Search Results for “budget deficit” – Page 3

January 8, 2011January 8, 2011Chris Norby

The Sudden Relevance of Chris Norby?

Norby-gets-roasted-195x110 — Mr. Speaker! Let's kill Redevelopment once and for all!

Way out here at the end of Screech Owl Road the silence is almost absolute – only occasionally ruptured by the stray thump of Marine helicopters in the distance. It gives a man time to think in peace and quiet, and I’ve been thinking about Chris Norby ever since his post the other day about the possibility of a stake in the heart of Redevelopment.

I started watching Norby’s political career in Fullerton back in the early 80s. During his days on the City Council he was effectively marginalized by the various majorities who saw Norby as an annoyance and an irritant. His 18 years saw almost no accomplishment at all; ditto his seven years as a County Supervisor, years in which his colleagues saddled you Orange Countians with a massive unfunded pension liability.

The gods were certainly kind to Norby when they presented him with an unforseen chance to extend his professional political career in the form of an open mike and an open Mike’s mouth. Still, what the gods giveth with one hand… 2010 saw a big Democratic majority and an opportunity to pass a budget with a mere 50%+1 of the Legislature. Total irrelevance for an OC Republican, right?

Well, maybe not. For those sly gods also finally presented Norby with an opportunity to be a Capitol player via a monstrous budget deficit and a Democratic governor who actually seems sincere in willing to dismantle Redevelopment – as well as to divert special taxes away from make-work, feel-good programs like the First Five scam.

Governor Brown will have to fight the entrenched Redevelopment lobby that has tentacles wrapped around members of both parties, and a budget proposal that goes after it may well need to be supported by Republicans, too. And when it comes to pulling the plug on Redevelopment nobody has a better record than Norby. A Brown-Norby alliance? Relevance at last? Who knows?

Better late than never.

March 12, 2010March 12, 2010MSM Falls on Face

Fullerton News Tribune As Worthless As Ever

by Jan Florys Dog8 Comments

Just in case anybody thought the Fullerton News Tribune might somehow become more, you know, relevant, with the departure of Barbara Giasone, they had better think again.

Let us contemplate this week’s edition. In a week when the City Council held a special meeting to discuss millions in projected budget deficits, the Thursday News Tribune’s big story (by a guy named Bruce Chambers), was about – drum roll – tulips.

Okay some guy grows tulips in his front yard, and that’s great. Tulips and daffodils are pretty and I love digging up flower beds. But is that news?

I don’t think so, but, what do I know. I’m just a dog.

March 11, 2010March 11, 2010Behind Closed Doors

CITY COUNCIL FAIL? THE LEAGUE OF CITIES

by admin24 Comments

The Fullerton City Council held a special meeting the other night to address the City’s projected budget deficits. It ain’t pretty.

biggest-hole — Man, that's a big ugly hole...

But even uglier was watching the discussion unfold on what to whack and what to keep when the discussion turned to the City’s membership in the California League of Cities – a do nothing operation run by bureaucrats for the purpose of promoting their own policies. The annual membership cost is something like $75,000 – not an inconsiderable sum.

To their credit both Shawn Nelson and Sharon Quirk-Silva recognized the elective character of this annual expense and are willing to dispense with it – a gesture both symbolic and practical. And then into the breach to save the day leaped council members Don Bankhead and Pam Keller, relating how important membership in this organization really is. Looks like Dick Jones is the swing vote on this.

Hmm. Bankhead and Keller. League of Cities. Now why does that ring a bell?

Oh yeah, now I remember. And here. These two spendthrifts attended the October 2008 League of Cities conference in Long Beach, a mere 25 miles from their front doors and racked up $400 per night waterfront hotel bills. Keller’s total was an embarrassing $1200+. Not even her die-hard posse could defend that profligacy.

The League of Cities is wonderful metaphor for government that can’t be bothered to control its spending and is accountable to no one. The real purpose of this operation is to give bureaucrats and ambitious local politicians a chance to hobnob, network, self-promote, and eat, drink and be merry on our dime. In some circles it is being claimed that Keller is using the League to wangle a seat on the OCTA, where her mission will be to promote Curt Pringle’s HSR agenda.

