OC Register Digs Into FFFF’s School Laptop Post, Misses the Point

ocregister-laptop
OC Register Front Page - Saturday September 19, 2009

The OC Register ran a story today on our previous laptop post in which a mother came forward to warn parents about the dangers of FSD’s school laptop program.

Overall the reporter gave a fair assessment to both sides of the controversy, although the article made the mother out to be naive about her duties as a parent to watch her children closely. Those who actually read the mother’s statement on this blog know this to be completely false.

The mother accepted responsibility for wrongly believing the school administrators when they told her that the laptops were safe. In her own words:

I felt stupid for being so naïve in thinking that a child should have a laptop with access to whatever she could dream of. I felt safe in believing that a school district would have the best firewalls to protect my child like they promised that firewalls do. I do believe that parents have a responsibility to watch over their children, and this generation requires a new kind of vigilance, but I also believe that a school has the responsibility to be honest in their abilities to protect our children as well.

Had the district been truthful about the risks associated with the laptops, perhaps this incident could have been avoided. This tragedy acts as yet another example of government employees and electeds distorting or concealing the truth to further their own personal agendas, to the detriment of the public whom they are supposed to serve.

Bottom line: These laptops are not safe for kids to use without direct supervision at all times. That includes all the kids accessing neighborhood wireless on the playground, in front of school, at the bus stop,  at Starbucks or in their own bedrooms. So now the question is, how does a parent monitor a kid with a laptop 24/7?

For most parents, it’s nearly impossible.

Who Should Be Fullerton’s Next Mayor? Pam Keller?

it's really just a little wood hammer...
it's really just a little wood hammer...

The recent edition of the Fullerton Observer did some boohooing and hand wringing about whether or not Pam Keller will get to be Fullerton’s next mayor here . The little article points out some of the nefarious goings on in Fullerton Past and the current council’s refusal to adopt some sort of mechanism to ensure that everybody gets a chance to be mayor.

We believe the person who should be Mayor of Fullerton is the person who can get two other colleagues to vote for him/her. That’s pretty simple. If they can count to three it’s their turn.

Fullerton’s lefties know that come reorganization time (1st meeting in December) local Repuglican bigwigs like Ed Royce make it a point to lean on fellow Repugs (In Name Only) like Bankhead and Jones to keep the gavel away from the Dems. But that’s the way it goes. It’s called politics. Fullerton’s “progressives” like to play politics too, but they just won’t admit it. We wonder if they would be so energetic in the defense of Shawn Nelson’s turn to be mayor.

Is Pam Keller qualified to be mayor? Well, let’s face it – if Jones and Bankhead can do it, so could an orangutan.

Yes. Yes I can...
Yes. Yes I can...

But we’re still waiting to get some straight answers from Pam and her Collaborative about who foots their bills, and why the money is drip-dried through the FSD; and we were chagrined, although not surprised, to hear her inane defense of the indefensible blight scam behind the recent Redevelopment expansion vote. So maybe she isn’t the best person to be the face of Fullerton.

Fullerton Observer Sinks To New Low

The Yellowing Sub Dives even Deeper
The Yellowing Sub dives even deeper

UPDATE: According to an e-mail we received yesterday, our acquaintance “Tenant” reminded us that he did indeed have a follow up conversation with Ms. Kennedy about his situation. We apologize for that error. However the basic thrust of this post remains. You can’t be a reporter and an advocate for this or that specific cause or organization at the same time.

And just to remind our Friends: we are a blog – not a journalistic endeavor and we have never tried to get anybody to believe otherwise.

To those Fullerton Observer observers who still believe that Sharon Kennedy has an atom of journalist integrity, or any objective standards either, we present the most recent Observer edition as our evidence to the contrary.

Last week we posted a story about how Fullerton Interfaith Emergency Services intended to expand their compound in the 500 block of West Amerige Avenue, and in the process how the current landlord had told his tenants to vacate the premises so he could close the deal.

What we didn’t share was the fact that one of the tenants had actually contacted Sharon Kennedy. According to this individual she evinced considerable interested in his plight; but the tenant never heard back from her.

