Friends For Fullerton's Future
FFFF supports causes that promote intelligent, responsible and accountable government in Fullerton and Orange County
Over at the big protest in front of the Fullerton Police Department, an arresting sight caught my eye. It was a banner hanging on the rail over the sunken court at department HQ.
And speaking of arresting, perhaps it should have read “Fullerton Police Alert: if approached by FPD assume a fetal position and hold your breath. Otherwise you will be targeted for resisting.”
The anonymous caller to yesterday’s KFI’s John and Ken program identified an Fullerton police officer with one eye as physically participating in the July 5th beating death of Kelly Thomas.
As hard as it is to believe, Fullerton does indeed employ a cop with one eye, and has been identified by our commenters as Jay Cicinelli. Cicincelli was a rookie cop in LA when he was shot multiple times in 1996 as described in this 1998 LA Times article.
Apparently in the aftermath of this incident Cicinelli was deemed incapable of meeting physical standards, was placed on permanent disability and separated from duty with the LAPD. Here’s where the story gets interesting, Fullerton-wise. Cicinelli’s career as a law enforcement officer was far from over.
It seems that a high ranking LAPD cop, Michael Hillman took special interest in Cicinelli and eventually he used an old LAPD acquaintance to land Cicinelli a job in Fullerton. That acquaintance? Yep, Chief Pat McKinley, as detailed in this glowing 2009 tribute to Hillman on the OC Sheriff’s website, after Hillman had followed Sandra Hutchens to the OCSD. Here’s the operative sentence by Cicinelli:
“I think he had a lot to do with getting me this job, I know he was good friends with (Fullerton Police) Chief Pat McKinley. How many departments are going to hire an officer with one eye?
The implications of employing and deploying a one-eyed cop on the streets of Fullerton are rather worrisome; the possibility that Cicinelli may have undergone severe trauma that has never been adequately addressed is even worse. Of course this latter issue is speculation; but McKinley’s role in bringing this cop to Fullerton calls into question issues of cronyism, poor judgment, and ultimately, perhaps, responsibility for what happened to Kelly Thomas.
This image was included in a story at Fullerton Stories here and purports to be a 2009 police booking photo of recent Fullerton homicide victim Kelly Thomas that was, presumably, provided by the ever helpful FPD spokehole Andrew Goodrich. Well, this is certainly a scary looking dude: pretty buff and mangy, and sufficiently angry-looking to scare the good folks of Fullerton right back into complacency about the homicide of a mentally-ill homeless man.
The only trouble is that it isn’t Kelly Thomas at all. His parents say this isn’t their son. But we don’t need their expert opinion. Apart from a large nose that is completely different from every other picture of Thomas, Kelly’s hair was flaming red, a simple fact illustrated in every other picture of him in the Fullerton Stories piece.
So what gives? Is this just a cheapjack trick by Goodrich & Co. to degrade the victim by presenting Kelly Thomas as a surly, muscular threat to Fullerton’s delicate residents? If so, the Fullerton Police Department has actually hit a new low, and given recent events that’s pretty goddam hard for them to do. But it’s just when you think you’ve hit the FPD basement you find out there are even lower levels.
I will await a comical explanation from the Good Sergeant Goodrich, but of course I won’t be holding my breath.
FullertonStories.com just published this letter from councilmember Bruce Whitaker, in which he demands that the video and audio recordings of the July 5th police beating of Kelly Thomas be released to the public.
Don’t forget to check out the printed responses of the other councilmembers, including McKinley who says “I disagree with that last sentence about releasing the video. It isn’t a wise thing to do and is for the authorities to do.”
What does that mean?
Okay, Friends this one is a bit convoluted so stick with me.
The latest State budget deal takes about $50 million away from Orange County. How come? Best I can figure it out is this: after the bankruptcy of 1995 the County sold recovery bonds and the State sequestered about $50,000,000 annually to pay off the bond holders from part of the Vehicle License Fee that was distributed to the County. Later when the VLF was swapped out for property tax income the payoff to bondholders still came from the VLF. When OC refinanced it’s debt in 2006 it started taking the VLF money directly from the State even though no other county got any of it.
