Over at the Fullerton Observer, the boohoos have gotten their panties in a knot over the cancellation of Tuesday’s Fullerton City Council meeting.
A post by the mysterious “Jack Hutt” is full of angst and anger that the meeting is not to be. Questions are being raised by unnamed sources, he says; unnamed observers are suggesting things, he says. It’s the usual Staknia Kennedy trope. Something is afoot Jack fears, and so a self-created opportunity to attack Councilmembers Jung, Valencia and Dunlap has presented itself to these self-styled journalists.
The People’s Mayor contemplating his political future…or perhaps what he might scrounge for supper working the 91 and Harbor Blvd.
Anyhow, fear not. Some unnamed group is having its own council meeting at 5:30pm on the City Hall lawn. Remember? The one they wanted to get rid of a few months ago. Bring your friends and your lawn chairs, says a flier designed and propagated by persons unknown.
And guess what? Someone, again unstated, is claiming “we” will appoint “The People’s Mayor,” a chance no doubt for the immigrant fraud and serial liar, “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra to finally get to call himself a Mayor of Fullerton even if it’s only Mayor For a Day.
Fullerton’s so-called Ad Hoc Fiscal Sustainability Committee met again, and probably for the last time last Thursday. Like its predecessor, the meeting expended hours of lots of peoples’ time and accomplished nothing. Not very little. Nothing.
Hours and hours of already familiar Power Point readings.
Three things worth mentioning happened.
Miss Daisey was driven…
First, Daisy Perez, the Assistant City Manager reminded the committee that if the City were to get a dedicated “infrastructure” half-cent sales tax increase, that money could be diverted to pay for “maintenance” of police and fire department facilities. She said nothing about a commensurate reduction in the “public safety” budgets and naturally nobody on the committee asked her.
Later, when pressed, the City Manger had to explain that he needed some sort of City Attorney blessing before he could share polling questions asked by the City’s quality of life/pro tax consultant. Huh? The only people who get to know the questions are the ones who got phone solicitations? What bullshit is this? Fortunately, Joshua Ferguson was on hand to share the nature of the questions his wife got; of course they were directed to promoting a sales tax increase of some kind.
You will be taxed…sooner or later!
Later still, when everyone was fatigued, Perez tried to get the committee to vote on a laundry list of options, all of which would be passed on to the council. This is the precise swindle that occurred during the redistricting process courtesy of City Clerk Lucinda Williams – when Fullerton Booohoo was trying real hard to keep Jesus Quirk-Silva in a political job.
Chris Norby, our former City Councilman, County Supervisor and Assemblyman showed up to save the day. He shared the value of vacant properties the City owns, and threw in the airport. These collectively are worth half a billion he asserted. He didn’t remind committee members that these properties would be declared surplus, and that “affordable” housing developers would get first shot at them. He reminded the committee that sales taxes are inherently regressive, perhaps thinking anybody cared about that.
In the end a completely improper process of trying to vote on something, anything, occurred. Without following any order except prompting by staff, the committee voted 3-2 against a Tony Bushala suggestion of a 1/2 cent sales tax dedicate to infrastructure, and keeping in place an existing ordinance guaranteeing a certain percentage of funding for infrastructure.
Peace. No, piece. Another piece of your money. You have it. We want it.
Then the appointees of the liberals Shana Charles and Ahamad Zahra, Derek Smith and Jennifer Duong proposed their own idea: a one cent general sales tax. This failed 3-2, also with Bushala, Wehn and Wozab voting no.
Finally a legitimate motion was made by Eric Wehn and seconded by Bushala: investigate the possible sale of the water function to an independent water company. That proposal was finally passed 3-2 again with the liberal appointees voting no. This idea really has no place to go, except that an exploration of the Water Department’s vacant property should be definitely considered for offloading.
There seemed to be confusion about whether the committee could meet again to keep kicking the can around. No decision was made on that as far as I can tell, but I’ve seen so many Fullerton meetings dissolve into incoherence at their end that I really can’t say.
I have received several mailers from La Habra’s Rosie Espinosa who is trying, again. for the job of County Supervisor for our 4th District.
They’ve all been pretty amateur, but the one I got today was also really sort of pathetic. Espinosa has a granddaughter, apparently, and this cute little girl is the star of the pathos driven card.