In the Observer’s mid-September issue she gave an answer. Buried in the middle of an article about unrelated FIES issues the author tucked in a few lines about the FIES acquisition of  property on Amerige. The article notes matter-of-factly that relocation help would be available for those tenants who need it. Check out left column halfway down page nine.

Of course there was no mention of the fact that previously none of the tenants had been notified that “assistance was available,” no mention of what the criteria for qualification are, and no mention of who at FIES told her that they were going to help anybody.

It sure looks to us like Sharon Kennedy was trying to help her pals at FIES cover up an embarrassing episode long after the fact. Wow! What a crusading reporter!

Well, at any rate, we are glad that someone may be getting something, sometime, somehow. We’ll check in to see what FIES is doing to make things right for the folks they are dislocating.

In the meantime a whole lotta irony is still goin’ on: several genuine, non-subsidized affordable housing units are taken out of the available housing stock and the property, soon to be owned by a non-profit, will be taken off the property tax rolls. Hooray!

hey everybody, we gotta stick together...
Hey everybody, we gotta stick together...

City and County Collaborate on $25 Million Bribery Plan

Last night the Fullerton City Council voted to give the County of Orange $4,000,000 of your money. Right now. Right out of your pocket.

well, there she goes
Well, there she goes. Say good bye.

So what’s the reason for this unusual generosity? It was because the County was threatening to sue the City over the diversion of property tax increment from the County through the bogus establishment of an expanded Redevelopment project area where no blight exists as required under State law.

The City lawyers, Rutan & Tucker,sure must have felt they had a lousy case – because they cooked up a deal behind the scenes to buy off the County with a ton of up-front cash plus some hinky lease back deals on down the road. Ultimately the total payout will be $25,000,000. We shared news of the the payoff meetings here . The County knows the Redevelopment expansion is fraudulent, because it has already made that argument publicly; but apparently there are at least three votes on the Board of Supervisors to take the deal and help out a fellow government agency. The County will formally go for the gold next week.

The City Council vote was utterly predictable with Pam Keller, Don Bankhead, and Dick Jones cheer leading the payoff. Dick Jones in particular excelled himself in ignorant idiocy. We’ll soon be showing  the Friends clips of Fullerton’s City Council in action.

To their credit, both Shawn Nelson and Sharon Quirk-Silva voted against an action that both robs the taxpayers of Fullerton and violates a basic ethical standard. The other three broke the law, and they know it. But they’re not out of the woods, yet. A court will decide the matter.

We Get Mail: Have We Confused You?

mailbag

We recently found this missive in our FFFF e-mail sack:

Subject: Having trouble figuring out FFFF

It seems this blog doesn’t know where it stands politically, I’d originally assumed it to be non-partisan, but have seen it seem to lean towards the right. Which I figured was corrected with the Norby expose until the duvall affair. Now it seems focused purely on the republican side of the 72nd special election, somehow supporting norby who recently the blog said was illegally raising funds. what?

There seems to be an ideological disconnect.

Good points. It seems a little clarification is in order. First, we have several bloggers – some Libertarian, some Repuglican and others of unknown political persuasion. Second, we have no particular espoused blog-philosophy other than trying to promote independent and relatively intelligent office-holders who will be accountable for what they and their employees do. We are not a party-affiliated operation and have no ambitions in that direction. There are already several partisan blogs in OC and they are full of self-congratulating hacks.

We do tend to be persuaded that less regulation and government micro-management of our everyday lives is a good thing; but we especially believe that the rules laid down by government should be applied evenly and fairly – especially to the government itself.

When Norby’s campaign goofed up and sent out money solicitations to County workers, the Shadow chastised him; similarly she had at him for his hapless County Clerk campaign that smacked of desperation on his part. But when an opening occurred after the Duvall mess, the Harpoon (rightly, I believe) suggested that Norby go for the State Assembly where we are in dire need of Redevelopment reform – a theme constantly revisited on this blog.

