At the Fullerton Observer Raising Awkward Facts Gets You Nowhere

Another angry lecture…

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 »

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
        • 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.
      • FrankStep out of your bubble pal.
  3. 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.
  4. 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?

Fullerton Childish

Lately we have been treated to a small band of “activists” at City Council meetings behaving poorly, insulting folks, catcalling and loudly showing their displeasure. This is rude behavior for grown-ups, and there is something else going on: demanding that you get your way and that oppositional forces must be bad, evil, in fact. It goes beyond politics and enters the realm of child psychology.

The latest example is an “opinion” essay appearing in the Kennedy Sisters’ Fullerton Observer. It was supposedly written by a person named Kevin Curriston, under the sensational headline “City Council steamrolls constituent views.”

As an aside, FFFF has encountered Mr. Curriston previously, although his identity was a mystery. In fact, some of us assumed he was a homeless individual rounded up by Sitkas Kennedy to support the Trail to Nowhere.

I replicate Curriston’s editorial below, wherein he attempts to justify the theme of his headline.

Kevin Curriston

I attended and spoke at the Fullerton City Council meeting on December 16,  2025. On the agenda was the question of whether to adhere to the custom of a fair rotation of mayoral selection, or to continue allowing council members to nominate and elect someone by simple majority vote.

About 75 citizens showed up to speak, all but one pushing for a fair rotation of the mayor and advocating for Ahmad Zahra or the current Mayor Pro Tem, Dr. Shana Charles, both for their continued presence in community events and caring, responsive attitudes.

Fred Jung was personally ostracized and insulted every which way to Friday, and accused of not even making eye contact with his detractors when they addressed him.  It was pointed out that he wanted to retain the position of Fullerton Mayor on his resume simply for his objective of running in 2026 for Orange County Supervisor. If we have anything to do with it, and can overcome a well-bankrolled political machine, that won’t happen.

Councilman Nick Dunlap spoke at the end and said the same thing: 40 people who show up to every City Council meeting to protest do not represent the voters of Fullerton.  He did not support rotating representation of all districts in Fullerton.  It was one town, with one set of interests.

Councilwoman Jamie Valencia nominated Fred Jung, and Valencia, Nick Dunlap, and Fred Jung re-voted for Jung as Mayor, shutting out Mayor Pro Temp Shana Charles completely in favor of Dunlap as Mayor Pro Tem. This will be the 4th time he’s been mayor in 6 years.  It is not a level playing field in any way!

Fullerton City Council has become Fred Jung’s well-oiled political machine that does not care about constituent concerns or views – only about their own cronyism and career ambitions.  It was pointed out that neighboring Buena Park adheres to a mayoral rotation policy, and mayoral elections in the City Council are done in minutes.  Fullerton is attracting attention all across the county for its contentious decision-making, totally steamrolling the will of its constituents.

Aloha

An editorial is all about opinion, and the opinions presented in this statement perfectly parallel those of Fullerton Boohoo, Militant Division, and can be seen in the drama, emotion, and exaggeration of a typical child. We can forget about the misstatement of facts other than to observe the inflation of numbers and time are concomitant with the infantile imagination.

Here we see the usual conflation of what someone wants with what is righteous and proper. That’s not so unusual in political presentation. But the next step is more pernicious; the assumption that what you want is what everybody wants and just as importantly, what everybody needs. We’ve seen it over and over again when the small cluster of agitators at City Council meetings profess to speak “for the people,” on issues of which the vast majority of Fullerton’s citizens and taxpayers are unaware. This is the self-centered thinking of a center-of-the-universe child, and a particularly irresponsible mindset for adults making big, expensive decisions. Yet, this is the essence of the Fullerton Childish perspective.

Curriston reminds us that Fullerton Childish is offended by Nick Dunlap’s rational observation that 40 people do not constitute “voters” and that getting elected means representing everybody. This attitude is vilified by Fullerton Childish because it often means the pet projects of their darlings, Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles are subject to at least a little scrutiny.

