Proposition 22 here, is an initiative supported by the California League of Cities and Redevelopment agencies and their lobbyists.
Voting yes on 22 would prohibit the State from restricting the use of tax revenues dedicated by law to fund local government services, community redevelopment projects, or transportation projects and services. It would prohibit the State from delaying the distribution of tax revenues for these purposes even when the Governor deems it necessary due to a severe state fiscal hardship.
The question boils down to whether the State should have the authority to redistribute redevelopment property tax increment funds and use it for schools, and fire departments.
The clip below was taken at the GOP state convention held this past weekend in San Diego and features the Yes on 22 proponents debating State Assemblyman Chris Norby at the Endorsement Committee meeting. Each party was given 3 minutes to make their pitch, the Yes on 22 proponents spoke for 3-1/2 minutes, however when Assemblyman Norby was only 2-1/2 minutes into his speech (6:58) one of the 22 proponents rudely interrupted Norby and yelled “TIME” even though Norby still had 30 seconds left of his 3 minutes.
My next post will feature video footage of questions and answers by both Norby (No on 22) and the Yes on 22 proponents. There’s also a little treat at the very end of the clip, enjoy!
Good morning. Today we pass along this anonymous letter regarding the GOP Central Committee meeting last night:
Last night I had a few hours to kill so I stopped by the OCGOP Central Committee in Irvine. There were plenty of inflated egos and asses being kissed. One person who seemed to be high on the GOP pecking order went into a tissy because they didn’t have a name tag. And then when one made, it didn’t say HONORABLE something-or-other. It was a shameless packed house with Central Committee-Elect Shawn Nelson and Harry Sidhu absent. In fact NO ONE from Harry’s 69th AD was present to vote. Nice participation!
Among the highlights worth noting, Tom Tait got smacked around for his support financial support of two Democrats for Anaheim City Council, Galloway and Chavez. But it didn’t stop there. Apparently Tait has not read the official California Republican Party Platform and answered, albeit honestly, to that effect on his GOP endorsement application.
Frankly, how can a candidate walk into a Party’s Central Committee and ask for their endorsement when the candidate admittedly has no idea what the Party stands for (or against)? This makes Tait appear to be a massive RINO! But that’s OK because he’s a nice guy. 2/3 of the Central Committee agreed that he was a nice guy so they gave him the OCGOP endorsement. Proudly, all but one of our 72nd Assembly District representatives on the Central Committee voted NO to Tait’s endorsement.
Maybe the OC Republican Party should make all of the applicants for endorsement sit down and read the Party’s Official Platform.
We’ve just received a message from our good Friend and former Red County blogger Allan Bartlet.
Hello FFFF readers. It’s nice to write for a blog that appreciates independent thinking. It’s nice not to be told what they can and can’t write about or what stories they can and can’t link to…but I digress. It’s official. I am no longer going to be contributing anything else to Red County as long as the taint of Matt Cunningham shilling for the ultra liberal bureaucracy Children & Family Commission is still over there.
I come before you today though to report excellent news from OC Republican Central Committee. Last night was Scott Baugh’s finest hour as Chairman of our party. It was a short meeting as Central Committee meetings go, but what it lacked in duration, it made up in substance. Chairman Baugh started by making some remarks about how great it was that the party has been vindicated for
endorsing Shawn Nelson last month. He put up on a projector for all the members to see, the over the top/lying hit pieces paid for by the county employee and sheriff unions on behalf of Harry Sidhu & Lorri Galloway. He then proceeded to have an impromptu fundraiser for Shawn right there during the meeting! Someone from the audience shouted he would match the first 30 $50 donations to get the ball rolling. For the math challenged, that’s $1500. It then started feeding off of all the energy in the room to fight back against the government unions. By the end of the night, Scott told me that we had raised and gotten commitments for almost $100k for Nelson for the party to do member communications on his behalf.
I couldn’t help but notice that he kept looking at Matt Holder during his presentation as if to say…”game, set, match Matt”. I think it’s fair to say that the gloves came off last night. You see as everyone knows, John Lewis & Matt Holder are running interference behind the scenes to help Harry Sidhu. If Harry gets elected, L&H and the unions will have one more friendly vote for all their lobbying business, which BTW is very substantial. The campaigns they work on are more or less “loss leaders” for them. They make their money on the back end. If Nelson gets elected, that’s two solid votes against them for any business they wanna try to get through the BOS. They would have to be perfect with the remaining three votes. We know they have Janet & Bill Campbell in their back pocket, but Pat Bates has endorsed Nelson. You see where all this is going? Like someone once said…”follow the money”.