Our readers may be interested to know that we are actively recruiting both Libertarian and Green Party members to run for the 72nd race because we would love to see some alternative voices heard for a change.

In short: we may seem unpredictable, and if we are its because there is more than one of us; certain issues may resonate with some of us; and we don’t write about everything. 

So keep visiting. You never can tell what you may discover here. 

School Laptops Help Children Find Pornography and Meet Sexual Predators

At the urging of Fullerton police, a mother sent us this chilling story of her 11 year old girl who was nearly lured into a meeting with a suspected sexual predator after spending months chatting with him on a school laptop. School district employees deceptively promised parents that the laptops were safe when they required parents to purchase them, ignoring evidence that abuse of the laptops is prevalent throughout all grade levels. Many other children have been harmed by the 1:1 Laptop Program, but this is the first time that a parent has had the courage to come forward with the truth.

What I am about to share is very personal, and something that I’ve feared sharing for months now. You see, my children are transfer students, and I’ve feared that our transfer for next year would be denied if I spoke up, or that my children would be humiliated from the publicizing of this. I’ve been afraid that somehow the message that I want to convey would be torn apart and somehow I would be accused of poor parenting. Regardless of my fears of discrimination or criticism I am coming forward because I feel that it’s my duty, as a parent, to warn other parents of the very real danger that exists for our children.

My daughter was a sixth grade student at Golden Hill Elementary School last year for the 2008-2009 school year. The parents of incoming 6th graders attended a meeting, prior to the school year starting, about the laptop program. We basically voted whether or not we wanted to participate in the program. It was my understanding that if I did not want my daughter to participate I could send her to one of the surrounding schools that was not participating in the program. Due to the fact that she was a transfer student, my husband and I did not want to transfer her out, as we felt that the other schools in our area were not, let’s just say, as nice of schools as Golden Hill. We agreed to the program because we felt that we had very little choice, and signed the appropriate paperwork to begin leasing our daughter’s very expensive laptop that we really couldn’t afford.

Parents were encouraged to ask questions after the presentation. Topics about internet safety were brought up, and the parents were told that many state of the art firewalls were in place. If a child were to search an inappropriate topic they would immediately find out about it and the child would be questioned. They said that a tech person from the district would come in regularly, if not every week, and randomly check the computers for such material, or to do repairs on the laptops as needed. I can honestly say that when the school principle and district technology and media rep stood up there and told me this, I believed them.

In the beginning of January, 3 ½ months into the school year, I checked my daughter’s email and found incoming emails that warranted suspicion. After further investigation of the emails I found out that my daughter was able to access pornography and that she was chatting with adult men online. She used her school laptop to access a pornographic website, from her bedroom at night, using the neighbor’s unsecured wireless. What I did not find out until later was that she was making plans to meet one of the men that she had met online. In the 3 ½ months that this was happening neither the school nor the district was alerted by her inappropriate web usage from her school laptop.

Looking back I can remember when I picked my kids up after school I often saw 6th graders, with their laptops open outside of the houses that surrounded Golden Hill. They were accessing unsecured wireless too. I wonder what they were accessing outside before and after school that they weren’t allowed to access at home. My daughter told me that many of the students had found pornography on their school laptops with ease.

I took the laptop to the Fullerton School District to be searched by the Technology and Media Assistant Director Sam Ricchio. I was so angry. I asked him how it was possible for her to get onto such websites if there were so many firewalls in place. I wanted to know why they weren’t notified right away like they promised us that they would be if such searches were occurring. Unfortunately, he didn’t have any answers for me. He searched her computer for days before calling me and recommending that I take it to the police for a more detailed search.

I took the laptop to the Fullerton Police Department. They were successful at doing a forensic search on the computer. They told me that she was in fact chatting online using Yahoo Chat. They tried to send a warrant to Yahoo to get the records of the chat sessions, but because Yahoo purges the chats so quickly, it’s not possible to get the records. Since there were no records, no crime was committed and the case was closed. A month after everything with my daughter was revealed; the Fullerton Police Department came to Golden Hill and taught on internet safety.

