data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4246e/4246e2747d5aef6a5782e028896caff29e85cb44" alt=""
The other day The Fullerton Harpoon published a post on how new Councilwoman Jamie Valencia got bad advice regarding receiving and then giving back campaign contributors who had expressed definite opinions about the ridiculous Walk on Wilshire – and another vote was coming up! He opined that the bad advice about Section 84308 in the Government Code (“the Levine Act”) may have come from the City Attorney Jones and Mayer – through one channel or another – a suggestion supported by later events.
As Mr. Harpoon ably showed by commonsense and State legal findings, the law in question does not even apply to the people opposed to Walk on Wilshire who gave Valencia campaign contributions over $250 in the past year.
It turns out that some dope is still pursuing that angle – to create a scandal out of nothing, and find a smoking gun where no gunshot was even fired. My money would be on one of the Kennedy Sisters of Fullerton Observer fame. Here’s a Public Record Act request dated 2/3/25:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ae7f5/ae7f57257747b33bd7f1568ccb8a8a6f69d3dce0" alt=""
Now, we now this request should have been responded to with a brisk “there are no relevant records” like a city does when it’s trying to hide something. In this case it would be true since the law doesn’t apply. Even the dodo who submitted the request cites the scope of issues involved in the law: permits, entitlements and licenses that clearly don’t apply to Walk on Wilshire opponents.
Enter Baron Bettenhausen, Esq.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/4e0fb/4e0fb495abbb647f7aa58d7112fa92b918d97777" alt=""
Mr. Bettenhausen, is graduate of the Regent School of Law, Now he’s a partner in the I Can’t Believe It’s A Law Firm of Jones and Mayer. His response to reporter Gabriel San Roman about the Valencia matter, was trawled in the Public Records Act request, above. The response is incompetent, immaterial and irrelevant.
Let’s see what Bettenhausen had to say to San Ramon:
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/976c2/976c2902fc11053724c2ec44e0c257166ff275b6" alt=""
Notice how Bettenhasen throws the rat on Valencia, claiming it was her decision to return the money because of her determination of a conflict with the law. Well, we already know what she did it, but not being a lawyer herself, we have to assume someone who is, or who had access to one, gave Valencia her options.
Bettenhausen admits it’s his firm’s responsibility to hand out legal advice regarding the “Levine Act” to the City Council, but notes that it’s the councilmember’s responsibility not to run afoul of it – another bit of obvious information meant to deflect from the real problem.
What’s the real problem? Valencia, Bettenhausen intones to the reporter, has “cured” the Levine Act problem, but he doesn’t acknowledge the truth: that there was nothing to cure. This is like your doctor telling your friends that you’ve been cured of a nasty disease when you never had it in the first place.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f92b8/f92b857988bb5cbcd7b50b665293fbef0c82e9b1" alt=""
If no one at Jones and Mayer was responsible for guiding the action provoking Valencia’s return of campaign contributions last fall, they are certainly responsible for knowing the contents and the applicability of the damn Government Code, including the Levine Act, to Fullerton decision makers in various circumstances. The lawyers at Jones and Mayer either didn’t know the law or they don’t care. Maybe both.
Ignorance and apathy? Throw in some occasional malice to FFFF and other Fullerton troublemakers. What a team.