall. You have to pick a side and you have to do so definitively.

In fact, I demand you take one of four positions immediately.

1) If you have stated that you’re proud to receive McKinley’s backing, you must withdraw your candidacy from the special election on June 5th. This statement does not meet with the spirit of the recall and is insulting to the electorate. Candidates not supporting the spirit of the recall should not be on the ballot. Just because you had some extra campaign signs sitting around from 2010 doesn’t mean you’re entitled to run.

2) If you find it morally acceptable to be proud of McKinley’s endorsement of your candidacy, state so in bold letters on all your campaign literature, website, Facebook account, and during any public appearances you make. Failure to be transparent on this issue is dishonest.

3) If you’re not proud of McKinley’s endorsement, state loudly and often that you’ve signed the recall petition and outline why Pat McKinley needs to go. Demand that those posting propaganda against the recall remove your name from their lawns. Take a stance and make it clear that no supporter of Pat McKinley is a supporter of yours.

4) Do nothing. If you ignore this open letter and succeed in your candidacy, count on being recalled.

Sincerely,

Ryan Cantor

P.S. Dear Friends, just to show what a small world it is, after all, the property above is the residence of one Beatriz Gregg, mater familias of the Gregg clan that includes our old pal Aaron, whose 2010 campaign was, um, something of a personal embarrassment.

April 21, 2012April 21, 2012Education Uber Alles

Beechwood Teacher Beats Rap. So Far.

by The Fullerton Harpoon118 Comments

Remember that strange episode up at Beechwood School a couple of months ago when parents were called in for a really scary meeting and not really told anything? Some teacher did something. Somewhere. Somehow. FSD Superintendent Mitch Hovey was just double-talking hard.

Now the OC Register is reporting that the still unnamed teacher’s offense – having “inappropriate” materials on his computer at school – does not rise to the level of a crime. At least that’s what Acting Chief Dan Hughes reported after an FPD investigation was submitted to our hard-working DA (okay, no snickering). Says Hughes:

“The investigation discovered potentially inappropriate photographs and videos on a school computer assigned to the teacher. But I am pleased to report that in this case, there is no evidence to suggest any Beechwood students were victims of a crime.”

Well, that’s good news, although what the guy had on his computer that caused all the hubbub remains shrouded in secrecy.

But according to the article Mr. Teacher isn’t out of the Beechwoods yet, and remains on “administrative” (presumably paid) leave while the Fullerton School District pursues its own investigation.

Jeez, Fullerton must be the public employee investigation capital of the Western World.

April 20, 2012April 20, 2012Bruce Whitaker

Proving That Old Dogs Can’t Learn New Tricks

by Mr. Peabody21 Comments

Here’s the title of Sylvia Mudrick’s press release describing Tuesday night’s council action with regard to Fullerton’s illegal 10% water tax: “Council approves eliminating franchise fee on water rates.” That’s not true. Yes, the council voted to stop transferring the illegal tax to the city’s General Fund, but they most certainly did not approve to eliminate the franchise fee on water rates – just the transfer, which means we will keep paying the illegal tax into some sort of escrow fund until a Prop 218 hearing can be held – the Prop 218 hearing that should have been held 15 years ago! Of course in the meantime there is no legal requirement to hold a Prop 218 hearing to quit collecting the 10%; and it looks like Quirky and Whitaker got sideswiped on the scam that will put another $400,000 in the escrow account as City manager Joe Felz tries to cook up a scheme to hang on to as much of that annual $2,500,000 he can.

But back to Mudrick: of course she has been happily peddling pro-city baloney for years, and as a retiree she is still doing it, now as a double-dipper.

The worst part of the press release is the bogus recitation of the history of the water tax, conveniently omitting the fact that periodic complaints have been coming from citizens since at least the early 1990s. Syl would have you believe that it was the City that brought this scam to light and that they have been proactive. Wrong. The City has been hiding this massive scam for decades; the tax has been patently illegal since 1997, and everybody in authority in City Hall knew it, a fact curiously omitted by our highly pensioned and still remunerated Public Misinformation Officer.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
PRESS RELEASE #09312 4/18/2012

Subject :Council approves eliminating franchise fee on water rates
Contact :Sylvia Palmer Mudrick, Public Information Coordinator, Fullerton City Manager’s Office
(714) 738-6317

The Fullerton City Council voted at its Tuesday (April 17) meeting to eliminate the transfer of a franchise fee charged on water rates in the city, effective May 1.