The school had a meeting at the end of the year for the parents of graduating 6th grade students. Parents were given the option to keep the laptop or to turn it in. We were encouraged to keep the computer because “It’s still a great computer with incredible firewall protection for your child. If your child looks up the word, say, ‘breast cancer’, it’ll be flagged.” My husband was so appalled by this that he approached the principal, Robert Johnson, and the district Technology and Media Director, Ted Lai, afterwards to confront them on the lack of truth in what was being promised. Ted Lai said, “Your daughter is a brilliant hacker, and her situation is a one in one million case.” It’s unbelievable that he would rather make sensational claims and accusations instead of recognizing the huge gaping flaw in the laptop program, which is lack of safety for our children. I called the detective who handled our case, and I told him what Ted Lai said. He sounded shocked at what he heard, and assured me that he never said anything like that to the principal or Fullerton School District. He said that it was far from a one in a million case, and that a similar thing happened to a child who attended a neighboring junior high, only she actually got in the vehicle with the predator.

Sam Ricchio recommended that I take all laptops and computer cords into my bedroom at night for safekeeping. He does the same thing in his own home. Our daughter no longer has private computer access, and my neighbor has secured her wireless. I felt stupid for being so naïve in thinking that a child should have a laptop with access to whatever she could dream of. I felt safe in believing that a school district would have the best firewalls to protect my child like they promised that firewalls do. I do believe that parents have a responsibility to watch over their children, and this generation requires a new kind of vigilance, but I also believe that a school has the responsibility to be honest in their abilities to protect our children as well. Let’s face it. Kids are kids. If you give them the key to unlock Pandora’s Box, they’re going to unlock it. It is unnecessary and unsafe for a child of any age to be given a laptop of their own.

My goal in coming forward with this story is to make parents aware that personal school laptops for children are not safe even though firewalls are in place, regardless of how much a child is supervised. Most children are not kept under constant surveillance by parents, caregivers, after-school programs, or even on school campuses. Seemingly innocent chat rooms are the hunting grounds for child predators, and the internet itself is filled with material that a child of any age should not have access to. This is not an isolated incident. This is not an outstanding circumstance or child. This can happen to your child or a child that you know. The police told me to consider myself lucky that I have my daughter with me, and that I did not have to identify her body from somewhere. They were right. I am lucky. Countless other families aren’t as lucky though. You can protect your children from what Fullerton School District believes is a safe and beneficial program. You can choose to NOT purchase a school laptop for your child, and to NOT support the laptop program.

Galloway Announces Run For Supe

lori2
Galloway

We just came across a post by Art Pedroza over at his Orange Juice blog about Anaheim City Councilwoman Lorri Galloway announcing a 4th District County Supe campaign kick-off event.

A while back our friend Joe Sipowicz speculated that Galloway might have been nothing but a shill for John Lewis; a shill whose job it was to get Harry Sidhu to back down and preserve the Anaheim vote for Tom Daly – the heir apparent as selected by John Lewis.

Now it seems that Joe’s guesses were off the mark; or if that Galloway was just supposed to be a shill she is one no longer. In any case this seems like really bad news for both Daly and Sidhu who, if they go through with their plans must split the Anaheim vote one more time.

Abolish Fullerton’s RDRC!

Some folks say brick veneer is a perfect symbol of the RDRC...
Some folks say brick veneer is a perfect symbol of the RDRC...

In the post about brick veneer stuck on to the side of the proposed parking structure on Santa Fe (here), admin added a helpful comment that shared the minutes of the Redevelopment Design Review Committee (RDRC) meeting when the parking structure was considered by the committee. Although the members of the committee quibbled with this or that detail of the structure, none of them opposed or even questioned the project architects idiotic statement that the fake brick was there to “relate to” buildings on Harbor. One of the members even proposed the thin-set type of brick to save money

While we have to wonder if the architect had been coached beforehand by staff to pay homage to Fullerton’s obsession with brick veneer, the main point of this post is to ask why nobody on this hapless committee even bothered to question the comical notion that a concrete parking structure needed a fake veneer in order to relate to other fake brick veneer buildings in downtown Fullerton.

