Trouble in College Park

College Park is an old neighborhood adjacent to Fullerton Junior College. Back in 1979 the City designated it as an historic preservation zone. That was 46 years ago if you’re counting. The area is full of little bungalows and small spanishy looking houses. It’s a nice neighborhood even if you add in the dinky roundabouts on Wilshire – the brainstorm of Wild Ride Joe Felz, who certainly could not have navigated them on election night, 2016.

But I digress.

Cornell Avenue resident

At the last City Council meeting a woman who lives on Cornell Avenue in the district complained about a building on her street under construction that was completely out of character with the neighborhood and the preservation rules, adopted in 1996, that are supposed to protect against such things. She kindly reminded the Council that she lives in D5 – Ahmad Zahra’s district.

So I went over to the 100 North block of Cornell Avenue and snapped some images.

The Thing That Ate Cornell…

Now I’m not an architect, but something is awfully wrong here. Yeah, it’s a big box with cheap, misaligned windows that is completely out of scale with the houses around it. Yikes. Check out the puny little rooflet over the cheapo Home Depot door.

It may be ugly but it sure is big…

How could this happen? It looks like somebody in City Hall dropped the melon with a loud plop. As I understand it, there is a staff process for reviewing these developments. Did it occur? I don’t know. But whether it did or didn’t happen, the problem is obvious. If it didn’t, why not? If they did what sort of knucklehead(s) could have approved this?

Eyesore is right.

At the meeting Development Director Sunaya Thomas preposterously claimed this hulking monster was somehow an ADU development – meaning a mere accessory dwelling unit, a “granny unit,” and that the City had no real control over the design of the beast; and also that it was up to the owner to figure out parking for his tenants! Up to the owner? Since when?

Of course Ms. Thomas is talking out of her backside, as is so often the case. The rules for preservation in the R2P zone are called out in the Municipal Code – Chapter 15.17.60, from which I quote:

 All proposed development, including the rehabilitation of existing structures, will be reviewed for compliance with established design criteria and standards, specific to the preservation zones and identified significant properties. These adopted design criteria and standards, entitled “Design Guidelines for Residential Preservation Zones,” are intended to serve as a baseline — a set of elementary guidelines — by which a proposal will be evaluated.

Here are the the guidelines, supposedly unknown to the very person in charge of applying them to new development in preservation zones:

https://www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/1232/637436214735730000

I learned a long time ago that it’s almost impossible to make Fullerton planning bureaucrats do their jobs (see noise ordinance issues). The defensiveness and lack of shame will always prevail. But this is appalling. The rules are there to follow, not to pick and choose.

Thomas failed and failed badly. The Council was lied to on Tuesday night. Does anybody care?

Hopefully the D5 council representative Ahmad Zahra, who champions transparency and accountability, will get to the bottom of this fiasco.

Don’t Worry, Be Happy!

The City of Fullerton has issued a press release to address the recent revelation that $10,000,000 was erroneously counted in general reserves when it really belonged in special restricted categories. Peruse this soporific and condescending verbiage and see if you can read a single reference to City employees having made a mistake, honest or otherwise.

Alternatively, take an Ambien and relax. Everything’s gonna be fine.

City of Fullerton Budget Update

At the March 17, 2026, City Council meeting, City staff presented an agenda item titled “Second Quarter Financial Report for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025–26 and Mid-Year Budget Adjustments.” The purpose of this item was to provide an overview of the City’s financial position through mid-year FY 2025–26, report on revenues and expenditures from July 1, 2025, through December 31, 2025, and present the updated financial position based on the finalized FY 2024–25 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). Following this presentation, the City would like to provide additional context and clarification to support a clear and shared understanding of the information discussed.

The City Council adopted the Fiscal Year 2024–25 budget on June 4, 2024, which included a planned structural deficit of approximately $9.4 million. As part of that budget, it was understood that the City would utilize a portion of its reserves—similar to drawing from savings—to balance the difference between revenues and expenditures. This approach was discussed publicly during the budget adoption process.

Throughout FY 2024–25, the City took steps to manage costs, including holding vacant positions and limiting expenditures where feasible. As a result of these efforts, the City reduced the actual year-end operating deficit to approximately $5.7 million, reflecting ongoing attention to fiscal responsibility.

