Setting The Bar Low Archives - Page 52 of 110 - Friends For Fullerton's Future

April 20, 2012April 20, 2012Bruce Whitaker

Proving That Old Dogs Can’t Learn New Tricks

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 18, 2012April 19, 2012"Dick" Ackerman

RECALL NO! Fundraiser

by Grover Cleveland45 Comments

Y’all come on up the hill and watch a bunch of well-to-do cheapskates pry open their moth-infested wallets one last time for the Three Bald Tires.

While you’re there, don’t forget to tour the home of water boarder and notorious hotel junketeer (on your dime!) Jim Blake, too. You spent $125 bucks for the privilege, you might as well look at his big screen TV, his Lazy Boy recliner and his fancy reproduction oil paintings.

And speaking of the notorious Jim Blake, I’ll leave this for your perusal just to remind you of the moral caliber the anti-recall gang:

April 18, 2012April 18, 2012A Step in the Right Direction

Water Tax Scofflaws Admit Guilt

by Travis41 Comments

Last night Councilmembers McKinley, Bankhead, Jones and Quirk-Silva finally admitted what the rest of us had been saying all along: the City of Fullerton’s in-lieu franchise fee is illegal, and has been for the past 15 years. After blowing off the issue for nearly a year (and really, a decade and a half) the city council was forced to suspend the fund transfer that went to pay for General Fund expenses.

Here is Doc Jones’ befuddled admission:

Note that the angrified and bewildered Jones believes that part of the 10% tax maybe had something to do with water delivery. Wrong. It all went to the General Fund to help pay for pensions and four-star hotel room junkets by Jones himself. The water infrastructure and repairs were never paid for out of the General Fund, either. That’s just more confused claptrap from Jones.

And by no means was the tax repealed last night. In fact, the fee will show up on your water bill next month, just as it always has.

Councilman Bruce Whitaker said it very clearly: the franchise fee was collected from ratepayers illegally, was never properly authorized by taxpayers under Prop 218, and needs to be completely thrown out altogether. Deficiencies in the water fund do not change this simple truth, and those shortcomings should be addressed separately with the full notification and approval of the public.

When the tax is finally repealed by a fresh city council, don’t forget that there are millions of illegally-taken dollars that still need to be refunded to water users.

April 17, 2012Boohooism

The Power to Recall: Unambiguous, Indivisible

by The Desert Rat29 Comments

Molly — Twenty years later and as clueless as ever.

The opponents of the Fullerton Recall, just like their predecessors in 1994, keep yammering about the “proper” use of the recall process. According to these worthy folks, the power of recall is only to be exercised in cases where an office holder has perpetrated malfeasance in office. Their argument is self-serving. And wrong. Here is what the State Constitution actually says, clearly and succinctly:

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ARTICLE 2 VOTING, INITIATIVE AND REFERENDUM, AND RECALL SEC. 13.

Recall is the power of the electors to remove an elective officer.

And that’s it. The rest is all about the technical procedure of doing it. There is no discussion of when recall is appropriate or when it may be used. None. From this terse definition we may reasonably infer that any use of recall is appropriate when the electorate deems it to be so. But what about malfeasance in office? That’s why we have a criminal code!

Of course it hardly needs to be pointed out that the Fullerton Recall has several great reasons to get rid of the Three Dithering Dinosaurs, including failure to lead, creating and tolerating a Culture of Corruption in the FPD, backing an illegal tax on your water for 15 years, and of course, let us not forget, all those insider deals to cronies and campaign contributors in which they gave away streets, sidewalks and government subsidies worth millions.

Anyway, next time you hear somebody like Molly McClanahan or Jan Flory cluck-clucking about this, be sure to to ask them if they’ve ever even bothered to read the State’s Constitution.

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 15, 2012April 15, 2012Behind Closed Doors

Acting Chief Still Acting Like Predecessors

by Joe Sipowicz92 Comments

When FPD Acting Chief Dan Hughes was handed the keys to the front door, wishful thinkers proclaimed the dawn of a new day for a department reeling from humiliating self-inflicted wounds.

His supporters claimed that Dan, for some mysterious reason, was going to bring decency and reform to a department whose members had, within the short space of seven months been exposed as thugs, perjurers, thieves, con men, sex perverts, destroyers of evidence, thieves (again and again), etc., etc. Despite a 30-year FPD career and various job titles that closely tied him to this band of miscreants, Dan is Different, his defenders said. Somehow. A veritable Galahad, in fact.

Even when Dan denied a Culture of Corruption in the FPD and said such an idea was disseminated by liars or ignoramuses, his supporters clung to the idea that Dan is Different.

But Dan’s latest decision may provide cause for pause. According to the folks at FullertonStories Hughes has replaced the otiose Andrew Goodrich with yet another union member, Sergeant Jeff Stuart, to be an official department spokeshole and Face of Fullerton. Really? Has Hughes learned nothing from the misinformation peddler, Goodrich. Maybe not. Or maybe he likes the idea of the FPOA getting the first, and often the last shot at misleading the public.

Haven’t we had enough of public information officers whose loyalty to their own tribe is far greater than that to their employers? To me this just looks like more of the same ‘ol same ‘ol: another opportunity to do the right thing has been passed over by Acting Chief Hughes, who is acting more and more like Chief Sellers all the time.

April 13, 2012April 13, 2012"Dick" Ackerman

Don Bankhead’s Gears Slipping; Elevator Not Reaching Top Floor

by Mr. Peabody21 Comments

Here is an interesting clip of Councilman Don Bankhead from the last meeting opining on the subject of new elevators being added to the existing elevator bridge at the Fullerton train station. See if you can figure out what he’s talking about.

Poor Don seems to think this is a brand new elevator bridge at the new parking structure being built on Santa Fe.

Uh, oops.

Confusion is nothing new for Bankhead, but one thing Don knows for sure: when somebody else is fronting the money for a project it doesn’t matter where it is, what it does, or how much it costs.