I don’t know why anybody thought grandmothering was A) notable at all; or, B) something that would lead a voter to believe in her competence. Grandparents in general are known to be over indulgent, lenient, and weak minded when it comes to their grandkids.
Maybe it’s a grab for the older female vote? I can’t fathom it. To me it suggests electing someone who is just old, for Rose Espinosa must be pushing 70, and in the past 20 years County voters are moving away from the gerontocracy approach to County Supervisors.
Curiously, Espinosa’s campaign address – 1 W. Manchester Blvd. Inglewood – is the same as Inglewood’s City Hall. Now that’s just peculiar and could use an explanation.
Anyhow, Rose is a dedicated liberal Democrat, I guess, and despite her previous electoral failure maybe this time she can draw some votes from the loathsome operator Connor Traut, a student of the corrupt Jordan Brandman, a devotee of carpetbagging, and seemingly never having had to work for much of anything.
Ahmad Zahra acolyte and tender sprig Elijah Mannisero is at it again. In a very strange post on the Kennedy Sister Observer blog he takes offense at my recent post on FFFF detailing many of Zahra’s shortcomings – ethical, financial, and legal.
J’accuse!
Specifically, the fragile green shoot takes umbrage at the claim that Zahra filed a false police report back in 2021 against his colleague Fred Jung.
Most of the impressionable fella’s post wastes time explaining what everybody agrees happened: Zahra popped off to Jung with a snide comment, and the latter reacted verbally. It’s funny that Manissero makes it sound like Jung pursued Zahra into the back room, because that is where they all go after meetings – as evidenced by Dunlap, Whitaker, and Quirk-Silva’s presence there, also. He inserts some little snips to look like he has uncovered something. Whatever.
In young Elijah’s recounting Zahra was afraid that Jung would escalate his behavior so he went to the cops – the next day. He shares the fact that the cops did investigate something and closed “the case” for lack of anything that looked like a crime. Oddly, Elijah takes exception to my “timeline” although my post offered none.
It all amounts to FFFF badness and evil, of course. No “false report” was made and we are spreading disinformation.
But hold on a sec, Elijah. You have the whole police report, including the accusation, right? I won’t bother asking who gave it to you because I already know. However, here’s one small problem: you didn’t share any documentation on what the exactly Zahra claimed Jung did to require police involvement. Hmm. I wonder why not.
Young Maniserro tries to claim I mischaracterized something when I wrote that other councilmembers denied Zahra’s account. Not true. Elijah should have tried reading. Here’s what the post said:
The cops interviewed other councilmembers who denied Zahra’s tall tale. End of story. Except that the story has never been reported by Zahra’s Observer friends and of course never discussed by Zahra.”
So the point is not just what people saw and overheard. The issue is whether they saw and heard everything Zahra put in his report to the cops – the whole thing. Obviously, they didn’t. Readers of his post still don’t know what Zahra claimed happened that warranted police intervention, and sweet Elijah didn’t bother sharing the whole report from which he only cites the verbal exchanges, but not the actual accusation Zahra made to the police. Where’s the rest of the report? Let’s see the whole thing
Maybe Zahra honestly thinks “are you a little girl?” is a sufficient affront to call in the police to investigate a crime – in which case there is no false report – just a stupid waste of everybody’s time. Can he possibly have believed that? Or is it much more likely that he saw another opportunity to play victim by dragging the cops into a silly verbal exchange by pretending a crime happened to him, an opportunity that backfired.
The most telling part of the post was Elijah’s attempt to drag Tony Bushala into it, somehow. Bushala wasn’t there at the confrontation, but he must be blamed for something or it wouldn’t be the Fullerton Observer. So the story twists itself to Bushala’s oversized influence, yadda, yadda, and transparency and the like.
What a mess.
Maybe his mom needs to run young Elijah’s sheets out on the line for the neighbors to see.
Now, finally in his last year of public preening and pontificating on our dime, Fullerton Councilmember Ahmad Zahra deserves an appropriate retrospective from FFFF. And this backwards look is colored by Zahra’s own continual critique of his colleagues for their lack of transparency. His claque, in particular the lonely old Kennedy Sisters of the Fullerton Observer, are willing to pass along these accusations without a shred of curiosity about their own hero.
Transparency.
Mug shot of the one-time Mrs. Ahmad Zahra.
