Bleeding Hearts Line Up for Redevelopment Cash

bleedh

Apparently, the Redevelopment staff got the word out to those already receiving City funds to get behind this redevelopment expansion if you want to score brownie points and maybe a little more dinero.

Speakers at Tuesday’s hearing in favor of the expansion included Jim Ranii of the Museum Board. Of course, the Museum is not blighted (is it, Jim?) and is not eligible for any funding by expanding the RDA. Muckenthaler Director Zoot Velasco talked of the “hidden blight” in Southwest Fullerton. Let’s hope its not so well hidden when it’s challenged in court. And, Zoot, the Muck cannot receive any future loot, so why allow yourself to be used by RDA staff? Then the folks from OCCLA who want grafitti removal (714-738-3108) and code enforcement (they don’t need redevelopment for either), and the Chamber of Commerce director Terresa Harvey, begging for hand outs for her fellow board members like Scott Dowds (who also spoke in favor). And lastly let’s not forget old Louis Kuntz Sr., who supported the expansion as well. Not surprising, since his son Louis Jr. and the Morgan Company who already got an $18 million public gift (including the gift of a public street–100 block East Whiting) from the Agency for his downtown apartment complex…. maybe there are some more profitable projects looming for him in the expanded area.

Now you know what happened to E. Whiting Ave.
Now you know what happened to E. Whiting Ave.

Of course, their pleas had nothing to do with blight. In order to legally declare an area “redevelopment” the area must be blighted.

The process limps forward towards a legal battle, with Shawn Nelson and Sharon Quirk in opposition. At least Nelson and Quirk respect the law that they have sworn to uphold. Stay tuned.

Sharon Quirk Quashes Bad Deals

sqDSC_4313

Fullerton residents owe Councilwoman Sharon Quirk a big thank you for her stellar performance at last night’s City Council meeting. Quirk displayed responsible leadership and accountability to the citizens of Fullerton. Furthermore, she made a decision that saved Fullerton taxpayers $6 million while taking the leadership role in quashing the controversial McDonald’s move.

The best part of the night was that she was humble enough to admit error; she had previously supported McD’s McMove, but she realized that move was detrimental to Fullerton taxpayers and she had the courage to stand on principle.

Additionally,  she tried to save the city/agency plenty more by voting against the RDA’s bogus blight findings that it is sure to lose in court.

We are proud to have Sharon Quirk as a Friend For Fullerton’s Future.

Quirk Kills Bad Burger Deal; Fox Block Kicks the Bucket

Residents witnessed another rousing victory for FFFF last night as Councilwoman Sharon Quirk wisely reversed direction on Fullerton’s famous $6 million dollar burger deal that would give away a brand new McDonald’s restaurant at taxpayers’ expense.  Pam Keller sensed the inevitable failure of this project and also changed course, sending this turkey down in a 4-1 vote. Nelson and Jones had it right from the beginning, but Bankhead rode this one all the way to the grave.

burger-squashed
No thanks, we're not hungry anymore

Now that the taxpayer-funded McDonald’s move is dead, there isn’t much hope for the massive Fox Block redevelopment scheme – and that’s fine by us. The Fox Block had little to do with the popular restoration of the historic Fox Theatre and there was plenty of doubt the that the block would be financially viable even with millions in taxpayer subsidies.  Throw in a little public deception about the height of the buildings, and it’s clear that this project needed to be flushed.

Even if you don’t approve of our approach here at FFFF, it’s hard to deny positive results. It’s good to see our representatives fix bad decisions and move forward. We know it’s tough to admit when you are wrong, but that’s part of responsible governance. Thank you, Quirk and Keller, for doing the right thing.

Coyote Hills Development – What’s Next?

After years of passionate debate, the development of West Coyote Hills seems to be moving forward. If all goes according to plan, a series of public hearings before various commissions will lead up to a final approval by City Council in October.

Nearly a decade of intense activism has paid off, and the group Friends of Coyote Hills has forced some serious compromises from the development plans of Pacific Coast Homes (a subsidiary of Chevron). The plan has been reduced to 760 homes with 352 acres set aside as “open space,” including the 72-acre Robert E. Ward Nature Preserve on the east end.

naturepreserve
Where does "The Preserve" end and the "Robert E Ward Nature Preserve" begin? What's the difference?