It doesn’t seem to occur to poor Kevin that maybe he should consider why a majority of his colleagues refuse to make Zahra Mayor. Like his immigration fraud, his battery and vandalism case, his filing a false police report against a councilmember, his going to Sacramento behind the Council’s back, his persistent and colorful recreation of the truth, and even his latest pretense of being “out of the state” for some mythical employment.

Ultimately, the mayor rotation fantasy isn’t really about fairness or democracy or any other abstraction for Fullerton Childish. It’s about the denial of the gratification that validation that your worldview provides. Whining and crying about unfairness. Truth is neither here nor there; rational examination of facts is not an option. Opposition is evil. If it can’t be found, it must be concocted.

A Potential Solution for Fullerton’s Homeless Crisis

Did you lay these eggs?

Sometimes stuff pops up that you couldn’t possibly make up. The latest Fullerton Observer includes a piece co-authored by Curtis Gamble and Sankia Kennedy and features the headline I used, above.

Why write about news when you can try to make your own! (Photo by Julie Leopo/Voice of OC)

To start off with I have to say I can’t think of two people less likely to come up with a potential solution for anything.

Representing bus drivers, homeless, students and all the little people…

Poor Curtis Gamble is just a perpetually discombobulated fellow who takes an opportunity a couple times a month to polish his sense of self-importance at city council meetings, generally offering comments on things he knows nothing about. He presumes to advocate for the homeless, bus drivers, seniors, students, etc., etc.; people who would probably just as soon forgo his representation. Co-author Saska Kennedy is thoroughly annoying too, although she, like her older sister, Sharon, is propelled by the ideological dogma of the self-righteous and sanctimonious left.

Rancho La Paz

Their “article” presumes there is a homeless crisis in Fullerton. And it offers that homeless seniors represent 20% of this crisis. Their potential solution? Use the Rancho La Paz senior mobile home park as some sort of permanent housing for the homeless, moving them into trailers as they are vacated.

I can’t conceive of a worse idea: a village of homeless people assigned property, not their own, to live in and presumably maintain. Somehow the pathologies of homelessness – schizophrenia, drug abuse, living in filth would be rectified by mobile home park living. Cooking, cleaning, job hunting, health maintenance all self-performed by the newly housed, one concludes. Of course professional do gooders from Illumination Foundation (as a for instance) will be on hand to dispense “behavioral” admonitions and the necessary modalities.

The friendly coin collector…

The biggest unstated obstacle, and one that Curtis and Skansia work really hard to ignore is the fact that the mobile home park has an owner. When last I heard, that fellow is a real estate and numismatist named John Saunders who has been villainized by Fullerton Boohoo for raising rents on his ground leases and who, I believe, is highly unlikely to go along with Homeless Village. Well, maybe he would if the City were to reimburse him for rents and maintenance costs and policing of the village. That would cost a fortune.

The article fails to mention that typically land, not the mobile homes are owned by a guy like Saunders. A trailer wouldn’t be available unless purchased by somebody for the homeless purpose, or just abandoned by the owner.

Then there’s the issue of joint sovereignty. The south half of Rancho La Paz is in Anaheim, not Fullerton, so there’s that.

When I was done reading this nonsense I was left wondering its purpose. Is it just gratuitous virtue signaling? A Big Idea hatched by the disoriented Curtis Gamble and advertised by the Kennedy Sisters? Hard to say. But one thing is certain. The piece projects the typical lack of pragmatism that is the hallmark of the Homeless Industrial Complex, so maybe it has a chance – if politicians can be seen to be throwing money at a problem absent results.

The Depot Lease Part 2; Utter Hypocrisy in Boohooville

On Tuesday the Bushala Depot lease agreement was not voted upon. It item was continued until July 15th.

But that didn’t keep a gaggle of Zahra followers from trying to continue the narrative of subsidies and below market rate rent.

Young and innocent…

Our new friend, tender young thing Elijah Manaserro, local scholar, was there to do just that. And a few other callers in.

Representing the bus drivers, the homeless, the CSUF students and all the little people…

My favorite speaker was the itinerant pest Curtis Gamble, whose near homelessness makes him qualified to opine on real estate deals.

How dare you!