Back in mid 1990s the immigrant Zahra came to America with a dream in his heart. That dream was stay here. To that end he quickly married a woman in Arkansas named Michelle Salmon in order to jump the green card line. In Zahra’s case the marriage fraud takes on a pungent charm since Zahra is proudly gay and has said in print that he has always known he was gay.
The newly minted husband left right away for the sunshine and beaches of California, leaving his unheartbroken and probably a little wealthier bride in Little Rock. When the statutory time obligation passed he divorced his abandoned wife, and here he remained. Zahra has never bothered to share his brief sojourn in Arkansas in any of various biographies, and why would he? That would be transparent.
Zahra claims he is a medical doctor although he certainly didn’t attend any medical school in the First World. Maybe in the Third World? There is no record of his practicing medicine anywhere, and he has never even bothered to share his medical school diploma. That would be transparent.
Sometime in the 2000s he says, Zahra, claiming to be a “film maker,” washed up on Fullerton’s shores. Zahra still claims film making as his job, even though no one can find any recent cinematic work to his credit. How he makes ends meet is a mystery and the wherewithal for his trips abroad (he says they are) is a matter of conjecture. Zahra never explains where he gets his income. It certainly isn’t from making movies. The public has the right to know how he supports himself. That would be transparent.
Not the people’s choice…
Zahra’s first action on the City Council was a cheap flip-flop that you never read about in the Observer. Despite his call for an election to replace Jesus Quirk Silva’s citywide seat, he soon voted to disenfranchise Fullerton voters and appoint the old retread Jan Flory; in return he got a great paying seat on the Orange County Water District Board where he pulled in $70,000 over a couple years. Zahra never talks about his decision reversal, nor do his followers. That would be transparent.
While on the Water Board, Zahra published three articles under his own name in the Fullerton Observer about water-related issues. It was later discovered that the articles weren’t written by Zahra at all, but rather by an OCWD PR hack. Zahra didn’t care and neither did the Observer Sisters, who tried to explain the plagiarism as some sort of amateur error by somebody, probably Jesse Latour. Transparency?
Read. Weep.
In the middle of Zahra’s first term on the City Council, he was busted and charged by the District Attorney for battery and vandalism. The case vanished as happens when somebody pleads guilty, pays a fine and does some community service. That gave Zahra the chance to falsely claim that he had been “exonerated” and offered to show evidence of that claim. But he never did. That would be transparent.
Not looking so good…
Zahra has been a cheerleader for legalized marijuana dispensaries in Fullerton. He had recommended the services of the later-convicted dope lobbyist Melahat Rafiei. He appointed Derek Smith, an MJ union lobbyist and peripheral character in the Anaheim Cabal crew to be his representative on the Budget Sustainability Committee. Zahra has never revealed his ties to the legalized marijuana cartel and what was in it for him. That would be transparent.
Ferguson and Curlee. The easy winners…
In Zahra’s worst offense against the people of Fullerton, he voted over and over again to sue David Curlee, Joshua Ferguson and FFFF. That flagrant abuse of power cost the public hundreds of thousands of dollars in a settlement. Zahra was aided and abetted by the Fullerton Observer’s Sharon Kennedy who actually employed an “expert” family member to assist City Hall’s reckless lawsuit. Zahra lied to the Voice of OC, claiming he was a “fan” of settling the lawsuit from the beginning, even though he voted against the final settlement. No explanation for this disaster was ever forthcoming from Zahra or his accomplice, Sharon Kennedy. That would be transparent.
In 2021 Zahra tried to privatize the UP Park and turn it into a commercial events center masquerading as a non-profit fish farm. The move was illegal as hell, but none of his friends cared so why should he? Zahra never reminds anyone of that harebrained scheme, but loves to talk about how his district is park poor. Transparency?
Tony Castro. Staying out of jail long enough to be of use to the Democrat Party of OC.
In his 2022 reelection campaign, Zahra spent $120,000 to keep a job that pays a thousand bucks a month. Part of this campaign involved the Democratic Party’s creation of a patsy candidate with a shady past but with a Latino name, Tony Castro, to beat his real opponent, Oscar Valadez. How much did Zahra know about this phony candidacy? Come to think of it, how much did Zahra know about the perjury of another fake candidate in 2024, Scott Markowitz, recruited by north county Dems in order to elect Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo. Once again Sharon Kennedy of the Observer not only ignored the story but ran interference. More transparency.