And so we repeat our challenge to Fullerton: ABOLISH THE RDRC!

Update: We have received word from an RDRC member that the committe was told that brick veneer was necessary as a CEQA mitigation for a Negative Declaration; that, in effect, the brick veneer would make the building compatible with other brick buildings in downtown Fullerton.

Just as we suspected. This “mitigation” is simply staff’s way of getting what they want: brick veneer. There is absolutely no need to “mitigate” a non-existent problem. If we can believe the RDRC member this was simply a matter of personal aesthetic taste – and poor taste at that. 

A Sign of Things to Come

We keep hearing that County Clerk Tom Daly wants to be our next county supervisor, replacing Chris Norby, the current job holder, who is termed out next year.

We have never cared much for the idea – not because Tom isn’t a likable sort of fellow, but instead because he has held a series of government jobs in and around the County since the 1980s and we don’t relish the thought of being represented by a typical insider, career politician-type.

What really worries us is the fact that the Democrat Daly is being energetically promoted by one-time conservative Republican John Lewis, the campaign consultant/lobbyist whose modus operandi is to get ’em into office and then begin to lobby ’em.

But back to the Daly campaign. Apart from Daly’s announcement away back in March – six months ago – we’ve heard virtually nothing about the his campaign, except that Lewis paid a loud visit to Chris Norby a few months ago trying to secure the latter’s endorsement for his man Daly. He didn’t get it.

So we’ve decided to help the Daly campaign. To that end we’ve designed a nifty campaign sign, several thousand of which we plan to decorate the Fourth Supervisorial District if in fact, Daly does decide to run after all. Hope you like it!

Daly-4-Sale-&-Career-Politician-22x30-[Converted]

Another Ackerman For Fullerton?

CA_ackermanphoto
You people remember my husband, right?

Martin Wisckol over at the Register wrote about the possibility of Mrs. Linda Ackerman, wife of  former State Senator, Assemblyman, Fullerton Councilman, and gerrymanderer par excellence , running in a special election to replace disgraced Mike “the Big Dripper” Duvall in Sacto. You can read about it right here .

Several thoughts spring immediately to mind. First, Wisckol reached Mrs. Ackerman while she and Dick were vacationing in France at the home of the Marquis de Sade. We’ll just let that one go except to add that that’s a pretty apt place to announce you’re might just replace Mike “Spanky” Duvall.

Second, Mrs. Ackerman doesn’t live in the district. She and Dick decamped a while back when his field of operations permitted him to move south. We don’t care for carpetbaggers even if they used to live here and we care even less for the spouses of politicos who trade on their mates political connections. Mrs. Ackerman’s political star has ascended in a not-so-curious trajectory, as her husband’s career wound down. She’s on the MWD board and that gives one cause to pause lately.

Third is the great irony of immediately placing yourself in the discussion about replacing a degenerate that was handpicked for office in the first place by your hubby and his “in crowd” GOP hacklings. Look how that one turned out!

Come on over to my ranch, and I'll tell you about the time I got famous.
Come on over to my ranch, and I'll tell you about the time I got famous.

Fourth, we read in Wisckol that Mrs. Ackerman claims she is conservative, but does not share Chris Norby’s anti-Redevelopment stance. In other words, she likes government intruding into local development and business, she likes affordable housing set-asides, she digs corporate subsidies, and she admires all the other big-government baggage that Redevelopment brings with it; hardly conservative at all, really. Well, hooray! Now we know what the Ackermans mean when they use the term conservative.

Finally, we note the possibility of a Norby-Ackerman rematch of the 1995 assembly election between Chris and Mrs. Ackerman’s husband, a spectacle in which Dick proved just how low he could go. Ackerman loathes Norby with a undisguised passion that has long since crossed over the threshold of obsession. Although the match would be highly entertaining, fulfilling a brain-dead family vendetta is a poor reason to do much of anything, let alone run for public office. Mrs. Ackerman should stay in Irvine.