Anyways, I just wanna thank Chairman Baugh for his efforts last night. It’s not been often that I publicly give him props, but I definitely wanna praise him when he deserves it.
Thanks for that, Allan. We’ve been pretty tough on both Baugh and the GOP Central Committee in the past. But it looks like things are really changing for the better and an expression of appreciation is in order!
Shawn Nelson won the Orange County GOP Central Committee endorsement over Harry Sidhu by 47-8 votes last night at the Irvine Hyatt. That’s 85% for Nelson if you like numbers.
The room was designed to fit 200 people, and was standing room only. Besides Sidhu, who voted for himself (Sidhu got sworn in as an alternative to the OCGOP just prior to the vote), Matt Holder of (John) Lewis Consulting Services and Thomas Gordon went down in flames voting for their own interests instead of the better candidate. knowing that his client was going to lose Holder tried to forestall a vote, avoid a vote, but it was not to be.
To those in attendance it was painfully obvious that the more qualified candidate was Shawn Nelson. As usual Sidhu read his answers from a script prepared for him while Nelson’s answers were direct, forthright, and informed.
Nelson, the OCGOP’s 2009 elected official of the year won the Daily Double. It will be hard for Sidhu’s paid apologists to cast this in any other light than a resounding rejection of their candidate. You can expect the negative Sidhu mail to start coming furiously from here on out – and that won’t endear Sidhu to the party faithful, either.
For Nelson this victory provides important momentum heading into the final seven weeks of the campaign and can be used in mailings to fellow Republicans.
In short: Nelson kicked ass. I’ve got some good video and will be uploading choice nuggets for the benefit and amusement of the Friends.
Our Friend Allan Bartlett who happens to be an OC GOP Central Committee member reports that an anonymous flier was passed out at last night’s meeting attacking Chris Norby – for the bogus sexual harassment suit (filed by a County employee fired for misfeasance), and for allegedly saying bad things about Mexicans.
Bartlett says Mrs. Dick Ackerman (who is going to run against Norby for the 72nd Assy seat) denied any knowledge of the flier, but he’s not buying that, and neither are we. She already let the cat out of the bag that others will be doing her dirty work for her- most likely her old man who has a natural flair for it. So be it.
As we have said the harassment thing was conjured up out of malice. As far as discriminatory comments about Mexicans is concerned, two thoughts come to mind: first, Norby may have his faults, but he is one of the least prejudiced people on the planet Earth; second that such a charge would be brought up at the forum of the OC GOP Central Committee meeting is just hilarious. How could anybody think that was going to hurt Norby at that venue!
When word of that flier gets out it might actually help Norby win the Raymond Hills GOP Bluehair vote!
Some of my best friends are Mexicans. Like my gardener and my house cleaner.
It’s a sad truth that government projects just don’t seem to have much accountability. There are always lots of impressive titles handed out, but nobody ever seems to have a grip on what’s going on.
Oh no, not again!
Take the NOCCCD Football field-to-stadium sleight-of-hand that took place at FJC. Somehow a project was altered without any policy review, CEQA documentation, or public notification. It only became a problem when neighbors found out about the deception and loudly protested. Who approved these changes? And who is this person’s boss? We’d like to find out who is responsible for the now very expensive and increasingly embarrassing switcheroo.
And let’s not forget the so-called Oversight Committee – a group of individuals who were either kept in the dark or who had their eyes closed. It’s hard to find anybody who really takes these committees seriously, except perhaps voters who are persuaded by the Bond Salesmen that the committee will actually ensure some sort of accountability for the public’s hundreds of millions of dollars. Nevertheless, there they are, and so they have a responsibility to the public.
In June of 2005, the Chamber of Commerce’s Executive Director, Thresa Harvey was appointed to the North Orange County Community College District Citizens Bond Oversight Committee as a representative of a “taxpayer group.” We’re not sure what a taxpayer group is since we all pay taxes (well most of us, anyway). In any case it was and is her job to comprehend what’s going on with the bond revenue projects. Was she misled? Did she even know what was going on?