At the close of Fiscal Year 2024–25, the City’s General Fund—the primary operating fund used to provide essential services such as police, fire, parks, and infrastructure—reported a total fund balance of $30.0 million. A fund balance can be thought of as the City’s overall savings. Of this amount, $19.8 million is held in the City’s contingency reserve, which serves as the City’s emergency fund to maintain services during economic uncertainty or unexpected events.

A portion of the City’s fund balance—approximately $10.2 million—is categorized as restricted, committed, or assigned for specific purposes. During the fiscal year, approximately $2.7 million was more clearly designated within these categories, increasing the allocated portion of the City’s savings from approximately $7.5 million to $10.2 million. These funds support important community priorities such as capital improvements, General Plan updates, Downtown parking, and street and infrastructure improvements, including road repairs. These funds remain part of the City’s overall financial resources but are set aside for their intended purposes.

Additionally, a $2.9 million prior-period adjustment identified through the City’s independent audit was related to the proper classification of assets between the General Fund and the Successor Agency. This adjustment ensures that funds are reflected in the appropriate account in accordance with accounting standards. The funds were not lost or misspent, but rather properly reallocated.

At the end of FY 2024–25, the City’s contingency reserve was approximately 14% of annual General Fund expenditures, which is above the City’s minimum policy requirement of 10%, though below the long-term goal of 17%. Based on current projections, the City is anticipated to end FY 2025–26 with approximately 12% in reserves, which remains within policy guidelines.

There has also been discussion regarding a potential 2% reserve level. It is important to clarify that this figure represents a baseline, starting position in the City’s long-term financial forecast, assuming no changes to current revenues or expenditures. It is neither the City’s current condition nor its expected outcome. As part of the upcoming budget process, the City Manager will present options during public budget study sessions to reduce the funding gap and improve reserve levels over time, ensuring the City remains on a path toward long-term financial stability.

The City’s financial outlook reflects broader trends impacting many communities, including rising costs for labor, materials, and services. At the same time, revenues remain stable, with property tax revenues increasing by 6.23% due to growth in assessed property values.

To help illustrate, the City’s finances can be compared to a household budget. Revenues function like a paycheck, expenses represent the cost of essential services, and the fund balance serves as savings. Over the past year, the City used a portion of its savings to support planned expenditures, while continuing to maintain an emergency reserve. Moving forward, the City is focused on aligning ongoing revenues and expenses to support long-term financial sustainability.

The Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) referenced above is the City’s official year-end financial report and is independently audited. In simple terms, it is similar to a household’s year-end financial statement—it shows how much money came in, how much was spent, and how much remains in savings, along with how those funds are designated.

Looking ahead, the City will continue to evaluate cost containment strategies, operational efficiencies, and potential revenue opportunities, which will be discussed during upcoming public budget study sessions along with updates to the City’s multi-year financial forecast.

In summary, the City of Fullerton’s financial position reflects a planned and publicly approved use of savings to address a budget gap, along with standard accounting updates to ensure funds are properly tracked. No money was lost, missing, or improperly spent. Approximately $2.7 million was reclassified to reflect funds set aside for specific purposes—such as road repairs and capital projects—and a $2.9 million adjustment was made to the appropriate account for those funds. The City ended FY 2024–25 with 14% in reserves and is projected to have about 12% this year, both above the City’s minimum requirement. The 2% figure referenced in recent discussions reflects the City’s baseline financial outlook if no changes are made to current spending or revenue levels, underscoring the importance of taking action. The City is actively working to reduce the budget gap and strengthen its financial position moving forward.

The City of Fullerton remains committed to transparency and keeping the community informed. Residents are encouraged to review financial documents available on the City’s website and participate in the budget process.

Poor, Sad Sukhee Resurfaces

Friends may remember the name: Sukhee Kang. Sukhee is one of those common cases where political ambition to hold office leaps far ahead of ability or commonsense.

Way back in 2016 Sukhee quit Irvine where he had been a Larry Agran flunky on the city council and bought himself a mini-McMansion on a Fullerton golf course, behind a security gate. Remember? Mr. Kang’s lust for higher office caused him to carpetbag in order to run for the State Senate. I seem to remember one of his lackeys in Irvine defended this foolishness as a sensible “empty nester” move and downsizing on the part of Sukhee and Mrs. Sukhee.

Sukhee got schooled…

As usual, Sukhee had a phony ballot designation as an educated (he taught some made-up footling class at Chapman) and he was an author, too, producing a self-published biography. Sukhee promoted the fact that he was a veteran, although it turned out it wasn’t of our army.