As long as free spenders like Bankhead and Keller promote this expensive joke we know we are not being properly represented.

And thanks to Nelson and Quirk-Silva for being accountable to the people of Fullerton.

July 15, 2026July 15, 2026About Us

Fullerton Throws Itself a Pity Party

by The Fullerton Harpoon25 Comments

Last night the Fullerton City Council held a special meeting. They called it a budget workshop, but it sure turned into a lachrymose affair. The weepy speechifying seemed more than a little rehearsed.

The meeting itself was more or less a rehash of previous meetings. Of course it should have been scheduled for July 7th but that would have interfered with the “community” budget sessions that week which staff claimed had 30 attendees; the survey that went out elicited about 70 responses. 100 out of 150,000 people. They had to admit that statistically, the responses didn’t mean much.

In an almost miraculous turn of events, staff cut the earlier projected deficit all the way down to $3.8 million. How, you ask? By eliminated vacant positions and jockeying some funds around.

Staff presented three scenarios: A, B, and C, in least to most draconian order, all draconian, of course. Option C basically kept the reserve funds around $16,000,000 by not using them in the next three years. None of the options involved laying anybody off or negotiating pay cuts with the unions. Keep that in mind, because the weepy handwringing that followed would make you think personal catastrophes had occurred.

Department by department got up to sing the blues to a receptive council. Goddamn, you’d think we were in the Mississippi Delta. The upshot was that nary a single department head had the grit to proclaim they’d get it done no matter what. No, that would be bad form.

I learned a couple of interesting facts. A police corporal – a corporal, mind you – costs $300,000 per year; and an Associate Planner is currently subsidized by the General Fund to the tune of $70,000 a year. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with the latter, the amount is shocking. It either means that Planning fees would not be sufficiently recovering costs, or that someone was projected to be costing the public an awful lot for general, non-billable time in City Hall.

I would be remiss indeed if I didn’t mention the good offices of consultant Grant Thornton, who, by means of a change order, presented a completely useless report whose “conclusions” were a summary of perfectly obvious statements. It was maddening to watch the consultant read off the Power Point slides, verbatim. I wonder how much that cost.

Public comments were highlighted by an extremely angry woman named Jody Vallejo, Chris Norby (who again touted the services of the Sheriff’s Department and the sale of surplus property), and a call in from the funny little boy-man Dominic Moonbeam

Won’t look you in the eye while you’re trashing him…

Then to the Council. Mayor Fred Jung read an odd and uncharacteristically long oration in which he took personal responsibility for the City’s budget situation and yet defended some of his more dubious votes and noted that Placentia’s privatizing their paramedics did them no good since they too, were having a budget crisis, a very strange and illogical statement. He offered that the unanticipated ICE intrusion into Fullerton was somehow responsible for some contribution to Fullerton’s financial woes, but gave nothing to support that claim. Overall, I couldn’t really figure out what in the world he was trying to communicate, although if I heard rightly he did seem to suggest at one point that a general sales tax was needed.

Shana Charles and Ahmad Zahra blathered on and on. I had to leave off to get a couple of frosty beverages. I did get back in time to watch “Dr.” Zahra compete with Jung to take responsibility for the situation, and that was pretty entertaining.

Fortunately, Jamie Valencia had little say other than to point out the relation between budget problems and municipal credit ratings; she emotionally and awkwardly read a prepared statement about the crisis, but reminded attendees that she’s only been around for a year and a half.

Nick Dunlap concluded the speechifying with a soliloquy that included the claim that somebody in the Sheriff Department confided to him that contracting with Fullerton for police services wouldn’t work and that the City would owe the Federal government an untold fortune if the Fullerton Airport were redeveloped. I think both these claims need to be substantiated.