The water franchise fee was first adopted in 1968 when the council assessed a fee of 2 percent of the Water Fund as a means of reimbursing the costs to the city’s general fund for operating a water utility. The fee was raised to 10 percent in 1970.

In fiscal 2010-11, the city’s general fund received approximately $2.5 million from the water franchise fee.

The franchise fee came under review in 2009-10 at the conclusion of a five-year water rate study. At that time, the council formed an Ad Hoc Water Rate Advisory Committee composed of citizens who were tasked with studying all facets of operation of the city water system.

In conjunction with its action Tuesday, the council directed the Ad Hoc Water Rate Advisory Committee to study and make recommendations on a method for the city to charge for the direct cost of operating the water system.

In addition, the council asked the committee to make recommendations on a method for reimbursing citizens for the actual cost of the franchise fee paid for the past three years.

Further information about the council action may be obtained by calling the Fullerton City Clerk’s Office at (714) 738-6350. Further information about the franchise fee and the water rate study may be obtained by calling the Fullerton Water Engineering Office at (714) 738-6845.

April 20, 2012April 20, 2012Behind Closed Doors

Paying a Fee to Pay Your Taxes?

by Travis22 Comments

Even the heartless IRS wouldn’t try to pull something this repugnant.

A frustrated local business owner sent me this copy of his annual Fullerton tax renewal in which a $25.00 tax payment was accompanied with a $20.00 “processing charge.”

You read that right. It’s an 80% surcharge for the city’s Herculean effort to cash your check and rubber stamp you as paid.

All local business owners must pay this ridiculous fee, from doctors and lawyers to handymen, ice cream trucks and taxi drivers. Presumably the actual processing is handled by administrative staff, who are likely already being paid out of the General Fund for other duties. How did they reach that $20 cost? Who knows?

And who decided that business owners should have to pay a fee to pay their taxes?

jones-gone-wild1 — Ya'll have gone insane. Now pay up, hear?

April 20, 2012"Dick" Ackerman

Larry Bennett Owes You A Month’s Worth of Water

by The Desert Rat20 Comments

Several months ago Anti-recall lackey Larry Bennett challenged you to find the illegal tax on water on your monthly bill. It was pretty disingenuous even for a slimmer like Larry. FFFF pointed out that the illegal tax wasn’t listed on the bill, which of course is one of the reasons it is illegal!

On Tuesday night good ol’ Larry all but admitted that there was indeed a 10% tax on your water. Of course he tried to diffuse the ugly truth by saying that 1) he likes paying the tax (could be true – he’s a damned fool); and, 2) the tax helps keep his grass green and his flowers happy because he’s a water hog (the first part is a falsehood; the second, yes, I believe he likes to waste water). Naturally, he was just parroting the nonsense of his hero Doc HeeHaw who also claimed some part of the 10% went to water delivery – an outright lie.

Anyway, I think that if he had a shred of honor, Bennett would now make good on his promise to pay your monthly water bill. But if you want to ask him you’d better hurry up. Larry will only pay the first person to e-mail him!

April 19, 2012April 19, 2012"Dick" Ackerman

Larry Bennett Likes Paying Illegal Taxes; Doesn’t Like Public Comments

by Joe Sipowicz75 Comments

Poor Larry Bennett. As spokeshole and Chief Liar for the moribund Recall No campaign he is upset that folks are disrespecting his Heroes on the council.

But get this: Larry doesn’t want his water rates reduced! He likes the illegal 10% tax and even wants to keep it because he somehow believes this will keep his grass green.

Of course, it’s funny to watch Bennett admit, sort of, that there is a $2.5 million problem after he challenged water rate payers to find the illegal tax on their bill; and it’s hard to tell if Bennett is just pimping for the Three Flat Tires or if he really believes that the illegal in-lieu fee has something to do with delivering water to his flower beds. However you slice it, this assclown is a first class tool.

And it’s pretty clear he doesn’t like annoying public comments that hold his Three Blithering Boneheads accountable for their miscreance and incompetence.

April 17, 2012"Dick" Ackerman

We Get Mail; An Unhappy Camper

by admin46 Comments

The following communication landed in the FFFF hopper yesterday complaining about the recall, etc. It is just so deliciously disjointed, illogical, misinformed, and well, crackpotty that it deserves to be shared with the friends.

