Fruity Lexia in a box has been named the Official Wine of Friends for Fullerton’s Future.
Fullerton Friends spokesmodels Heidi and Karin enjoy their favorite alcoholic beverage between blogging sessions on FFFF.
If county bureaucrat Hieu Nguyen thinks Dick Ackerman can help his Clerk-Recorder campaign, he’d better think again. There is one word for Ackerman-backed city and county candidates: LOSERS.
Is it just bad luck? Or does Dick choose weak candidates he can control after they’re elected? The problem for him is that they don’t get elected!
Look at the record of Dick’s choices, dating back over a quarter-century:
- 1982: Ackerman backs insurance agent Jim Williams for Fullerton City Council. Williams loses to Molly McClanahan.
- 1984: Dick endorses realtor Merrill Braucht for the open council seat. Braucht loses to Chris Norby.
- 1988: Dick supports Dan Baker for an open council seat. Baker loses to Don Bankhead.
- 1992: Ackerman goes 0-for-2 in ’92. His hand-picked candidates Jim Blake and Jack Beddell place 5th and 6th.
- 1994: Ackerman vocally opposes the recall of Buck Catlin, Bankhead and McClanahan. That trio had rubber-stamped an unpopular new utility tax foisted by City Manager Jim Armstrong. The recall easily passes, all three leave office and the tax is repealed.
- 1996: Dick endorses fellow legislator Mickey Conroy for Third District Supervisor. Conroy loses his cool—and the election–when he flips his opponent the bird during a debate. Brea School Board Member Todd Spitzer wins handily.
- 2002: Like 1992, Dick goes 0-2 in 2002. He actively supports Supervisor Cynthia Coad’s re-election and is featured prominently in her mailers. Coad loses to Norby. Later that year he backs accountant Chuck Munson for Fullerton City Council. Munson is buried by Shawn Nelson.
To be fair, there is one current Council Member who was elected and thrice re-elected with Dick Ackerman’s support: Dick Jones.
Just in case any objective person needed more evidence that the basis of the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency’s proposed land-grab is unadulterated hog wash, we share a letter from an individual whose property is currently within the proposed boundaries; and of course we include a copy of the response from the City.
In his letter to the Agency, longtime Fullerton resident and businessman Mr. Paul O’Neil of AEROMARK, provides a rather comprehensive indictment of the entire expansion process and its ultimate conclusion of “blight.” He concludes his letter with a request to have his property deleted from the project area. In response Agency Director Rob Zur Schmiede agrees that the property can be excluded because it is near the boundary, because it not necessary to further the goals of the project, and because Mr O’Neil wrote a letter!
Well, Mr. Zur Schmiede’s missive begs several pertinent questions that go to the very heart of the Agency’s competency and honesty in this whole matter. First, if the property in question is on the edge and not necessary, why was it included by the City’s “expert” consultant in the first place? Second, why does the fact that Mr. O’Neil wrote a letter asking to be removed have any bearing on the supposed “findings” necessary to include it? This response gives every indication of being nothing but a way to shut up potentially vocal opposition to the expansion by an obviously informed, and unhappy property owner. If the mere fact of “writing a letter” is a germane to exclusion of a property, then it seems like every single property owner ought to have the same right.
We also note that exclusion of Mr. O’Neil’s “edge” property from the project would simply create a new “edge” property right next door. At the very least that property’s owner should have the same opportunity as Mr. O’Neil to have his property deleted from the expansion – thus creating another edge property!
This whole process of Redevelopment expansion, including both analysis and notification, seems to have been undertaken in an incredibly haphazard way. Who can say whether this was intentional. Not us. But we have our suspicions – as do a growing number of affected businesses and property owners.
The ‘ol H2O seems to be on a lot of people’s minds these days, and as ever more people wrangle over the available resource, why not?
This time of year the City of Fullerton addresses the issue of water rates it charges the users of this commodity as part of its budget voodoo. What many people fail to realize is that not only does this water revenue go to running the waterworks, per se, but that 10% of the gross revenue is siphoned off into the General Fund to pay for salaries and benefits of people who have nothing to do with the purchase and transmission of water. In the next two years the projected amount of liquid gold is projected to be over $5.3 million, a tidy sum, to be sure.
This little financial two-step is called the “in-lieu franchise fee” in which the City treats the water enterprise fund as if it were a separate utility – and milks it like a cash cow. Can anybody possibly believe that there is a direct and attributable cost to the City’s General Fund of $2.7 million a year to operate the waterworks?
What all of this means is that every time water rates are raised there is an indisputable raise in the amount transferred into the General Fund. Another apt term for this raise is a tax increase, pure and simple, disguised in this case by being included as part of a “fee.” Year after year the Fullerton City Council has embraced this cheapjack swindle, perhaps not caring that the water rate payers (including many businesses) are carrying a disproportionate tax burden. It’s enough for them that no taxes were seen to be raised.
Next time you cross paths with one of your councilmembers why not ask them why the water “in-lieu franchise fee” is so high, and ask them to justify it. If you get a cogent answer please let us know!
The verdict is in, Jack Franklyn owner of Roscoes is above the law.
We have to say this for FSD Trustee Hilda Sugarman. She puts her Premier Cru on the line for what she believes in. And what she believes is that her elementary school kids need laptops to be properly educated.