The writing was on the wall…

Sukhee had all the usual endorsements – loads of Dem politicians, the sort of thing we now know is almost worthless. But Kang didn’t reckon with FFFF or Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform. He came in third and it was sayonara, Sukhee.

Anyhow, we learned shortly thereafter that the empty nesters had flown the coop – back to Irvine, demonstrating the bullshit of the rationalization.

I’m a leader. Larry told me to put that there…

Now Kang has kangaroo’d back into politics. He’s running for the Irvine City Council, a sad attempt of a 75 year old man to be relevant. It’s even sadder than an old dude trying to be important. The Irvine Council now has seven seats instead of five, and poor sad sack Sukhee has to run for a paltry district seat now.

Irvine District 1 residents may not even remembers this creep’s ditching Irvine just to run for an available office in a whole other town. Hopefully an opponent will remind them of Sukhee’s stay in Fullerton.

Fullerton Crazy

Somebody posted a comment the other day about some guy named Tim Johnson. I don’t know Tim Johnson, and I hadn’t even heard anything about him. I was directed to his performance at the last council meeting.

I would really worry about this guy’s mental and emotional well-being. Or I would if he weren’t such a puckered asshole.

You can watch his performance on the City Clerk’s website. His diatribe starts at 1:49:35 mark, right after young Oliver, the No Account of Montecristo.

It’s become a rather worrisome trend lately for the harangues of a few malcontents at council meetings to vent their angry spleen in increasingly agitated, even violent language and behavior. This Tim Johnson individual is a good example.

Constantly slapping the podium; offering wild gesticulations; pointing at councilmembers; shouting angry and abusive language; this seems to be this person’s stock-in-trade.

There was no substance in Mr. Johnson’s diatribe except hatred for Fred Jung who has not been sufficiently contributory to making Fullerton fun! Like his kindred spirits at said podium he seems to think insulting people is an effective way to get them to do what you want. He also seemed to think he has a right for councilmembers to look at him as he denigrates them.

A little research suggests Tim Johnson organizes a bike parade on the 4th of July. His web presence is something called “Fullerton Loves.” He is therefore qualified to determine right from wrong.

Like many other local oracles he approves of those who gives him attention. Nick Dunlap does, apparently, and so does the relentless self-promoter Shana Charles, the otiose councilmember from District 3. The cops and firepersons go to his parades, I guess. And that is the launching pad for his little rocket: Jung makes backroom deals in a cigar lounge, etc., etc.

I’m glad there is a police presence at council hearings as a handful of angry people try to shout down councilmembers with catcalls from the back rows. The obnoxious Kennedy Sisters have already been escorted out for disrupting meetings. Sooner or later civility is going to have to be enforced by the FPD.

Les Amis Days of Squatting On Our Property Are Over

The pause that refreshes…

So it looks as if the City of Fullerton has finally decided to quit playing pat-a-cake with Jinan and young Oliver Montecristo. The owners of the restaurant Les Amis who kept encroaching on public property without approval or permits, and who serially dodged paying tens of thousands of dollars to the City in rent, are having their “improvements” on public property removed by the City.

Les Amis and unpermitted stuff…

Here’s the notification to the City Council from acting City Manager, Eddie Manfro:

Mayor Jung and City Council Members,

I was informed this morning that Public Works crews have removed the outdoor dining encroachments at Les Amis restaurant this morning.  This follows the 90 day extension that she was granted by City Manager Eric Levitt.  Following her payment of $3,900 on July 23, 2025, no further payments have been received. 

According to Director Bise, Les Amis was provided with a 48 hour notice prior to removal of the encroachments.  Public Works will hold it for 30 days in case they wish to keep it for their future use (but not for installation in the public space). 

A copy of Mr. Levitt’s 90 day extension is attached for reference.  Thank you.

Eddie

A yard sale is a small business!!

No doubt the suddenly “pro-business” folks at the Fullerton Observer, and “doctors” Zahra and Charles will continue to spin this into a David and Goliath story: little David being the scofflaws who have paid almost nothing to the City in rent for 15 years and who blatantly refused to follow City rules about squatting on public premises.

Poor Oliver

The last City Manager, Eric Leavitt actually gave the Montecristo mob yet another 90 days to make good on their debts and encroachments. Les Amis got a two day notice and still refused to do anything. So Public Works did. And the City has generously volunteered to keep the Montecristo junk on hand for a month in case they want it for some reason.

Les Amis sans meubles…

I really hope Jinan and Oliver get a bill for cost of removing their junk from the public right-of-way, although I doubt if they’d pay it.