Jeez, maybe we need to do this more often...
Things have gotten to the point where even Fullerton’s City Manager Chris Meyer has produced a letter claiming the stadium violates the City’s General Plan, and the City is demanding an EIR. This is doubly ironic, since he routinely attends Chamber of Commerce Board meetings where Harvey can usually be found; and also because the City has been signally deficient when in come to CEQA compliance of its own favored projects.
But, to return to our main story: Who is accountable for this gridiron fiasco? Will we ever know? Probably not. But in the meantime the NOCCCD is facing the increased likelihood of an amended EIR for their stadium and some fancy footwork in the backfield if they want to build it.
Hundreds of Hornet fans disguised as empty seats...
The City of Fullerton’s General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) took a bold step at their meeting last night to include West Coyote Hills as a Focus Area in the City’s new General Plan update. The Coyote Hills area was not included as a focus area in the last General plan update that was done in 1996. In a packed meeting room, a motion was made by Richard Lambros to uphold a prior “gag” order relating to discussing Coyote Hills. The motion failed. After several members of the audience voiced their opinions the Committee voted to create a new Coyote Hills Focus Area.
Item 18 on tomorrow’s ridiculously packed agenda are proposals to put a streets and infrastructure tax on the November ballot. One includes a 15 year sunset clause and the other has no sunset at all. The no sunset option in DOA, I’m sure. The tax increase is projected to produce $15,000,000 a year.
The 6.5% sales tax increase is supposed to be restricted to infrastructure, meaning it needs a supermajority (66.6%) of voters to pass. A general tax would only need 50%+1 to pass; but that option seems to have no chance of a majority to put it on the ballot, and is not being considered. Since the August 4th meeting is cancelled so the politicians can attend the cops’ feel-good National Night Out party, this is the last chance to get something on the November ballot.
The people of Fullerton have finally had enough of bad roads that only seem to get worse. But will 67% vote for this? I don’t know. People hate bad roads but a lot of them also hate taxes.
The ad hoc Budget Sustainability Committee did not recommend this infrastructure tax increase. Two members did support it, and only on the condition that the current budget requirement for infrastructure spending remain in place, thus avoiding the usual budget switcheroo. But the idea couldn’t get a third vote. Still, the existing requirements for infrastructure are not being deleted in this ordinance, so at least there’s that.
I am extremely skeptical of Fullerton’s bean counters to keep everything straight, especially given this years accounting fiascos. The language of the proposed ordinance requires an annual audit of the funds, but we know how this goes.
I see the potential for several departments – police, fire, parks stand out – as trying to lay claim for capital project billing using these new funds. The Engineering and Public Works personnel will be the biggest employee beneficiaries since they already generously charge their time to capital projects. Does their current subsidy by the General Fund remain? I sincerely doubt it.
On the happy side, the ordinance would require 75% of the new funds be applied to streets only. Water/sewer and airport expenditures are explicitly verboten using this money, likely because they don’t need it. Still, the plan is only as good as the accounting.
Right now it looks like Ms. Charles, the sanctimonious and self-important gasbag representing District 3 on the Fullerton City Council has no competition for re-election this November.
I suppose this is a testament to the apathy of the electorate because there should be at least one person willing to challenge the otiose uber-leftist whose constant stream of self-righteous and ignorant bullshit almost demands an opponent.
A visit to the City Clerk’s webpage listing candidate committees shows no one except Charles in the Third District.
This doesn’t mean that a non-committee candidate isn’t running, or that a potential opponent isn’t waiting to file the forms necessary to raise funds like a serious contender. But time is almost up. Candidates will be able to “pull papers” to run in just a few weeks. If they haven’t announced yet, at this late date, it seems unlikely.
Why?
Charles has taken lots positions that would undoubtedly be unpopular among responsible, taxpaying citizens outside the Fullerton Boohoo echo chamber. Let’s put aside her flip-flops on issues like the downtown noise regulations and the issue of private publications on city property. Instead, let’s focus on issues that would be pretty damaging to Charles once voters learn about them. They involve wasting money, or trying to. A lot of it.
First is her steadfast support of handing over $200,000 of public funds to support illegal aliens harassed by ICE. You can feel sympathy for people snagged by the ICE goons without wanting to use public funds to pay for their groceries.
