We’ve asked our infamous commentator “T-REX” to share his ancient wisdom with our readers. After agreeing to provide T-REX with two large broom handles stolen from Fullerton Public Works, the Friends are proud to present the first in a regular series of dino related thoughts.
TODAY T-REX GET PHONE CALL FROM LADY AT HIGH SCHOOL.
LADY SAY MANY OOO-MANS WORRIES ABOUT “CONSERVATIVE PROVOCATEUR” AND SCHOOL FOR LITTLE OOO-MANS CLOSE EARLY.
T-REX THINK THIS SILLY. OOO-MANS USED TO WORRY ABOUT CONSERVATIVE ROCKS FALLING ON HEAD OR CONSERVATIVE SHARK EATING DANGLINGLY BITS.
SOMETIMES OOO-MANS WORRY ABOUT CONSERVATIVE DARK, BUT OOO-MANS MAKE CONSERVATIVE FIRE, SO NOT WORRY NO MORE.
MAYBE OOO-MANS WORRY TOO MUCH. MAYBE THEY FOCUS ON CONSERVATIVE READING AND CONSERVATIVE MATH FOR LITTLE ONES. MAYBE BEING TOO CONSERVATIVE AND CLOSING SCHOOL EARLY IS STUPID IDEA THAT TEACH LITTLE OOO-MANS TO BE AFRAID.
MAYBE YOU REACH OUT WITH THOSE BIG OOO-MANS ARMS INSTEAD OF HIDING IN CAVE OR CACKLING LIKE RABID CHICKEN.
Tomorrow the planning commission is going to be dealing with more parking issues. Or shall I say they’re going to be talking about something they have no control over because the State already stepped on them.
Back on 27 September 2016 Governor Moonbean signed SB 1069 into law. SB 1069 deals with “Additional Dwelling Units” or in the common vernacular “back houses”. You know the units as they’re the ones that get added behind a house so a homeowner can rent their second/third/fifth property to two groups of people as opposed to one. Charitably they’re known as “Granny Units” and uncharitably as “‘Mommy why is the creepy man staring at me all the time’ Units”.
The merits or pitfalls of these units notwithstanding, as we now legally have to allow for them all over town, this particular piece of legislation includes the following nugget:
Cities must waive parking requirements for ADUs that are entirely contained within existing structures, or that are within one-half mile of public transit, one block of a car-share vehicle, or in a historic district.
Within one-half mile of public transit. Okay, so let’s put that into context. Here’s a map of Fullerton to which I’ve added the major bus lines of OCTA in blue.
Using the Google Maps Distance Tool I can say that 1/2 mile would mean that Fullerton cannot require additional parking for ADUs anywhere approximately South of North Court. Likewise no new parking requirements would be allowed 1/2 mile East or West of Euclid or State College for ADUs. I’d worry about the neighborhood by CSUF but with CollegeTown coming back (courtesy of Japanese Chat Girls) that’s the least of their worries.
I loathe writing about roads and parking, truly I do yet unfortunately our elected betters seem to not understand human nature and thus the issues constantly come up.
This no required parking if within a half-mile of public transit is because allegedly the low-income take public transit unlike those who write these stupid laws. The poor take so much public transit that we subsidize the snot out of buses, streetcars, trolleys and hubs such as ARTIC. The poor love their public transit so much that we keep having to exempt streets from overnight parking in the lower-income apartments thanks to their under-parked nature. Why if only the folks in those low-income apartments could find parking for all of the public transit that they love to take we wouldn’t need to exempt so many streets.
Add this newest parking issue to the quiver of arrows that will be used to kill the overnight parking ban. As an aside I wonder how many new AirBnB rentals will be built here in Fullerton thanks to this “affordable housing” bill.
Members of the Cal State Fullerton GOP club say that an anthropology professor physically attacked students yesterday during an on-campus clash with anti-Trump protestors. The Register and Breitbart have the stories.
It’s too early to tell if any of this is true. But that doesn’t mean we can’t tell you what will happen next.
CSUF administration will announce that they’ve called in an “independent investigator” who is really just an on-call attorney, hired to minimize the school’s liability and facilitate the quiet payoffs of any lawsuits.
The employee will be placed on paid administrative leave until the media and the students become tired of silence and move on to something else. Some sort of internal investigation may occur, but the findings will be hidden from the public and any students who were harmed.
The CSUF police force, part of the same beaurocratic structure that is responsible for this madness, will ultimately find no reason to press criminal charges upon their coworker.
During this excercise, pretense of concern for student safety will be audibly reiterated, but realistically disgarded. The administrators will focus all of their energy balancing the nearly unlimited employment rights of potentially abusive faculty with their need to protect the reputation of the institution that allowed this assault to occur.