And speaking of ever so earnest Oliver, I look forward to his appearance at the next City Council meeting blaming Mayor Jung for his own mother’s failure to pay her bills and play by the rules.

More Fullerton “Fire Fighters” On the Way

.

FEMA to the rescue. Or maybe not…

Thanks to a federal grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) our city government is being presented with almost $3,000,000 to hire 12 new sworn fire department personnel and subsidize the new employees for three years to the tune of 75%, 75%, and 35%. The new hires will consist of three “Fire fighters,” three “Fire engineers,” and three “Fire Captains.” The City’s obligatory “matching” contribution is $1.8 million for those three years.

Another fire truck will be re-activated at Fire Station 6, requiring promotions of existing FFD underlings to take the vehicle to emergencies. This part of the item is not covered by FEMA.

It’s Item #14 on tomorrow night’s council meeting agenda.

If you want to read about it, here, you’ll see that the staff report is a virtual shell game of verbiage and is based on the notion that savings from the operation of the ambulance service hijacked by the FFD will cover the City’s new expenses; of course these “savings” are speculative – most likely the wishful thinking that goes along with empire building. There is not a single utterance about budget impacts now or in the out years.

Never a fire fighter around when you need one…

Sustainability? It would be nice to know what happens to these 12 positions after the three years are up and there is no longer any federal subsidy. Will these worthy folks be discharged in the name of budgetary constraint? Will they be kept on courtesy of cuts elsewhere? The new jobs will have to have pension costs now, and of course in the future which jack up our required payments to the good folks at CalPERS. On these issues the staff report is silent as a tomb.

There it goes…some might come back. Less overhead!

It’s long been a tenet of conservative principles that these dispensations of largesse from Washington and Sacramento are sort of like a pusher getting his junkies reliant on his dope. Here, specifically I have to wonder why FEMA is even in the business of increasing fire department sizes and budgets and the obligations that go along with that augmentation.

Obviously the agency that is known for helping communities’ response to big crises, mostly of the natural disaster kind, now has a remit and a budget to hand out money without reference to any disaster at all. And that budget most be pretty damn big if Fullerton can get a $2.8 million commitment.

Wouldn’t it be nice if the federal revenue that pays for this were kept at home, in the hands of the taxpayers and their local representatives, in the first place.

George Bushala Strikes Back

Home town hero…

I’m really starting to like George A. Bushala, the guy who is standing up in public and saying the things that need to said about the fraudster councilman, “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra. At the April 1st Fullerton City Council meeting he also added the scalps of the Fullerton Observer and its two sister “editors” to his collection.

A couple days later, as FFFF shared, Skasika Kennedy recreated public comments (erroneously, of course) and added her typical “editor’s note” at the end of Bushala’s statement, bragging about standing up to his falsehoods.

It turns out that Bushala is not going to take this defamation lying down, and has retained counsel by the name of Briggs Alexander. This firm sent the following letter to Skakia Kennedy yesterday calling out her failure to show wherein Bushala had lied, and demanding that she reproduce (without editorial comment) a letter from young Bushala in lieu of facing legal action for libel.

Wow. Suggesting that the Kennedy Sisters behave like responsible journalists and quit defaming citizens. What a novel concept.

The look of vacant self-satisfaction…

It’s pretty sad when it takes this sort of effort to get people who call you a liar to prove where the lies are. In this instance there are no lies since the documents detailing Zahra’s dubious slime trail across the United States have been published right here on FFFF. Of course the Kennedy’s have no interest in the truth and are completely enveloped by their ideological miasma in which truth is whatever helps you feel good about your cherished ideals; okay for private rumination, possibly costly in a public forum.

And the Award for Worst Over Acting Goes to…

The other night City Councilperson Ahmad Zahra put on quite a display of self-righteous indignation. The topic was whether or not to look into the advantages of Fullerton becoming a charter city. That move might give the city some flexibilities our current status as a General Law city might not afford. The issue was about as dangerous as self-rising flour, but to hear Zahra go on about it you’d think a vast conspiracy was afoot to separate Fullerton citizens from their freedom.

His outraged and disjointed diatribe must have lasted five minutes. He went for the cheap seats. Anger. Sardonic smiles. Dramatic hand gestures. Putting on, taking off glasses. Goodness gracious. How he longs to be a Third World dictator.