I resent having literature sent to my home on the recall. I think this is nothing but a witch hunt. The Support the Fullerton Recall/Water Tax paper sent to my home doesn’t mention the other board members. This tax was voted in 15 years ago and how many council members and city managers knew about this? Why are you only mentioning the three? What about the others? I think if you have enough money to be sending slanted info the citizens of Fullerton, you could certainly use it to a better advantage. I feel terrible about the Kelly case, but I don’t think only 3 board members need to be blamed. From the beginning you have pointed fingers to the three. What did they not vote on that you find they need to be recalled for? Don’t we all have our own opinions and have the right to express them. We might not all agree, but that doesn’t constitute a recall. I think you should call off the hounds and get on with the business at hand. What has the council voted against that has Tony Bushala upset about? Does it have something to do with redevelopment money? Let’s hear about that.

It’s very interesting that this unfortunate soul has been told by somebody that the illegal water tax was actually “voted in” 15 years ago.

April 11, 2012Behind Closed Doors

Ad Hoc Citizens Committee to Council: Quit Ripping Us Off!!

by The Fullerton Harpoon33 Comments

Lou Ponsi of The OC Register authored this article on how the Fullerton Ad Hoc Water Rate Committee has unanimously decided to tell our esteemed City Council that the illegal 10% tax on our water bills should be stopped. Brave? Well, yes – for Fullerton.

To his credit, Ponsi omits the usual obligatory counter-argument floated by the Fullerton Establishment to defend the indefensible – whatever it may be. This could be because he even can’t find anyone to defend the unsupportable tax on a utility that goes to pay for the very pensions and perks of the City Councilmembers and staff themselves.

But of course Lou does not delve into the blatant stalling tactics of City Manager Joe Felz who has temporized, stalled, and delayed doing the right thing in order to wring yet another year’s $2,500,000 ill-gotten gain out of the Water Fund and the water rate payers.

March 28, 2012March 28, 2012Brick Veneer, Fake Old, And Other Horrors

Not For Sale? Yeah, Right!

by The Fullerton Shadow37 Comments

dudley's - no recall — The abode of F. Paul Dudley, possibly designed by Mike Brady

The anti-recall forces keep chanting the mantra that Fullerton is not for sale, despite all the obvious evidence to the contrary, and that under the Jones, Bankhead and McKinley regime, Fullerton has been very much for sale.

Here’s a picture of an anti-recall sign in the front yard of former Development Services Director, F. Paul Dudley, the man who, for over twenty years, participated in a series of calamitous boondoggles, oversaw the over-development of downtown Fullerton, the cookie-cutter development of Coyote Hills East, and the fake New Urbanism of Amerige Heights. F. Paul Dudley is the man who gave the Florentine family a permanent building on a public sidewalk. Apart from being a dyed-in-the-wool arrogant bureaucrat, Dudley is also a happy member of Fullerton’s $100,000 Pension Club, pulling down a whopping $139,420 for doing nothing.

BradyBunch — The original, and the best.

But get this: Dudley now peddles his relationship with the Three Hollow Logs acting as a lobbyist for developers! So you see, for Dudley Fullerton is very much for sale. He and a small handful of people like him need a compliant majority on the council so that they can get massive entitlements and stick the rest of us with the impacts.

March 27, 2012December 12, 2016Brick Veneer, Fake Old, And Other Horrors

Slidebar’s Noise Assault: Is It Even Legal?

by admin189 Comments

Ah, late night music in downtown Fullerton. The louder it gets, the more people show up. And at the Slidebar, the party rocks on every night of the week.

Sure, it’s fun if you’re visiting from the 909 on a Thursday night. But to the rest of the public, nonstop amplified outdoor music is known as something else: a Public Nuisance.

Here’s what the Fullerton Municipal Code’s Limitations on Permitted Uses section has to say about music on outdoor patios:

Accessory Outdoor Dining or Patio.

15.30.040.I.7.c.ii. No amplified music or amplified entertainment is permitted outdoors, except recorded background music for dining establishments wherein normal conversation is not impeded; no music or entertainment shall be permitted on a patio past 10:00 p.m. Sunday through Thursday, and 11:00 p.m. Friday and Saturday.

So whose job it is to police the downtown bars and night clubs that have patios with outdoor amplified music?