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 LeslieThe 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.
- BrianI see you seem to know a lot about council member Zahra, just what does he do for a living?
- Sharon KZahra 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.
- BrianI see you seem to know a lot about council member Zahra, just what does he do for a living?
- AmyDunlap 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.
- BrianI’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 KBrian – 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 - AmyThose 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.
- BrianLike 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.- AmyI don’t see how, but okay. I’m sure you know best.
- Matt LeslieAmy, 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.
- AmyI 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.
- BrianLike I said, just because you comment, doesn’t make your comments true. With this statement you proved my point again.
- FrankStep out of your bubble pal.
- Sharon KBrian – sounds like you are talking to yourself on that critique.
- BrianI’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 KBrian – 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 LeslieAnd, 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?