The Friends of Coyote Hills still aren’t happy, but it is doubtful that they will be able to accomplish their ultimate goal – using the heavy hand of government to devalue the property and then spending tax dollars to buy the entire 510 acres and set it aside as a park and preserve.  A lack of funds and the commercial wheels of progress have run over that idea, whether it was righteous or not.

Of course, any group of concerned citizens would be wise to pore over every last detail in the volumes of documents submitted for this project. History shows that city staff, commissioners and council are incapable of conducting enough forward-looking due diligence on their own, especially on a project of this scale. Any and every question should be brought up to the relevant commissions. Ambiguous answers should not be accepted from anyone. Decision-makers must be held accountable for ensuring that expensive surprises do not hit taxpayer wallets down the road.

There is an informational meeting on the Coyote Hills project at 7:00 pm on July 8th at the Senior Center. Anyone who is interested should attend.

Jeff Oderman: The High Price of Bad Advice

Rutan T3661222739_afe6cd6f9b

Fans of Evita will remember these lyrics: “When the money keeps rolling in, you don’t ask how. Think of all the people guaranteed a good time, now!”

Well, a lot of people at Rutan and Tucker Law firm have made plenty $$$ off Fullerton taxpayers, especially its redevelopment attorney Jeff Oderman.

Oderman has a record of loyalty to city staff and staff-directed projects, even if it means bamboozling the council (acting as redevelopment agency). Take the City Lights low-income housing project on East Commonwealth (next to the Old Post Office). In 1997 the Agency-assigned developer Caleb Nelson (who was living out of his car) disappeared. The whole deal should have ben sent back to the Council for reconsideration. A request-for-proposal should have been issued to give developers an equal opportunity.

Instead, LA developer Ajit Mithaiwala appears from nowhere to take over the project. Then-RDA Director Chaplupsky starts dealing with Ajit, until council members Norby, Sa and Jones start wondering aloud– “where did this developer come from?” Oderman claimed Ajit was now the developer. Not true, Jeff! Despite demands from the council majority, no document was ever produced showing that Mithaiwala had ever been legally assigned the project. His shoddy construction of LA projects was also a concern.

voila, it's that simple
voila, it's that simple

The council saw past Oderman’s bad advice and voted to end the project. Then, Mithaiwala threatened to sue Dick Jones personally for derogatory comments he made about future tenants. Jones got no protection from Oderman and instead Jones was pressured to change his vote. He did, and the project went through.

In 1999 the City started a breach-of-contract suit against Southwest Engineering, Inc. for non-performance on the Basque Yard remodel.  It turned out that Southwest had used Rutan and Tucker to defend itself against a similar suit with another city. For a firm to represent both parties in a lawsuit–even if not the same case–is a serious question of legal ethics. Yet Oderman never told the council, who found out about it from a third source–when it was too late to change lawyers.

Oderman then recommends the City settle with the non-performing contractor, paying Southwest over $1 million.

Now Oderman is giving the council/agency the same bad advice on blight in the proposed expanded redevelopment area. Its passage will lead to at least two legal challenges on the bogus blight findings. County Counsel Attorney James Harman and FFFF’s attorney Bob Ferguson have stated convincingly and repeatedly why the blight findings fail legal muster.

Similar blight findings in many other cities–including Upland, Mammoth Lakes, Diamond Bar, Murietta, Arcadia and Glendora–have been thrown out by the courts. Fullerton’s may well be headed in that direction. Has Oderman cautioned the council about the legal risks? Or is he there to provide cover for the staff and the consultants?

But, what does Oderman care? A lengthy lawsuit only adds to his hourly billings ($400/hr. adds up pretty fast). Win or lose, he’ll still be paid. If Oderman is really so confident about winning the long legal blight fight ahead, then pay him on a contingency!

Please, City Council–hire a lawyer to represent you–not defend staff boondoggles. Until then, the money keeps rolling in for Rutan and Tucker! $400 per hour for 15 years of bad advice.

Thanks suckers!
Thanks suckers! J. O.

Fox Block: The Missing Slide

At a recent Fox Block community workshop, the Redevelopment Agency made every attempt to direct public discussion away from the height and scale of the proposed commercial structure. The agency even went so far as to not show any elevational drawings, although they did pepper the room with 1st and 2nd floor plans. Even the blunt question of “how many floors will it be?” was answered with reassuring answer “We don’t know, we’ll figure that out later”.