As usual everybody sang the praises of “economic development,” the talismanic chant of those who are either extremely ignorant, extremely cynical, or extremely desperate. Just because it’s been an unproven bureaucratic activity in the past is no reason to doubt its efficacy in the future; it must be protected, even nurtured! No one said anything about proving that economic development even pays for itself. Don’t ask, don’t tell.

Needless to say, everyone also sang the praises of “police and fire” the ruthless and untouchable combination of unions that makes or breaks candidates and whose member suck up 70% of the General Fund.

The three-hour weep-fest ended in the usual way a morass of confusion out of which the City Manager, Eddie Manfo is supposed to make a final agenda item that will lead to an approval of the budget, now two weeks late. He pleaded for some direction about how to come back but got none. Oh, well. Eddie’s services cost us at least $400,000, a year, even more than a police corporal, so he ought to be able figure out something plausible.

In the end Manfro asked if it would be okay if the budget decision were made in August. Nobody said no. Then they all stood up and went home.

June 22, 2026June 22, 2026A Manfro All Seasons

The Dog Ate My Homework

by The Fullerton Harpoon44 Comments

Fullerton is supposed to have its budgets wrapped up by the end of June. That’s when fiscal years end and new ones begin. It’s in the Municipal Code.

But not this year. So a resolution was needed to keep the gears of government grinding in Fullerton at current levels so that “essential services” be maintained. At the June 16th meeting the City Council passed the appropriate resolution authorizing the continuation of the process into July. Here’s the casual explanation of what’s going on::

“Staff continues to evaluate revenue projections, expenditure estimates including cost containment and deficit reduction strategies, capital improvement requirements, reserve levels, organizational needs and other fiscal considerations as part of the FY 2026-27 budget development process.”

Permit me to translate the double talk: “a complete absence of leadership has stalled the process and nobody in City Hall has the remotest idea how to deal with the massive, impending budget shortfall except by taxation.”

We have seen over the past year the revitalization of the footling Budget Sustainability Committee that accomplished exactly nothing. Zero. Zip. Well, not quite nothing, because its members reflected the positions of those that appointed them. Dunlap’s appointee voted against all tax proposals offered up. Jung and Valencia’s appointees supported a half-cent special infrastructure tax, but not a general sales tax. Zahra and Charles’ appointees rejected a special sales tax and pushed for the one cent general sales tax.

One committee member suggested privatizing the Water Utility; another suggested borrowing from the deep pockets of the new (or old) waste hauler. Another idea was creating a business district to pay for the Downtown Fullerton deficit. Innovative concepts for a City on the edge of insolvency that got no traction. T he committee how disastrous budget cuts would be to the public, especially to the hallowed halls of “public safety” that sucks up the lion’s share of the budget. Service levels, donchaknow.

I don’t recall anybody discussing mandatory salary reductions. Maybe I missed it.

Which leaves the City with no viable tax path forward even getting one on the November ballot. Other revenue generating ideas went nowhere, including selling off real estate, particularly that where Water Fund activities are going on. Other ideas, such as selling the boutique hotel site aren’t practical because Council and staff and City Attorney have led to humiliation and fraud on the property and has seen it tied up in dispute.

Even as Fullerton’s “leaders” fiddled away their time, new information about huge accounting errors revealed the situation was even more dire than previously imagined.

It would be dereliction not to remind Friends that our illustrious City Council actually agreed to hire a bunch of ambulance drivers on credit and a dozen new “firefighters” at the behest of the their union even as the budget crisis loomed on the near horizon.

March 31, 2026April 2, 2026Boohooism

Jan Flory, Victim

by Mr. Peabody51 Comments

Sometimes you think you couldn’t make something up that is so ludicrous as to seem impossible.

And so it is with the case of Jan Flory vs. Fred Jung’s ballot statement that was determined on March 27th.

Not the outcome, per se, in which Jung had to change his designation from “Fullerton Mayor/Business owner” to “Fullerton Mayor/Businessman;” and had to remove from his statement the silly claim of opening 9 new parks and balancing a budget left unbalanced by predecessors.