That can’t be good…
Then there is the embarrassing matter of the so-called boutique hotel, where the Council approved massive entitlements on a property and then “sold” it for peanuts to build a massive and harebrained project on Santa Fe Avenue. The worst part was deeding over the property to a couple of inveterate con men who, after many years, haven’t turned a shovel of dirt on the site and never will. Providentially, that approval was Shana Charles’ very first vote.
Green means green. One way or another…
How about the issue of her income from the marijuana lobby – gained via her husband’s effort to get Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo elected in the 2024 D4 election. Her tribe is always blathering about the evils of money in campaigns; Jaramillo got $60,000 of Washington DC lobbyist cash working for her and $4000 went right into the Charles family wallet. Would the residents of D3 like a dispensary on State College?
I don’t want to forget the disastrous Trail to Nowhere that cost $2.5 million and has virtually no use. FFFF predicted that over and over again, although it wasn’t hard for anybody to foresee. The last half dozen times I have driven down Richman at various hours, I have yet to see a single user. Charles was stupid enough to fall for all the bullshit peddled by staff; either that or she knew it was nonsense and didn’t care. Does it make a difference?
Spinning, spinning…
If there is a tax on the November ballot Charles will have to take a stand. Spinning won’t help. She won’t get her 13% general sales tax increase, but there could be two 6.5% special sales taxes to vote for, infrastructure and “public safety.” Opposing these would send a signal that she doesn’t care about fixing the budget deficit she helped create: just a couple years ago she bragged about hiring more people.
She has to run on the state of the City and that state isn’t good. She’s been there for four years with nothing to show for it except foolish positions and non-stop, rambling lectures.
I decided to watch the afternoon Fullerton City Council session about hiring a new trash hauler, yesterday. When it came time for questions directed to staff I learned a few things.
First, I realized the extent to which Ahmad Zahra blames one individual – Tony Bushala – for every thing he, Zahra, doesn’t like. And it’s got to the point where anything attributable to Bushala is something he, Zahra, doesn’t like. Even when the attribution is based on his own baseless paranoia and suspicion and egomania. It’s embarrassing.
That’s a mighty fine thing you did, Anthony…
This accounts for his outbursts yesterday to staff and special council about the origins of the upfront payment to the City by a couple of RFP respondents, EDCO and Republic. As noted here, the idea was mentioned by Mr. Bushala several months ago at a Budget Sustainability Committee meeting and that was it. There is no demonstrable tie between that brief occurrence and any of the trash haulers, except in the febrile brain of the dodgy “doctor” from Damascus. Nada. It was never mention in the first round of RFP submissions.
When Zahra couldn’t get staff or the lawyers to agree with him and condemn the notion of a big initial payment he became agitated and began a completely unprofessional diatribe.
It was good stuff for the handful of his Fullerton Crazy claque in attendance who also faithfully believe any nonsense peddled by Zahra and who remain completely incurious about Zahra’s own string of malfeasances starting with immigration and marriage fraud to get into the country.
I am gratified to know that Zahra is a reader of this blog. It’s really too bad he can’t learn anything from it. He is not the least bit opposed to hidden taxes, per se; quite the contrary. However what he and his pals really love is an officially adopted tax, out in the open, when the community proves it is worthy of the higher paid city government that the new revenue buys.
Of course it didn’t seem to occur to Zahra that his admission about the FFFF post undermined his conspiracy theory that Bushala was somehow, somewhere tied to the new proposals by EDCO and Republic.
I observe that a third proposal, by CR&R offered four million bucks, upfront for street repair. This appeared to be seen as some sort of a philanthropic gift. It was seen as such by Councilman Nicholas Dunlap. This is naiveté or dumbness. Nobody works for free, and the cost of that four mil is obviously wrapped up in CR&Rs rate structure that would obviously be lower without their apparent upfront largesse.
The City’s special council mentioned that a lawsuit described as a precedent by opponents of the upfront payment idea was not really precedent since the matter was returned to a lower appeals court where the matter was settled without adjudication. According to this chap an upfront deal repayment would have to be legally justified based on the value of the franchise and that would be his job. I’m confused by this since the proposals by EDCO and Republic do not involve in-lieu franchise fees at all, but rather describe one-time monetary payments, exclusive of the in-lieu fee. This needs clarification.