Confused? In 2006 County Supervisor Bill Campbell said he wasn’t, but he failed to do anything about the money hanging out there according to Voice of OC (EA)’s Norberto Santana, here. It seems he didn’t want to address the issue and hoped everybody would forget about it. That lame strategy worked for about 5 years. Now the State is laying claim to the dough.
The worst malefactor here is County CEO Tom Mauk who has yet another catastrophe to lay claim to. Following swiftly on the heels of the disastrous Human Resource Department audit in which Mauk was busted giving his cronies huge raises and promotions, this latest calamity may prove to be the final nail in Mauk’s coffin.
Will three supervisors finally perform self cranial-rectal extraction and get rid of this bozo? They aren’t very bright but sooner or later…
Stay tuned.
The other day FFFF received this rather odd comment on the blog:
“Thanks for risking your lives so that my family and I can enjoy OURS!”
– Joel Swintowski
There were links to a website here that sported an official-looking letter from Fullerton’s police officer’s union president, Barry Coffman asking for money. There was the quote from Mr. Swintowski, clearly implying that he supports the Fullerton police union.
I got to wondering who this Joel Swintowski person might be. I never heard of him. So last night I contacted our FFFF investigative team of people-finders and guess what they came up with? There’s no such registered voter in Fullerton or in all of Orange County with any such name.
But, as they say on TV infomercials: Wait! There’s more! I also found a host of identical websites for police unions across California with the same quote from this “Joel Swintowski” guy. Clearly this operation is a money gathering scheme organized by some entity and then sold to police unions throughout the state like this one in Menlo Park, probably with a hefty cut taken from proceeds collected from unsuspecting suckers.
Now back to Fullerton. Coffman says it’s a “donation” that he’s begging. The request for money states: “Your contribution to us today will help provide outreach and strengthen relations by and between the FPOA and several local worthy groups and charities.”
Now we know the FPOA spends tens of thousands of dollars trying to get right-thinking people elected to the Fullerton City Council. And by right-thinking, I mean “public safety” union stooges who will raise their pensions and lower their retirement age. Do any of these “contributions” find their way into political activity? Could be. They are not tax deductible – the kind of deduction you get making a contribution directly to a real charity, eliminating the pistol-packin’ middleman.
So who might some of these “worthy” recipients be? Any guesses?
Could they include the campaigns of the same two guys, Bankhead and McKinley, who are getting prepared to raise your water rates 91% so they can use a portion of that money to support their own plush $McMillion retirement plans?
Maybe it’s time for an IRS audit of this solicitation for alms. Maybe the State AG needs to be called in, again. You know, just to make sure it’s legit.
And in the meantime maybe it’s time for FPOA to find a real Fullerton resident for its self-promotional testimonials.
Today The OC Register (see Jim, we know how to do it right) did a story on former Fullerton policeman Todd Majors who was busted for credit card fraud and is doing easy time taking out trash at Theo Lacy and going home every night.
Of course we already reported about Majors, here. Kimberly Edds of The Register actually did do some investigation to discover that Major allegedly has an addiction to pills and was hired by the Fullerton Police Department even though he had a drunk driving bust. Supposedly his drug addiction caused him to lurch into a life of crime.
Writes Edds: While internal affairs continued its investigation, Fullerton police asked themselves whether they missed any signs about Major or how they could have done to prevent a good cop from becoming a criminal.
Well, I sure hope they figure that out real soon.
Edds’ story concluded with the obligatory police cry for sympathy for one of their own – as some sort of pathetic victim.
The other day Register “reporter” Lou Ponsi put forth a story he read about on our blog first and presented it as his own to his handful of unsuspecting readers.