No, Friends, the crazy, and unintentionally hilarious part was the last minute filing by Ms. Flory’s attorney meant to dodge a stay on the original writ of mandate. In this latest filing, Mr. Brett Murdock (who could not have possibly have composed it with a straight face) demanded immediate relief because Jung’s statement would cause poor Flory “irreparable harm.”

It’s pretty funny reading, all based on the premise that government is a business, and that business is hers:

“Petitioner Jan Flory is engaged in the business of government and politics“

A reputation is a terrible thing to waste…

The supposedly “practically libelous in nature” part is due to the implication that Flory – whose name does not even appear in Jung’s ballot statement – didn’t balance the budget during her fourth laborious canter around the Fullerton City Council track. This supposed assertion of her incompetence is said to impugn her professional political reputation; this so, so funny because every Friend is aware of Flory’s dismal record of incompetence and deceit on the City Council – from the years of Water Fund fraud, refusal to reform a culture of corruption at the FPD, Redevelopment disasters, and of course deficit spending, just to mention a few issues.

I have always hated you, and I always will…

And then there’s the specious and even more hilarious Murdock argument that if Jung were to win based on his ballot statement, it would deprive Flory of opportunities to possibly serve on one of the many County commissions and boards, some of which might offer remuneration:

“If published in the official election material, Jung is more likely to win the election. As a political opponent, Petitioner is unlikely to be appointed by the Supervisor to any of the County’s 85, (sic) boards, commissions and committees; whereas as a highly-qualified and prominent supporter of Traut, she may well earn an appointment.

Membership on a board or commission not only comes with political advantages, but pecuniary advantages as the County “pays certain board and commission members stipends for attending meetings.”

Other benefits—for which “it would be extremely difficult to ascertain the amount”—could accrue to prominent supporters of a winning candidate, including opportunities to be hired as staff counsel or prestige in the community as a lawyer or lobbyist.”

I can’t imagine which “community” would consider Flory as a lawyer – she quit her lawyering, good or bad, years and years ago. Flory the octogenarian lobbyist if Traut gets elected? Who’s kidding who? Her victimhood is based on not being able to be a political hack?

All of this adds up to very little, really, except to spread a little unintended humor to the good people of Fullerton.

March 21, 2026March 21, 2026Behind Closed Doors

Don’t Worry, Be Happy!

by The Fullerton Harpoon15 Comments

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

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

City of Fullerton Budget Update

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

June 13, 2024June 13, 2024Ahmad Zahra

Revenue Enhancement Time. Plus Lies and More Lies

by Joe Sipowicz8 Comments

Last Tuesday the Fullerton City Council voted 4-1 to approve the ’24-’25 city budget. Whitaker, as usual voted no. The budget projects big deficits as we’ve already heard.

After that the Council was presented with “revenue enhancement” ideas – the same old nonsense that we’ve already talked about, here. At first these ideas were simply floated to make it look like somebody had given some thought to find other ways, however silly, to address the tsunami of red ink; but in reality the point was to push a general sales tax, a movement that had been subtly going on for many months.

However the proposals agendized last Tuesday did not include a sales tax this fall, a sure indicator that the City Manager has polled the Council and knows he doesn’t have the votes to put it on the ballot. But that didn’t stop Councilmembers Charles and Zahra from pitching and pitching and pitching the idea; and finally supporting each other to get the issue of a sales tax on the an agenda, pronto, in time to schedule it for the November election.

But before that happened the public was treated to some of the most blatant and self serving re-writing of Fullerton history I have ever heard.

If I knew what I was talking about this wouldn’t be Fullerton!

Shana Charles started off with long-winded blabbering that was irrelevant, self-contradictory, confusing, and erroneous. Of course – “decimated” staff, the ill-effects of right-sizing,” reduced response times – the usual liberal litany of problems were simply meant as an introduction to the sales tax proposal. Her complaint was that previous councils had made mistakes, not by exercising fiscal restraint, but by “cutting to the bone.”