Nevertheless, we persevere. Stick around, friends. We’ll keep a close eye on this one.
The Case of the Disappearing/Reappearing Balanced Budget
Many of you may recall that during my campaign for Fullerton City Council I wrote an Open Letter to Jennifer Fitzgerald. I’d like to revisit the issue of Mrs. Fitzgerald’s oft-repeated myth of a balanced budget.
On her website as well as on campaign literature she made the point that our budget is balanced. I offer as evidence a screen-grab from her campaign website from 22 October 2016;
I won’t re-litigate the whole letter here but suffice it to say I wasn’t happy about her Public Relations spin on our overspending by at least 43 Million Dollars during her tenure.
I’m bringing this all up due to agenda item #2 from last night’s Council Meeting. The council voted 5-0 to receive and file the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) for the fiscal year ending 30 June 2016. Inside the CAFR was one little nugget really stood out to me when reading the report.
Hello Fullerton Friends. I’ve been gone for a few weeks owing to the Flu, Family, Festivus and other merriment this time of year. I hope you’re all enjoying your holidays whichever ones you choose to enjoy. Feeling better I wanted to start to dive into some of the public records requests I’ve received from the city but my wife wants me to write about Amerige Court. As my Grandfather once told me that the two most important words in a marriage are “Yes, Dear” I suppose I’m going to have to write about Amerige Court.
For those who don’t keep track of Fullerton boondoggles year in and year out Amerige Court was originally planned to be a 9-Story Mixed Use monstrosity which would sit on the property that is currently some of the most heavily utilized parking for Downtown Fullerton straddling Amerige Avenue between Harbor Blvd and Malden Avenue.
The plus side, at the time of inception anyways, was that it would provide Downtown with 150% of the parking that was (and is) currently available with the downside being every other aspect of this plan. When people got wind of it the city pushed the plan into a “Study Session” where it was cut down from 9 stories to a more reasonable size and the 150% parking requirement was nixed because why not take the only good thing away from the plan. (more…)
The CSU media specialist didn’t like the fact that Ms. Bordas used my post and even less that it was pulled from the 4F blog. Unfortunately, the story was pulled from the Daily Titan and Ms. Bordas has had to endure a lot of questions on her fact checking.
The fact remains that the words she quoted from me are based on the official legal agreement between the State of California and the Chapman family who donated the El Dorado Ranch. You can find the document at the Orange County Recorder’s Office by asking for Instrument No. 1989-334761 of Official Records. You can also email me at [email protected] and I will email the 28-page PDF to you.
Here are a few facts to consider about the El Dorado Ranch that the agreement spells out:
We just received an e-mail from a young Friend, directing our attention to a story in the CSUF Daily Titan about the university trying to go ahead with the acquisition of the Hope University campus across Nutwood Avenue. We’ve been documenting the damage already done to mid-century architecture in the area and of course noting that the buildings on the Hope campus are architecturally significant – and would be demolished by CSUF.
According to the article funding would come from the sale of bonds. $30 million will be needed to close the deal. But of course the university employee cited says nothing about how the bonds are to be paid for. It seems that the school’s debt service ratio is already crappy – they’ve been spending like drunken sailors over there and their credit card is maxed out. Can anybody forget the debacle of the “University Heights” housing fiasco, here, and here? That didn’t help, either.
With the State budget cuts they’ve had to cut enrollment, and so student fee revenue is down.
And speaking of fees, it also seems as if the recent increases in fees and tuition have a lot of students pissed off, and using their dough to help swing future expansion that’s years off is going to rub a lot of people the wrong way.
So will the CS Chancellor’s office nix this massive added liability? Let’s hope so. CSUF President Milton is on clueless cruise control. Somebody needs to behave responsibly – and soon.
The word in academic circles is that the CSUF is busted. Or at least it doesn’t have the wherewithal to swing a deal under consideration to buy back property it once owned across Nutwood Avenue.
The site is the current home of Hope University and it contains some wonderful buildings designed and constructed as part of a modernist master plan. The rough idea was that the CSUF Auxiliary would acquire the property, and, after a lease-back period to Hope, would start knocking everything down – presumably to throw up more out-of-scale, hideous erections. We first wrote about it here. And our expert consultant defined the term “exaggerated modern” here.
So the recession may have a silver lining anyway – at least as far as historic preservation is concerned, but we shall see what the future brings.
In the meantime, just to the south, the giant hole in the cityscape left by the demolition of perfectly fine modern-style buildings to make way for the Jefferson Commons swindle are a silent yet eloquent testimonial to the lack of foresight exercised by our elected leaders.