Zahra’s indignance was theatrical, of course. He had to play out his part in front of the dozen people he could muster to attend the meeting and cry about impending doom. But his description of the charter city idea was phrased in language that denigrated the current Council majority whom “nobody trusts,” nobody being, presumably a few dozen Zahra puppets and the Observer Sisters.

Their goal, according to Zahra, was to create new “land use” rules that would benefit the person who put the majority in their Council chairs and who spends his time buying up properties left and right. The unnamed bogeyman of Fullerton Boohoo – Tony Bushala. Goodness gracious, Zahra went on, the City of Fullerton itself was at stake.

Zahra’s other claims were so stupid and impossible that they hardly need to repeated except to show how desperate he has become. A charter city he falsely exclaimed, could get rid of competitive bidding on projects leading to shoddy construction! A charter city he falsely claimed could evade California’s prevailing wage laws leading to shoddy construction!

And then: the roads fix the roads. The roads are as bad as ever. The priceless wrap up? Zahra said the Council majority would tell people what they want to hear. And it won’t be the truth. Wow. Coming from leaky, weepy, dedicated to his con of the boohoos, Zahra.

When Zahra had finished his histrionics he was immediately challenged by Councilman Nick Dunlap for his previous no votes on infrastructure spending. Zahra interrupted noisily, as he has been doing lately, but was shut down by Dunlap and Mayor Jung. Councilwoman Jamie Valencia told Zahra not to worry – his Academy Award will come someday. She was greeted with boohoo boos from Zahra’s pals in the audience.

Spin and kick…

One telling part of this episode was when Councilperson Shana Charles, who had just cheerfully stated her interest in the charter possibility, voted no on the motion simply to study the idea – right after Zahra’s melt down.

The motion carried 3-2 so we have not heard the last of this issue.

Zahra Wets Bed. Again.

Fullerton Councilmember Ahmad Zahra has been on a roll lately. And by roll, I mean getting humiliated by a council majority that is sick and tired of the immigration fraud, plagiarist, serial liar, and busted woman batterer. Well, no Kitty Jaramillo and no mayorship for you, Ahmad. No stipend-paying, do-nothing wank at the Orange County Water District, and no more idiot Walk on Wilshire.

We’re #108!

We’ve seen his own flailing effort to create a controversy over Councilwoman Jamie Valencia’s campaign contributions, going so far as to basically accusing his own City Attorney of incompetence in the matter. And that’s not the only unforced error made by this little fellow.

Zahra says take a hike!

Back in January Zahra decided not to re-appoint his Planning Commissioner Arif Mansuri, a gentleman FFFF has noted as a diligent and intelligent representative with actual professional credentials. Zahra instead appointed a young guy named Adrian Meza.

Never heard of Meza? I didn’t either so I did some research. The guy is one of those identity politicking “progressive” types, without any discernable ability who hang around politics for critical self validation – just like his apparent mentor, Ahmad Zahra. Meza says he is a Digital Marketing Specialist, whatever that means, and works for a company that arranges egg collection and surrogacy for gay people. What this has to do with experience in land use and planning is beyond me.

More importantly, Meza is a member of the that preachy and self-righteous crowd that doesn’t do an awful lot of thinking for themselves. Naturally he has been a writer of some kind for the Fullerton Observer that touted his video about how bad Fullerton’s roads are. The video recommended new taxes, of course, and even spent time wedging in support for the Trail to Nowhere with a hat tip to the community disservice of FFFF.

His bio on linkedin suggests he is still a Parks Commissioner (his first listed title!) and and even lists his efforts for the Observer as some sort of real job. Other stuff is part-time work in municipal park departments. Of course, like Zahra, he describes himself as a “videographer” with one amateur attempt listed. Man, talk about fluffing. We do have another Zahra on our hands.

Nothing left but empty bloviation…

Anyway, this selection has come to grief, apparently because Mr. Meza doesn’t currently live in Fullerton. as required by law. WoW. That’s embarrassing. How is it that Zahra didn’t know his guy doesn’t live here? And an even better question would ask whether Meza has been on Fullerton’s Park and Rec Commission while not a citizen of Fullerton. That would look bad. The question deserves an answer from Zahra; if Meza was willing to be on our Planning Commission illegally there’s no reason to suppose he had no qualms about being a Parks Commissioner while living, say, in Anaheim.

Of course no one will get an answer from Zahra about this, because no one will ask. Hopefully one of the other Councilpersons who ratified the nomination will try to find out. But I doubt it, Fullerton being Fullerton.