Charles then lauded the wonderful benefits that the City of Placentia derived from it’s Measure U sales tax that saved it, having declared bankruptcy – a statement completely false. She failed to mention the fact that Placentia has saved millions by getting their “fire fighters” out of the paramedic business, an idea of which her Fullerton fire fighter union pals are terrified.

While patting herself on the back for very recent staff and service level increases, she failed to see the rich irony of her own incompetence on the edge of a precipice: a situation well-understood when she voted for last year’s budget.

More economic development, better wardrobe…

If Charles blathered nonsense, Zahra just lied about Fullerton’s recent fiscal history, most likely because he has been on the City Council for 6 years, and has his greasy fingerprints all over the budgetary disaster.

According to Zahra, our problem reaches back decades and only now is the Council addressing the problem. Of course our City Councils have made bad decisions over the years, but the current disaster is of very recent vintage and has also occurred while he has been on the City Council.

For several years in the mid and late teens Fullerton was dipping into reserve funds to pay the freight, even as Zahra’s allies Jan Flory and Jennifer Fitzgerald and Jesus Quirk- Silva were lying to the public about the budget being balanced. It wasn’t. In fact the City continued in its cavalier way until Fred Jung and Nick Dunlap joined Bruce Whitaker on the council in 2020.

Measure S Covid Lie — Let me count the ways…

Zahra related how he, as a precinct-walking candidate, noted how people wanted better roads and how his predecessors had promised them, too, but that they failed. He didn’t note the fact that Fullerton’s public safety employees were hogging up bigger and bigger shares of the budget – as they still do.

The subject of Zahra’s failed 2020 Measure S sales tax came up, a sore subject, apparently, since his underserved constituents in D5 voted for it. So let us not stop from revisiting it, and right now! Charles chimed in that well she people she spoke to voted against it because there was no sunset provision, and, get this – because there was no oversight committee!

As an aside, I have to share that Zahra made an hilarious little speech about he could not support an infrastructure improvement bond because voting for municipal debt would keep him awake at night!

Bruce Whitaker made just about the only insightful comment of the discussion, namely: that cities can control costs but they can’t control revenue, an observation that flies in the face of the revenue enhancement propaganda, but that is perfectly true. As has been stated here before: nobody even knows if an Economic Development Manager even pays for himself in terms of incremental tax increase.

I will wrap this up by acknowledging a Zoom caller who actually did make a good revenue enhancing and who identified a huge fiscal problem: downtown Fullerton, the annual sinkhole that makes millions for the scofflaw club owners and that leaves the taxpayers with a $1,500,000 bill. He suggested a special assessment on these eager party entrepreneurs to pay for the havoc their booze and their customers cause. Not surprisingly, none of the council members even mentioned the problem. They never do.

April 23, 2024April 23, 2024Ahmad Zahra

The Fiscal Cliff

by The Fullerton Harpoon33 Comments

The Fullerton City Council is holding a special meeting tonight – a 2024-25 Budget “workshop.” No work will get done but there will be shopping going on as staff begins its formal press to raise a sales tax.

There is a lot of self-serving verbiage about how well our City staff has performed its tasks up ’til now, but then the hard reality hits because budget numbers can’t pat themselves on the back.

There are some harrowing numbers in the proposed budget – including a $9,400,000 draw-down from strategic reserves. This means of course, that the budget is no where near balanced as City Hall apologists like Jennifer Fitzgerald and Jan Flory claimed when they ran the place into the red almost every year.

M. Eric Levitt. Will he save us from ourselves?

Let’s let our City Manager, Eric Levitt tell the tale:

“Financial Stability. The City has been able to over the last two years (for the first time in recent history of the City) to reach and maintain a 17% contingency reserve level. This budget maintains that reserve level; however due to an operating deficit, we will be utilizing one-time excess reserves this year and coming close to that 17% level in FY 2024-25 and below that in years beyond next year“

The overall picture gets even worse as the levels of reserves slowly dwindle away. After this year Fullerton continues to be upside from $7.5 to $8.8 million each year until the end of the dismal decade. We are not favored with the running reserve funds balances.