When public comments were done, Zahra showed his role as coordinator of the opposition. He wanted comparative market rates, he said; there won’t be any, but okay, fair enough. But then he displayed his fundamental ignorance by including agreements with The Summit Restaurant and the Boys and Girls Club – completely different properties.

On the docket…

The fact is that the Santa Fe Depot doesn’t have any “comps” in Orange County. The historic building is is unique and made up of several disparate areas, each of pretty small space; in other words, hard to rent out. And the Loading Dock, proposed for inclusion in a revised overall lease, is only connected to an area already leased by the Bushalas. Adaptive reuse will require a huge outlay of money to effect structural reinforcement, enclosure and interior finishes. And because there is no place for kitchen or restrooms, it is functionally useless for anybody except the Bushalas who have ten year lease extension options.

Enhanced with genuine brick veneer!

Here’s the hypocrisy part. Remember the ill-fate “boutique hotel/monster apartment,” an unsolicited proposal with no RFP, no RFQ, no RF-anything? Do you remember any of Fullerton BooHoo raising Hell about that? Me neither. I do remember that Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles voted to give con-men Johnny Lu and Larry Liu a $14,000,000 price subsidy on a parcel they upzoned themselves. Talk about short-term memory loss.

Hopefully when this item returns, staff will explain (based on their extensive expertise) the expertise Fullerton Boohoo is always praising – that the deal they negotiated is not a subsidy and that rather than losing money, the deal will bring in tax revenue to the City and to the County; and that letting the Loading Dock fall down doesn’t help anybody – even those taxpayers Zahra and Charles pretend to care so much about.

The Bushala Depot Lease: Fear and Loathing in Boohooville

On the docket…

On tonight’s City Council meeting agenda you’ll see an item about a lease revision at the historic Santa Fe Depot between the City (owner) and the leasee – Bushala Brothers. Inc.

Apparently the Bushala’s have been trying to get a lease on the entire loading dock portion of the Depot for the better part of 10 years while rolling it into an updated lease for the entire building. These efforts seem to have been met with the usual obstructionism from City staff, who in the past seemed happy to stall and temporize.

But mirable dictu, the Age of Miracles isn’t past! A lease has finally been agreed, and the opportunity to see a successful adaptive reuse of the loading dock into a commercially viable space may be at hand.

Happiness all around, right?

Heavens, no! Enter Ahmad Zahra and Fullerton Boohoo. The new running dog for this dog and pony operation is a sweet young thing named Elijah Manassero who writes articles for the Fullerton Observer attacking Tony Bushala and using the phraseology of Zahra and Vivian Jaramillo. Apparently Elijah has taken to social media to proclaim his outrage over the Depot lease.

Crazy deal? Insanity? Really, innocent, young Elijah? That’s what you wanna go with? No “City taxes” are spent on this arrangement and there is no subsidy, ya poor, dumb sap.

Now we may be sure that the “well below market rate” nonsense was fed to him by Zahra or somebody else who knows even less about commercial real estate – like Skaskia Kennedy who is also parroting the idiot “subsidy” line. The fact is that there is no other potential tenant with any interest in the loading dock and never has been.

A tax-paying tenant on the loading dock would increase sales taxes to the City. Having no tenant contributes nothing, a fact that has escaped poor young Elijah and the younger Kennedy Sister.

Over thirty years ago the Bushalas were the only non-subsidy demanding respondent to an RFP by the City of Fullerton to lease and restore the Santa Fe Depot, a fact reflected in the lease value – then and now. The restoration was successfully performed and the building is now on the National Register of Historic Places – an undeniable and rare success story for Fullerton Redevelopment.

More recently, the Bushala’s have donated tens of thousands of dollars in labor and material to help volunteers perform stabilization and repair efforts on the loading dock roof structure that the owner – the Fullerton taxpayers – haven’t had to spend a dime on. More malfeasance, naive Elijah?

It’s way past time to put the loading dock platform to productive use – use that is profitable to the taxpayers pliable young Elijah and Fullerton Boohoo pretend to care so much about.

And tonight’s the time to finally do it.