In October of 2021 Zahra filed a false police report against his colleague, Fred Jung. The cops interviewed other councilmembers who denied Zahra’s tall tale. End of story. Except that the story has never been reported by Zahra’s Observer friends and of course never discussed by Zahra. That would be transparent.
Zahra’s campaign finance reporting has been the subject of an FPPC investigation. First reported in August of 2025, it still seems not to have been resolved. A credit card payee, not vendors was routinely reported, leaving an unclear record of who was the beneficiary of these payments, payments that might have benefitted Zahra personally. Zahra has said nothing about this complaint. His friends at the Observer don’t seem interested, either. So why would he? That would be transparent.
That’s quite a list of misfeasance and malfeasance. Transparency? Not so much. Zahra has had the good fortune of having bamboozled the simpletons at the Fullerton Observer. And he has groomed a stable of eager young fellows who appear to be interested in political upward mobility and are happy to parrot the transparency schtick. To these followers and acolytes there is no reason to delve into their hero’s own extensive catalog of lies, secrets, hypocrisy and plagiarism.
I really think that’s what a lot of last night’s council meeting regarding a proposed development at the northwest corner of Harbor Blvd. and Hermosa Drive was about.
The appeal of the Planning Commission’s denial was the issue and to their credit Dunlap, Jung and Valencia pushed back on the appeal. But the real show was put on by Ahmad Zahra and his stablemate Shana Charles.
First a little about the project. It would cram 32 dinky “townhomes” on a parcel that the City claims is 1.3 acres (it looks smaller); the zoning for the site is R-1-20 which is typical in the old horsey part of town – a minimum 20,000 square foot lot, or about half an acre. But the developer applied for permits during a period when Fullerton’s “Housing Element” was not in compliance with the State regulations; therefore he could rely on “Builder’s Remedy” a harebrained scheme by the State Legislature whereby somebody can cram a whole bunch of units on to a site and fuck you, neighbors. There just has to be mandated and restricted “low income housing” of which our friendly builder was to produce the bare minimum.
Such is our government that the project still needed to be approved by the Planning Commission, and City planning staff recommended approval lest there be spooky lawsuits. The PC bravely said nay, exercising their authority as a discretionary body. The Council did the same.
But it was a fight. Zahra and Charles did their best to defend what can only be described as an out of scale, mini-monstrosity. Five stuccoed buildings with crappy plastic windows; three stories each jammed onto the site with only way in and out. And because of, ya know, low income housing, the developer doesn’t even have to bring power to the site underground!
Zahra tried mightily to show that the PC had no objective basis for their decision given staff’s assurances; but this begs the question of how much due-diligence staff actually put into this to make a balanced presentation in the first place. Apparently there was no traffic study required and because of our wonderful Legislature, “in-fill” projects are categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. Staff said there was no basis for a claim of public safety endangerment, a finding, if made, that could be used to reject the project. Zahra tried to undermine the neighbors and the Planning Commission’s conclusions as mere opinion, not fact.
Two of our underserved population?
Charles was just as bad with her usual dumb grin, condescending routine. We have to abide by the State’s diktats and there was nothing else that could be done. And although public opinion is just great we have no choice, yadda, yadda. The ridiculousness of voting on something about which you have no choice seems to have escaped the otiose public health professor. How come you dropped the low income level from 20% to 13%, asked the smiling academic of the developer. Higher interest rates the fellow claimed; both were play-acting. The Legislature previously reduced that requirement over a year ago and of course they both know it.
A few of Fullerton Boohooers got up to present pre-coordinated statements: the need for housing uber alles. Fresh and fragile Elijah Manassero gloated that there was no way to reject this; and we need places for people like him to live, he tenderly beseeched! Of course these folks mentioned the horrible lawsuits coming Fullerton’s way – as if that had ever concerned readers of the Fullerton Observer. The “pastor” who can’t figure out how to button his shirt was there, on cue to preach to us that a city’s character” is more than just scale and density.
Satkia Kennedy on the job…
Sitkia Kennedy could be seen in the fifth row applauding these speakers, presumably before she returned to her role of objective journalist.
Not quite forgotten…
Our old friend Elizabeth Hansberg showed up via Zoom to advocate for the project. We recall her “advocacy group” that advertises her willingness to advocate for a project; developer donations to her non-profit always welcome. She betrayed her affiliation with the comment: “we are providing the opportunity for people to move up…” Of course she gleefully entertained the council with the threat of lawsuits from her legal pals.