Apparently the idea that you can pilfer somebody else’s story and claim it as your own finds favor with Lou Ponsi’s “supervisor,” too. His name is Jim Radcliffe and below is his response to a complaint lodged by one of our readers.
See, according to Radcliffe if you “independently” verify someone else’s work then you’re in the clear to pretend that the story is yours. He notes that The Register stories get “picked up” all the time and that it is a compliment. No, Jim, even if true it’s swinish behavior, and just because you claim you don’t mind getting ripped off doesn’t men anybody else has to like having it happen to them.
Here is Radcliffe’s comical defense:
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Jim Radcliffe (jradcliffe@ocregister.com) wrote:
I am Lou Ponsi’s editor. … He is a very good reporter and handled this story like a pro, under my supervision. … We did see it first on that blog. And I applaud that blog for learning about it first.
But, as is common among the better news organizations, he independently verified everything we used in our story, making numerous phone calls. We usually don’t credit the first news organization that has the story; the reader typically doesn’t care and just wants to know about the story itself.
We, at the Register, are constantly the first to break stories that other media then pick it up: TV and radio stations, the L.A. Times, The Associated Press, etc. We don’t mind at all, as it is actually a compliment. We do mind if the news organization does no original reporting to make the story “theirs” and doesn’t credit us. … If there is no original reporting, then the initial source should indeed be credited.
Lou didn’t steal anything. He confirmed the arrest was true and found out new things about the case.
I have worked for various news organizations, and this is the industry standard. If you have any additional concerns, please feel free to call me at 714-704-3761. … Again, I applaud that blog for keeping an eye on Fullerton, so long as the coverage is fair. … The more journalists keeping an eye on a community, the better for everyone. … Jim.
Jim Radcliffe
Team Leader
The Orange County Register
714-704-3761
Ponsi found out “new things” about the case? No, he didn’t. He just found out that the officer in question had made some DUI arrests – a fact utterly irrelevant to the story and included by the “pro” no doubt to be “fair.” And of course he claims he made an unreturned phone call to somebody.
Please note too Radcliffe’s applause for FFFF (not in print, of course) – so long as the coverage is fair. Could it be that Radcliffe really believes that if a blog doesn’t meet his subjective definition of fairness he is not obligated to recognize its work product?
Finally, I have no idea what gives Mr. Radcliffe the idea that he is employed by one of “the better news organizations” but it certainly can’t be any discernible level of ethics.
I got hold of a press release from LULAC yesterday regarding their “plan” for County redistricting. LULAC stands for League of United Latin American Citizens, and the president of their Santa Ana chapter, Zeke Hernandez seemed pleased as punch with the monster he and cohort Arturo Montex have fashioned. First, here’s their map.
And here’s the text of their press release:
League of United Latin American Citizens, Santa Ana LULAC Council #147
Established: National – 1929 | Santa Ana – 1946
Orange County LULAC District #1
PO Box 1810, Santa Ana , CA 92702-1810
PRESS RELEASE: May 23, 2011
Local Civil Rights Groups to Submit Proposed Redistricting Plans to Orange County Redistricting Committee
Contact Persons: Zeke Hernandez, 714-661-4428 / zekeher@yahoo.com
Arturo Montez, 714-914-3154 / arturomontez@gmail.com
Santa Ana LULAC Council #147 (League of United Latin American Citizens) has submitted it’s completed county supervisorial plans with appropriate population data to the Orange County Redistricting Committee by the May 18 deadline. The Santa Ana LULAC county plan (Plan #3) and data are included in this press release (see also attachment).
Santa Ana LULAC President Zeke Hernandez states, “There are well-over twenty plans being submitted by county supervisors, community groups and individuals. Board of Supervisors Chairman Bill Campbell announced at the May 17th board meeting that he himself is submitting four plans, including one suggested by former county supervisor Phil Anthony. We understand another county supervisor has submitted 10-12 plans through his/her appropriate office or through third party intermediaries. Other local elected officials may also be submitting their own plans.”