Fullerton Publication Exclusion Confirmed

Last night the Fullerton City Council voted down a desperate attempt by “Drs.” Charles and Zahra to rescind a recently approved policy that excludes non-government publications on City premises – except for a spot in the Library.

The 180 degree spin was far from attractive…

As FFFF noted the other day the whole thing was a ginned-up reason to force another vote and to mobilize Fullerton Boohoo. The transparent pretext of “new information” fooled nobody, since it was obviously just cover for Shameless Charles to get right with her constituency and at the same time to subject the council majority to another round of uninformed harangues by Zahra’s mindless minions.

Somehow a content neutral policy of excluding news outlets from the City Hall lobby was construed as an all-out assault on the free press and freedom of speech, yadda yadda. The Fullerton Observers were outraged, of course.

At the end, the inevitable wind-up speeches were completely predictable. Charles went into a long and winding circumlocution meant to separate her from her previous voice in support of the policy.

It’s over when I say it’s over!

Zahra, as usual, outdid himself in his insufferable, twattish way, nattering about freedom and admonishing staff and the City Attorney that they are paid by all Fullerton, not just the council majority, and that being legal doesn’t make something right. The irony of this bullshit was lost on Fullerton Boohoo, but not on me. This is the same little miscreant who voted time and time again to pursue a lawsuit by the City against FFFF, Joshua Ferguson, and David Curlee. Zahra’s lawsuit against FFFF was an attempt to punish people expressing a First Amendment protected right. The City lost that lawsuit, costing the people of Fullerton, the folks Zahra pretends to care so much about, upwards of a million dollars. That’s a lot of asphalt repair for your district, “Dr.” Zahra.

Zahra blamed FFFF for being behind an intricate plot to get the Observer out of City Hall, a compliment really, although whether deserved remains to be seen. The new paper FFFF publication, the Fullerton Tribune (I’ve seen the gallery proof), can’t be dispensed there, either.

The vote to rescind the policy failed 2-3 with Valencia, Jung, and Dunlap voting no.

Gloves are so Nineteenth Century…

At the end of the interminable yakking, Jung moved to “table” the issue, a parliamentary tactic of using a positive majority vote that makes it impossible for Charles and Zahra to resurrect the thing through some fabricated “new information” in two weeks or beyond. Hopefully, on future votes Jung will remember to do this the first time around, or better yet, make it clear that 2 council people can only agendize new items, not something they lost.

The motion to table passed 3-2, Charles and Zahra dissenting, evidence that still want to bring it up again.

City of Fullerton Stalls FFFF

That’s the way it looks. FFFF’s attorney Kelly Aviles sent word to the City that Friends for Fullerton’s Future was planning a periodical publication and wanted to dispense it on City property – City Hall, the Fullerton Library, the Community Center. You may recall our post.

Our lawyer has not heard anything in the past four and a half weeks. There is an obvious stall tactic, of course. This means one of two things. Could it be because the City doesn’t know how to respond? Or, maybe the City wants to ignore the request just hoping somehow it will go away.

dick-jones
Staying awake long enough to break the law…

We do know that there is no love lost between FFFF and Fullerton’s astonishingly still employed City Attorney, the I Can’t Believe It’s A Law Firm of Jones and Mayer. These cut rate pettifoggers, hand job lawyers, and low percentile law school grads don’t like us because of our myriad posts outlining their incompetence, corruption, and self-dealing. They even tried to sue FFFF and a couple of its writers a few years back. Their loss must still hurt their misplaced professional pride.

We also know that the upper echelons of the City also look askance at our disrespectful but honest chronicling of their misdeeds over the past 17 years. There’s a long list of corrupt cops, boobs, drunk driving city managers, incompetents and ne’er do wells whom we have raked over the coals, including several of the current generation.

Will pretend to work for food…

Obviously, the immigration and marriage fraud Ahmad Zahra doesn’t like us because we are anti-Muslim homophobes, which hilariously corresponds exactly with his exercise in self branding. Whether his pal in the “progressive” ideology charade, Shana Charles is opposed to an FFFF presence in City Hall is unknown.