In typical Fullerton fashion, the end the issue was punted to May 19th, I guess.
The net result of this proposal, if approved, is only 32 out of the 13,000 new housing units demanded by the SCAG and Sacramento crowd. Only 5 would be deed restricted to low income. The units are meant to be sold at this point so the positive impact for poor renters like Zahra and Charles is virtually nil.
I’m trying to figure out why the Fullerton liberal claque was so het up on this project. I couldn’t think of a good reason except that they thought this was something that would annoy northern Fullertonions – those folks that Zahra is always complaining get all the municipal goodies while his underserved constituents get the short end of the stick.
Is this really about a perceived class distinction of north versus south? I really don’t think there’s anything more involved than that. One of the speakers said it: “The entire city needs to do their (sic) part…”
At the last Fullerton City Council meeting Ahmad Zahra, the ersatz damascene doctor, brought up the subject of the annual State of the City event. It’s a big lunch affair with lots and lots of people attending. His intent was to try to embarrass Mayor Fred Jung since the Mayor is the one gives the address, and Jung does it often whereas Zahra has never done it and never will.
Zahra called the event a publicity stunt that, given the bad state of Fullerton’s roads and finances should be scrapped. It’s all about transparency and public involvement, and other such nonsense. He still wanted an accounting and naturally so did his associate Shana Charles.
But then, lo and behold. When the two sanctimonious boobs were done, Mayor Jung, asked the City Manager how much last year’s event cost the City. The latter announced that last year’s event didn’t cost the City anything. In fact it made money!
Oops.
I didn’t say that…
Anyway, ther unnecessary review of this event is on tonight’s council meeting agenda where Zahra can whine about the council as a whole having no input; and the usual Fullerton Boohoo and Fullerton Angry nuts can stomp and shout.
You might think that a conscientious public servant like Zahra would forgo wasting staff time putting together and delivering a report on this event; and wasting his colleagues’ and the public’s time in listening to it. If you did you would be wrong. This is going nowhere. Here’s the lead in on the actual agenda:
An update on the City of Fullerton annual State of the City event, including a financial summary of the 2025 State of the City and considerations for the 2026 event. Staff anticipates utilizing a sponsorship and ticket-supported approach similar to the successful 2025 event for the 2026 State of the City and seeks City Council direction.
When staff describes the Mayor’s speechifying event as “successful” you’re not going to be able to use it to embarrass the Mayor.
Maybe Shana Charles will show up and then galumph out in a high dudgeon protest – like she did in 2023. But then she’d have to pass on a free lunch.
Fullerton’s illustrious ad hoc Budget Sustainability Committee was treated to a marathon “we’re cut to the bone” presentation by the City’s department heads last Tuesday night.
One of the interesting concepts for revenue enhancement, albeit one-time, came from our Director of Public Works Stephen Bise.
It seems that over time, unrefunded “engineering” fees from City permit applicants adds up. Currently, the City has about $700,000 in such fees sitting idly in a Public Works account. According to Bise some of the fees were collected way back in the 1990s. The City Council would have to put its seal of approval on the deal and a notice to the rightful owners of this money would have to be made.
Similarly, funds gathered from contractor bonds and not claimed piles up, too. Bise reckons that ampount is $145,000. Presumably the same process for keeping that dough would be deployed.
This situation begs the obvious question: what responsibility does the City have to notify its customers that they have positive balances; or better yet, why can’t the Public Works Department simply write checks and return the money to its rightful owners before it piles up? There seems to be an unwritten rule that the money belongs in City funds (gathering interest at least) until such time, if any, that the owners request reimbursement. It really is a form of indirect “taking.” These individual amounts may be small, but as Director Bise indicated, are substantial in aggregate.
Apparently Fullerton made a grab of these bond funds a few years ago that had accumulated up to 2016. That amounted to $800,000. The next decade’s worth is now on the table, apparently. Can the Council resist seizing this cash? I wouldn’t bet against it.
As to the process of notification I admit my ignorance. Are such notifications made to the real owners or their heirs and assigns? I wonder. It would be so much easier to put a public notice in a “newspaper of record” where virtually nobody would ever see it; and then put it on a Council Agenda, posted 72 hours before the meeting where even fewer people would see it.