Well Friends, we have discovered the elusive drawing in Arteco’s proposal that was submitted last year. This is what the audience should have been shown:

fox-missing-slide
Click to enlarge - 68 feet of glorious redevelopment

Why didn’t the public get to see this important drawing at the meeting? There were plenty of concerned neighbors at the meeting who would have loved to see what their neighborhood will look like should this project be completed.

After the nasty battle over the height of the Amerige Court boondoggle, don’t you think they would bring this issue into the light at the very beginning? Why can’t Arteco Partners and the Redevelopment Agency be honest with the citizens of Fullerton?

Time to “Rethink” The Fox

1934cornerview

Ever since the City of  Fullerton climbed aboard the “Save the Fox” bandwagon, something was just plain wrong.  Somehow the redevelopment bureaucrats inculcated into the public mindset the story that the only way the Fox could be “saved” was by appending it to another massive downtown housing project. To facilitate the latter the city had to relocate a fast food franchise; to accomplish that they had to buy up property on Pomona Ave. at exorbitant prices.

And so the initial make work myth has created a cascade of expensive, almost comical decisions by the city council.

Why was the linkage between the Fox and a new project a quote “myth”? Let’s apply some common sense to the issue. It was assumed (correctly) that the theater was going to require massive subsidy to restore and to operate; but somehow the city believed this loss could be rolled into a larger, profitable project by some private developer, or to be more precise, the city staff believed they could sell this bag of magic beans to the public. Three city council members (Don Bankhead, Pam Keller and Sharon Quirk) are still waiting for the beanstalk to grow.

magic beans, only in Fullerton
magic beans only grow in Fullerton

There is no logical connection between restoring the Fox and the development of any new project! The fact is that whoever developed this “project” will receive massive subsidies from the Redevelopment Agency which will cover the cost of the Fox, developers do not do anything for free.

And so why doesn’t the city at least be honest: come out and acknowledge the cost of restoring and operating the Fox-and if it is deemed a worthy municipal value grant the money directly to saving the Fox. Or better yet why not let the people vote on weather or not to create a permanent Fox restoration and operations budget? Honesty and transparency. Two other civic values.

Roscoe Finally Comes to his Senses

Rosco
Roscoe's illegally constructed outdoor patio

Dear Friends, a few weeks back Friends for Fullerton’s Future filed an appeal of the appalling decision by the Fullerton Planning Commission to grant a bogus “special event” permit to Roscoe’s in order to legitimize the ongoing violation of the City ordinance regarding outdoor live amplified music in the C-3 Zone. The appeal was based on the fact that playing live amplified music outdoors is detrimental to the health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare of persons visiting, residing or working in the neighborhood and is injurious to property or improvements in the area.

We are pleased to inform you that as a result of our appeal, Roscoe’s has withdrawn their application, therefore no public hearing on Roscoe’s appeal will be necessary.  calm

City Council Hearing on McDonalds $6 Million Subsidy

Oh boy, it's McSpanish McMission Revival
What's that in the background, more McSpanish McMission Revival?

On July 7th at 6:30, the Fullerton Redevelopment machine is revved up and ready to shove the $6 Million Dollar burger plan, fake old and all, down the public’s  throat.

APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER: FULLERTON REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY.

A request to construct an approximately 4,400 square-foot drive through fast food restaurant for McDonalds in a Community Improvement District, which includes applications for a minor (doesn’t sound minor to me) development project for the site plan and architecture (fake old crappola that people are sick of), and a tenative parcel map for lot consideration and lot line adjustment purposes, on property presently located (and owned by the Redevelopment Agency, ie. tax payers) at 501 N. Pomona Ave. (N.W. corner of Chapman and Pomona,  across the street from Fullerton High School), (Categorically exempt under Section 15332 of CEQA Guidlines).

How could this project be exempt under CEQA? It’s a proven fact that this project will be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the kids attending Fullerton High School and injurious to property or improvements to the area. This McD’s project is a part of a larger project which must be considered ONE project! I smell a Mclaw suit ! ! !

Smile now, cry later
Smile now, cry later