Dunlap-Jung
No comment…

What about Nick Dunlap and Fred Jung? We have been sort of nice to them when they do good things; also not so nice when they cave in to Fullerton’s boohoo phalanx. Are they trying to blackball us? I don’t know and I don’t know if Jamie Valencia has even heard of our humble blog.

Whatever the dynamics, we’re not giving up. If a squalid rag like the Fullerton Observer, with its innuendo, errant information, sanctimonious and blatant politicking can be disseminated on public property, so can our proposed chronicle.

Fullerton’s Committees and Commissions. What Are They Good For?

Well, the answer to that question depends on who you are and what you want.

Last Tuesday’s Fullerton City Council agenda featured an item to modify some of the current roster of committees and commissions. The idea was to schedule fewer meetings for some, get rid of “at-large” members in others and in one case, the Active Transportation Committee, roll it into the Transportation and Circulation Committee. The Planning Commission was to be expanded to seven members by adding two at-large members.

Naturally, the true nature of these committees and what they actually accomplish was not part of the discussion.

Almost no city committees are legally necessary according to State law – except, I believe, Library Boards and Planning Commissions. The rest are there, presumably, to give the public a chance to contribute to the charming swindle known as participatory government. This is almost always a fiction, as anybody who has spent any time watching these shows, knows. The committees are little better than rubber stamps.

Never in doubt…

City staff likes committees because it gives them a chance to build momentum behind one of their pet projects – to create an aura of inevitability about this or that. It’s an opportunity to go to the City Council and explain the unanimous support for their item. And if, perchance, a committee shows a little independence then their ideas and their votes are mere suggestions with no legal standing.

Some of the bureaucratic enthusiasm for committees must have waned a bit when Fullerton went to direct Council appointments a few years back. Previously choices were made by review panels made up of council and committee members who could be relied on to pick “sound” people, that is, folks who could be trusted not to rock the proverbial boat.

Application denied…

In the olden days staff liked larger committees. The reasoning seemed to be that the more members you had the more impotent the commission really was.

City Council members like to put friends and allies on committees, and, in the case of the Planning Commission, maybe even someone moving up in Fullerton’s political arena. This is how you build a political machine: you help people, they help you.

It is not uncommon that if there is an annoying member of the public, an irritant at Council meetings, he or she might just be shut up by being put on a committee, becoming part of the team, so to speak. It worked shockingly often. John Henry Habermeyer, Estelle Geddy Professor of Political Science and Economics at RPI for many years, describes the scenario eloquently:

The answer is to asphyxiate the irritant in a smothering embrace; to draw said miscreant into the circle of government itself by appointing this him to some footling committee or other, thereby causing him to voluntarily silence himself in deference to the grand fraternity to which he has been officially welcomed. He has a name plate; perhaps even a coveted parking space! Many an underdeveloped  and agitated ego has been assuaged by such a maneuver and its proprietor thereby silenced.

Committee members who are not impatient with bureaucratic doubletalk like to be on committees, especially if they can sit up on the dais in the City Council chamber. It makes them feel good about things, an ego boost.

Of course the public is completely unaware or even interested in committee meetings which are almost always held in empty rooms.

Since almost everybody seems to like the current set-up, why the proposed alterations? The staff report referred to economies, efficiencies, and such-like. The verbiage didn’t sound very heart-felt or persuasive and the reader gets the impression of a top down diktat from Mayor Fred Jung to clean things up.

In the end most of the proposed reductions to five directly appointed members of certain commissions was approved, which is basically a smart move. The inconsistent proposal to increase the Planning Commission membership to seven (actually the way it used to be) failed. The motion to keep it the way it is passed 3-2 with Fred Jung and Jamie Valencia voting no.

On a side note, Fullerton Boohoo was at the meeting to display their unhappiness. Why not? The altar of probity, the Fullerton Observer had tried to stir up opposition earlier with one of their editorial/news mishmashes. The funniest part of this effort was to explain that these committees help keep staff “accountable,” an obvious misdirection from the Kennedy Sisters who have never cared about staff accountability before.