Due to population changes following the decennial federal census count in 2010, Santa Ana LULAC has been able to draft two supervisorial districts (1 and 4) with over 50% minority population. These two districts have a community of interest – sharing common social and economic interests. The Santa Ana LULAC Plan #3 is affirmed to stand on its merits for the purpose of a community’s fair and effective representation.
Hernandez added, “We have brought to the attention of the Board of Supervisors its concerns that the redistricting committee has not adopted a definitive process on how it will review submitted plans and how it will determine which plans will be recommended for adoption. The committee has acknowledged it may even re-draw a submitted plan by the public to be sent to the Board for approval. Committee members are comprised of staff aides to the supervisors and were appointed by them to act on their behalf. The committee recently revised its writing of the committee meetings, but continues to do its best to provide very little content, thus thwarting public knowledge through written commentary.”
Santa Ana LULAC Public Policy Director Arturo Montez emphasizes, “We have drawn a plan that has ZERO concerns relating to incumbents, political parties and candidates. These plans were drawn, keeping in mind our strong adherence to the U.S. Voting Rights Act and the California Constitution. In addition, we have done our best to take into consideration the public’s concern for transparency and reform in the redistricting process.”
Montez continued, “Santa Ana LULAC feels its Plan #3 surpasses any other 20-23 plans that were submitted by the May 18th deadline. The question that now comes to the forefront: Will the Board of Supervisors recognize the dramatic demographic changes taking place in Orange County ? As proposed, District #1 has an 85% minority population, and District #4 has over 72% minority population. These are most likely the most heavily minority populated county districts in the nation.”
The redistricting committee will hold its first of several public meetings on Thursday, May 26 (2 pm) to review and receive public comments on the submitted plans. This first meeting will be held at Orange County Hall of Administration – Board Hearing Room, 333 West Santa Ana Blvd., 10 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana.
Established in 1946, Santa Ana LULAC Council #147 is the oldest LULAC council in California and is an affiliate of Orange County LULAC District#1 and LULAC National – founded in 1929 with its national office in Washington , D.C.
The mission and objectives of the League of United Latin American Citizens (LULAC) is to advance the economic development, educational advancement, public policy outcomes, housing opportunities, health awareness, and general civil rights protection of Latinos in the United States and Puerto Rico through community-based programs and services through more than 700 local LULAC councils nationwide.
~~ end ~~
The funniest part of this “ZERO concerns” drivel is this gem: Montez continued, “Santa Ana LULAC feels its Plan #3 surpasses any other 20-23 plans that were submitted by the May 18th deadline. Now, Art hasn’t seen any of the other plans, nor apparently, does he even know how many were actually submitted. Yet it’s Plan 3 surpasses any other!
Judging by the map above, LULACs main purpose is to create a Latino-majority district in the Fourth and a near-Latino majority in the First. Well okay, that’s their agenda. But the map necessarily carves up four or five cities, including Fullerton, into two or more supervisorial districts in order to sequester “white” populations out of the districts in question. While ethnic gerrymandering for and against minorities is nothing new for, it flies in the face of one of the main goals of redistricting which is to keep cities wholly in one district.
This means that a decent plan should aim to consolidate Garden Grove and Newport Beach, not create more divided cities.
Another aim of redistricting is to create compact, geographically cohesive units. LULACs plan just makes the current odd shaped districts an even odder hodgepodge.
Sorry guys, back to the drawing board!
According to our old Friend, Allan Bartlett (who apparently has had his posting priviledges at Red County restored), our Assemblyman Chris Norby has hired a new chief of staff to replace his old one. The new guy is named Bryan Lanza, who may count as his main claim to fame resigning from Abel Maldonado’s staff when the latter RINO went along with a big Demo tax deal.
Now, I’ve never heard of a government employee of any kind resigning on a matter of principle, so if it’s true, good for him.