Infrastructure is supposedly a big deal. Which reminds me of a quotation attributed to Mark Twain: Everybody talks about the weather but nobody does anything about it. But this year we are told, we can push get going on our deteriorating infrastructure along by borrowing! Once again let’s heed the words of Mr. Levitt:

“I have also put together a strategy to increase that funding level to closer to $14 million over the next four years through the use of financing. However, there are both upsides and downsides to this approach which will be discussed with you in more detail at today’s presentation.“

Now this should be a red flag: borrowing to perform maintenance, a basic accounting no-no. And what form will the borrowing take? Not a municipal bond, you can be sure, It would likely be by selling certificates of participation or some other dodge to avoid municipal debt restrictions. Here’s the table that shows our Maintenance of Effort (MOE) shortfall without financing.

Now we all know that interest payments are made by somebody, somewhere, and that somebody is you and me. We get to pay the interest on debt incurred by years of municipal mismanagement by people like Joe Felz and Ken Domer and Jeff Collier who get to sail off to a glorious and massively pensioned retirement at 55 years of age.

And finally, to circle back to the story lead, here’s a distasteful nugget carefully slipped into the City Manager’s report:

“Staff recommends City Council review options over the next year to stabilize the budget and ensure the City remains financially sound.“

Jesus H. There it is. Not quite explicitly stated, but we know very well where this is going. Another general sales tax effort, just like the ill-fated Measure S of four years ago. The seeds for this have already been planted, of course, in a nasty little taxpayer-funded fishing expedition in the guise of a community survey. Last November I regaled the Friends with this slimy maneuver, here.

By the way, this is exactly the same process City Hall rolled out four years ago. And we will be told By Ahmad Zahra, Shana Charles and Vivian Jaramillo that if we don’t pony up we will be morally deficient.

Well, good luck Friends. This is going to be a long year and you can bet the farm that we will be asked to pick up the check – again.

May 16, 2023May 16, 2023Ahmad Zahra

Fullerton’s Fiscal Ship About to Take on Water. Nobody Has a Clue What to Do

by Joe Sipowicz22 Comments

A few weeks ago the Daily Titan published an article about how, in a few years, Fullerton is going to be running in the red. Deep red. City projections point to being upside down $19 million between 2024 and 2028. Now that’s not very good, is it?

Here’s the grim forecast:

Naturally, the article quickly devolved into a vehicle for advocating the hiring of more people and paying them more, replete with completely fraudulent comparative pay statistics. On hand were Ahmad Zahra and his helper Shana Charles to bleat about unfilled positions and service deficits, always the first opening salvo in a new tax proposal – like the one Zahra pushed hard in 2020.

The head and the hat were a perfect fit.

Doug Chaffee, the senile Fourth District Supervisor of Orange County and a former Fullerton mayor contributed this gem to the conversation: “I think I would have been a little heavier on keeping our staff because they are the lifeblood of the city. They do the work.” Uh, huh. He failed to mention his own inept culpability in mismanaging Fullerton’s budget for years.

Hilariously, Zahra seems to think the phrase “economic development” has some sort of talismanic quality, as if there were anything City Hall could do to produce it. It never worked during the heyday of Redevelopment and it won’t do anything now. It’s just a shiny distraction that can’t even pay for the bumblers who are paid, and paid very well, to pursue it.

What economic development really means is a focus on increasing tax revenue to pay for the salaries and benefits of public employees and their bloated, guaranteed pensions. It would be refreshing if just once elected folks thought about less about raising revenue and more about living within budgetary constraints.

Mayor Fred Jung calmly opined that Fullerton has adequate reserves to handle the tsunami of red ink coming his way, but this is not reassuring. Fullerton went through the same crimson bath during the Fitzgerald/Chaffee/Quirk-Silva/Flory/Zahra regime, and anybody who thinks Fullerton is better off for the deficit spending it is a damn fool.