Whether or not the changes would have saved anybody time or money is debatable. What is not debatable is that these footling committees are there to look like public participation is going on, when it hardly ever is.

The Words of George Bushala. Speaking Truth to BooHoos

Home town hero…

Thanks to the AI software employed by the Fullerton Observer we have a more or less accurate written account of the statement made by Fullerton resident George Bushala that caused all the fuss at the December 17th Fullerton City Council meeting. Included are the interruptions by Sharon Kennedy and her sister Skaskia in violation of rules of public behavior in the chambers.

Giving free speech the middle finger…

There may be additions or subtraction of which I am unaware, but the whole thing has the ring of truth – meaning minimal Observer opinion masquerading as fact – links to Observer articles should be followed with skepticism. I notice Sharon Kennedy is referred to as the current Editor of the Observer. I have no idea who “Erin” is. And of course the Observer ever accurate, identifies the wrong Bushala.

George Bushala Jr. stated, “Here are eight reasons why I don’t believe Zahra should represent our City Council members as mayor and why he undermines voter rights.

1. In 2018, after being elected to represent District 5, Mr. Zahra voted against allowing the voters of Fullerton to elect a replacement for an at-large seat vacated by Jesus Silva. Despite initially supporting a special election, he later opposed it, citing the cost. This contradicts his support for other questionable expenditures that far exceeded the projected costs of the election, raising concerns about his commitment to democratic processes and fiscal responsibility. (Click here to read the Fullerton Observer article) (Click here to read the Voice of OC article)

2. Mr. Zahra appointed himself to the Orange County Water District (OCWD), playing a key role in the appointment of Jan Flory to the City Council, which subsequently led to his own appointment to the OC WD Board. This raises concerns about a potential quid pro quo arrangement. Mr. Zahra seemed to support Flory’s appointment to the City Council in exchange for her backing his appointment to the OCWD Board. Such actions give the appearance of self-serving political maneuvering and erode public trust. (Click here to read the Daily Titan article) (Click here to read the Fullerton Observer article)

3. Mr. Zahra wasted public funds on a baseless lawsuit, supporting the expenditure of over $1,000,000 of taxpayer money to sue two local bloggers who downloaded a publicly available file from the city’s website. This lawsuit, which sought to suppress free speech and punish journalists for exposing city government missteps, was an unnecessary waste of public funds and a troubling attack on the press. (Click here to read the Fullerton Observer article) (Click here to read the Voice of OC article)

4. Mr. Zahra was involved in plagiarism and deceptive behavior. He falsely claimed authorship of an article in the Fullerton Observer that was actually written by staff at the Orange County Water District. This misrepresentation caused embarrassment for the newspaper.”

Sharon Kennedy, the current editor of the Fullerton Observer, shouted that the information being discussed was misinformation and lies as she stormed out Erin yelled at Saskia, calling her a loudmouth and telling her to be quiet.

Mayor Dunlap intervened from the dais, urging the audience to be quiet. “Let the man speak. Excuse me? Okay, you’regoing to take a recess in a minute. If you’re going to keep this up, knock it off,” he said. He then asked the police chief to help control the situation.

Bushala continued, stating, “This misrepresentation has caused Zahra embarrassment for the newspaper and raises doubts about Mr. Zahra’s honesty and transparency. His actions suggest a willingness to mislead the public for political gain.”

Saskia Kennedy shouted that Bushala was lying.

Mayor Dunlap raised concern again from the dais, insisting, “Let the man speak. You know what? We’re going to call a recess. Everyone has the right to talk. Knock it off. Can we behave like adults? If not, I’m trying to figure out if we can conduct ourselves like adults. Can you refrain from heckling? Okay, let’s get back on track.”

Bushala continued, “I’ll skip to point six: manipulating the 2022 election. During his reelection campaign, Mr. Zahra was accused of recruiting a fake candidate, Tony Castro, to split the vote with Oscar Valdez, the leading candidate in District 5. This manipulation of the electoral process undermines the integrity of our democratic system and puts Mr. Zahra’s commitment to fair elections into question. I was interrupted earlier, but I have two more quick points.