Mrs. Sugarman is one of the masterminds of the FSD laptop program that has given us (and the ACLU) such heartburn. Perhaps not coincidentally, she is also the President of the Fullerton Excellence in Education Foundation (or at least was as late as 2008); the pupose of the foundation, per its website is to support the technology/laptop education in the FSD, etc.
We have heard on the grapevine that the Foundation has pledged $120,000 to the district program over the next two years, which is fortunate since the program seems to be in the hole for at least that much in unanticipated costs in this year’s budget. Seems some folks don’t want to pick up the tab for pricey laptops.
But on to the the bibulations!
This evening, the Foundation holds an “exclusive” wine auction over at the Arboretum. Lots of locals are involved and it looks like many of Sugarman’s in-laws are event sponsors; and, again we give kudos to Hilda for doing a little intrafamily arm twisting.
We’re sure a good time will be had by all, and that everybody goes home feeling downright philanthropic. But let’s hope that at least some of the attendees come to reflect upon FSD Superintendant Mitch Hovey’s blithering baloney on the FEEF website:
“To be effective in the 21st century, the Fullerton School District believes that students must be able to develop innovative products and processes using technology, construct knowledge and demonstrate creative thinking.”
We really have no idea what this statement means, but in any case it seems to imply a pretty tall order for an eight-year old. We here at FFFF are somewhat old fashioned, and think that its the job of our elementary schools to teach kids how to read, write, and do some ‘rithmatic; and maybe along the way learn to think a little bit for themselves. Mitch, please consider scaling back your goals for success to something comprehendable, reasonable and measurable.
US Congressman Ed Royce has endorsed Fullerton City Councilman Shawn Nelson in his bid to replace outgoing Chris Norby as the OC 4th District Supervisor. Here’s the letter, purloined from Nelson’s campaign website:
This is good news for Shawn, but hardly surprising. The bigger question is whether other Republican politicos will start coalescing behind Nelson without expecting to be paid for the honor.
And speaking of politicos when is Chris Norby, the would-be County Clerk, going to get up off his duff and endorse a conservative Republican?
Finally, when we reflect upon some of the intellectual and philosophical ciphers Ed Royce has stuck Fullerton with in the past 15 years on both the City Council and the various school boards, we have to ponder the value of his endorsement. Still, as far as the rank and file are concerned it is better to have it than not.
FSD Trustee Hilda Sugarman, one of the masterminds of the district’s $1500 laptop flop actually reads our blog, as evidenced by the following e-mail string. The funny thing is she thought she was sending an e-mail to somebody else (the Superintendant?) when she was actually sending it right back to us!
Our own Travis Kiger, author of the laptop post, politely notified Mrs. Sugaman of this fact, courteously invited her to correct any errors in his post, and promised to publish them. Hilda is right: Travis is a lovely person!
Sugarman has yet to respond but we’ll give her some time to get a response written for her by district staff. If and when she does get back to us, Travis will be sure to post these “corrections” – whatever they may be.
You see, unlike public agencies we always welcome correction and are not afraid to admit it if we get something wrong!
Here are the e-mails:
From: Fullertons Future <info@friendsforfullertonsfuture.org>
To: Hilda Sugarman <hilda_sugarman@fsd.k12.ca.us>
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Subject: Re: [Friends For Fullerton’s Future] School District Still Forcing Parents to Buy $1,500 Apple Laptops
Hilda, I believe you meant to forward this email to someone else, but instead you replied back to us.
I am the author of this story. If there are errors in the story please send them to me and I will add a postscript – or feel free to reply in the comments.
Travis Kiger
From: Hilda Sugarman <hilda_sugarman@fsd.k12.ca.us>
To: Fullertons Future <info@friendsforfullertonsfuture.org>
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2009
Subject: Re: [Friends For Fullerton’s Future] School District Still Forcing Parents to Buy $1,500 Apple Laptops
REad the article. Do you know who this lovely person is? Do you think it is worth correcting the errors?
Hilda
On Jun 3, 2009, Fullertons Future wrote:
Hello,You may be interested in this article:
School District Still Forcing Parents to Buy $1,500 Apple Laptops
Posted On June 3, 2009
As another school year comes to an end, the Fullerton School District is telling parents that it’s time to pay $1,500 for a brand new laptop for each of their children. Included in the presentation is a reminder that if they don’t get a laptop, the school district will ship…
View the rest of this article at http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2009/fullerton-school-laptop-program/
We haven’t posted anything on Anaheim’s Harry Sidhu and his bid for the 4th District County Supe race in some time. And we have been negligent in not passing along news of his upcoming fundraiser on June 20th. His “host committee” (remember – the guys who get in free) include a roster of current and former Anaheim politicos.
This is surely bad news for the other Anaheim candidate, Tom Daly who must be chaffing at the thought of Harry grabbing the support of Anaheim’s old guard both Republican and Democrat. That may actually be a reflection of Tom’s real popularity south of the 91. His campaign mastermind, John Lewis, must be plenty pissed off about it, too.
But back to Harry. He has a wee bit of a problem. Harry does not live in the 4th District, but in the posh precincts of Anaheim Hills, in the 3rd. He has stated that he will buy an address in the 4th, for appearances and legal requirements, presumably, because nobody expects him to move out of his cozy compound in the hills. None of this reflects well on Harry who can be seen as a perennial office seeker with more money than sense.
In the meantime Fullerton’s Shawn Nelson has already launched his campaign for the 4th and has a website under construction.