Point #7 addresses deceptive actions to gain U.S. citizenship. Mr. Zahra, a self-identified gay man, married a woman from Arkansas shortly after arriving in the United States, presumably to obtain citizenship. This action raises concerns about his ethics and integrity, particularly regarding the use of marriage for immigration benefits. While his sexual orientation is a personal matter, this maneuver to secure citizenship raises serious ethical questions about his character.”

Ahmad Zahra attempted to defend himself against slander and personal attacks but was shouted down by Mayor Dunlap.

Bushala then addressed point #8: the allegation of filing a false police report against Vice Mayor Jung. In 2021, Mr. Zahra was involved in filing a false police report against Vice Mayor Jung. Such actions not only undermine trust in public City Council members but also threaten to damage the public’s confidence in their elected officials. Fabricating accusations against colleagues sets a dangerous precedent and raises significant ethical concerns.

Mayor Dunlap stated, “We’re not going to allow disruptions during meetings, and we won’t tolerate cheering from the audience. If you wish to speak, you have the same right as everyone else to express your view within our democratic process. You can do this her in the chambers or on Zoom. However, we will not accept heckling from the audience. Whether you like me or dislike me, or if you agree or disagree with my views, it’s all in the process. But you veto, do it from the proper venue, which is to come forward to the microphone and allow others their opportunity to speak.”

“Dr.” Ahmad Zahra is Still Not Mayor of Fullerton

Last night the City Council appointed a new Mayor for 2025. And guess what? It isn’t Ahmad Zahra, the evasive and prevaricating Middle Eastern medic. He’s been on the City Council for 6 years and has never been able to get two other votes to make himself Mayor.

Why not?

It’s because the majority of his colleagues don’t like him. Not at all. From his self-serving behavior, his sanctimony, his manic publicity seeking, his peddling salacious gossip about his colleagues to local blogs, and his filing a false police report against the new Mayor, he has demonstrated time and again his toxic personality, clearly unfit to be the figurehead of the city.

It’s never even been necessary for the other councilmembers to consider Zahra’s illegal immigration into the country through a phony marriage to a woman in Arkansas; or his assault and battery case against a woman; or his serial plagiarism of water articles written by an Orange County Water District bureaucrat to appear to be some sort of expert.

Last night meeting did have some fun moments, too, that FFFF will share from the video stream when it’s up.

George Bushala, a new local hero…

Of course there were the usual gaggle of boohooing Zahra disciples, people dumb enough to fall for his routine. But one man, George Bushala stood up and completely dismantled Zahra – by actually citing the facts about the man’s background narrative – not the bullshit his followers like so much to lap up. It was a damning bill of indictment and it was beautiful to behold.

Bushala’s statement wasn’t stoically accepted by Zahra, who cried out that he was the victim of a personal attack – pretty rich coming from the creep who has been orchestrating public demonstrations against Jung, Dunlap and Whitaker for several years; demonstrations full of insult, character assassination and innuendo. Personal enough? The non-plussed Zahra had to be admonished not to interrupt public speakers.

From the back of the audience one crazy-bonkers woman started screaming about lies against Zahra. She kept interrupting Mr. Bushala, who calmly waited each time before requesting to able to continue. After being castigated by Dunlap to shut up, the belligerant shrew finally left the chambers in a fit of purple pique, before the cops could hustle her out.

Crazy is as crazy does…

And guess what? It was none other than one of the operators of the “independent newspaper” The Fullerton Observer, Sharon Kennedy!

New Mayor.

Anyway, as far as the vote went, Nick Dunlap decided to nominate Shana Charles for Mayor, a gambit no doubt mean to get some love from Fullerton Democrats. Of course it won’t; and in any case Shana Charles nominated Zahra. Jung nominated himself. And the result was Charles 1, Zahra 2 and Jung 2. On the second try it was 3-2 Jung, with newcomer Jamie Valencia supporting her political mentor. So we’ll be favored with Jung’s rich baritone act for 2025. We’ll also hear about the horrible unfairness of it all for a while, but if you think about it, Zahra could have made Charles Mayor but he obviously didn’t want to. Misogyny?