Tonight: Steve Baxter and Fullerton’s PAS Gallery Produce “Art With An Agenda”

I’ll see you there.

By William Zdan:

The term “Pollice Verso” means (roughly) “thumbs down”. It’s in reference to the (albeit incorrect) traditional depiction of a Roman emperor giving the “thumbs down” signal that dictated the fate of a vulnerable/defeated fighter…usually a slave or other “expendable” that was forced into brutal exhibition.
I’ve toyed with the phrase, changing it to “Police Verso”..in obvious reference to the despicable actions that took place in Fullerton last year. In my painting, Dick Jones plays the part of a distant and ineffectual Caesar. He thumbs the fate of the unseen victim in smug disinterest, not even allowing his glaze to meet the atrocity for which he shares ownership. A panel of piggish spectators oversee the event, in uncontrolled animalistic enthusiasm.

When watching a television report with Dick Jones last year, I was disheartened by the comments he had made about the  murder. “I don’t know why he died” was the comment from Jones that affected me the most. Jones made a point to boast about his war-time efforts and how much worse, non-fatal injuries had been experienced there.  Jones, we know and YOU know why he died. And it wasn’t just because of the fierce bludgeoning that he received by your endeared law-enforcement brethren. He died, Jones, because of a culture that still treats other human beings as “expendable”. Because people like Kelly are easily marginalized. Homeless people, especially mentally ill homeless people, clearly don’t count to Jones…and he did not create that sentiment, he just reflects it. Just as the slaves and expendables of the Roman Empire could have their humanity stripped of them by a blood-thirsty crowd, eager to do so…so was Kelly Thomas rendered a worthless item by those people we trust to protect the rest of us who do “count”. As I heard Jones speak, I thought (as I often do), “we have not progressed as a society. We are no different than Rome”.

Despite the (much needed) height of the soapbox upon which I like to stand relative to this topic, I cannot dismiss my own contribution to the negative and destructive culture in which I actively participate. So…the pawn/villian in my painting takes the form of my own image. Shamefully turned away from the viewer, I still raise my tool of destruction above my pig-like visage. I still perform for the pigs and am obedient to the tyrants of norms and expectations. I still pass by countless expendables, which whom I ironically share so much commonality.

I spent much of my young adulthood studying and working with the mentally ill. I worked at occupational, psycho-social rehab facilities for schizophrenic people during college. I even interned at a psychiatric prison for 6 months. During that time, I imagined that my idealism and self-congratulatory understanding of those emotionally suffering individuals would allow me to make a difference. Instead, I’ve become homogenized, like the dizzying amount of conscientiousness introverts that allow people like Jones to have any say in the direction of our society. Despite the fact that Kelly walked the same blocks that I walk every week, I had never even seen him…and wouldn’t have remembered if I had. I stretch my own rubber glove over my hand every day…keeping my fellow man at a distance…careful not to touch the blood that I shared in spilling. Because if I (a so-called idealistic artist with fair exposure to the troubles of the mentally ill) can willfully ignore injustice for the sake of convenience, I am just as filthy a pig as Ramos.

So, I am the ultimate executioner and THAT illness is worse than Kelly’s was. I am the baton-waving brute in my painting. I was never so aware of this until I met Kelly’s mom yesterday. I stood next to her as she looked at the painting that I shat out for this important event. I had jumped onto a cause for someone I never met or cared about. Nowhere in the painting is Kelly’s personal injustice really depicted. Rather, in the form that fell Rome, mine is a self-indulgent view. And here was this man’s mother, looking upon my painting about..well, about something to do with being angry and selfish and pointing fingers, I guess. She said to me, “he was really a good kid”. I bet he was.

William Zdan

Travis Kiger Gets Key Endorsements

Travis and family

Just days after pulling papers to run in the Recall replacement election, Travis Kiger has received the full support of our County Supervisor Shawn Nelson, our State Assemblyman Chris Norby and Fullerton City Councilman Bruce Whitaker.

Said Chris Norby “Fullerton is very fortunate to have Travis as a candidate. As a resident and taxpayer in Fullerton I know we will be in good hands when Kiger is elected.”

Shawn Nelson echoed Norby’s comments. “Fullerton is in need of strong, conservative leadership. I live in Fullerton and I trust Travis to deliver on the promises of transparency and accountability.”

Travis Kiger represents the new type of Republican for Fullerton: one who believes in civil liberties, freedom, limited government, pension reform, a balanced budget, reasonable taxes and fees; one who opposes the sort of crony capitalism and corporate welfare that has been the hallmark of Fullerton “conservatives” for decades.

Most importantly, Travis stands for accountability to the citizens of Fullerton, without cover-up, condescension, excuses, or incomprehensible double-talk.

 

The Shameful Water Triple (Er, Quadruple) Dip

UPDATE: Of course the comment from “Do the math” is right on the money. The 10% in-lieu fee is defined as a percentage of gross revenue – including the in-lieu fee itself! This tricky little dodge adds 10% of the 10% – an add-on of yet another 1% to the cost of your water bill! Uh, oh! Quadruple dip!

The Desert Rat

Way back in 1970 the Fullerton City Council passed Resolution No. 5184 dictating that 10% of the gross revenue collected by the Water Department was a reasonable amount to cover ancillary costs from supporting City departments. Here’s the key language from the Resolution:

That an amount equal to ten percent of the gross annual water sales of the Municipal Utilities Department during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1970 is hereby transferred to the General Fund in payment for the services of the Finance Department of the City and of the City Administrator, the City Attorney and the City Clerk to the Municipal Utilities Department of the City as a part of the operating costs of the waterworks system of the City during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1970.

That at the end of the fiscal year ending on June 30, 1971 and at the end of every fiscal year thereafter, a sum equal to ten percent of the gross annual water sales of the Municipal Utilities Department of the City shall be transferred to the general Fund of the City in payment for the services, during such fiscal year, of the Finance Department of the City and of the City Administrator, the City Attorney and the City Clerk to the Municipal Utilities Department of the City.

What sort of justification proved that 10% of the water revenue in 1970 should have gone to the General Fund is anybody’s guess.

In 1982 the City Council passed an ordinance permitting itself the authority to collect an “in-lieu” fee from  the water utility as a fixed percentage of revenue. Despite the name change, the City continued to add the historic 10% to Fullerton’s water bills, and rake it off directly into the General Fund – without so much as a second thought.

A bit confusing? Not really. The original justification for the fuzzy 10% figure was to reimburse the City for vague incurred costs; calling it an in-lieu fee never changed the inescapable fact that the 10% amount was supposed to pay for actual costs associated with running the waterworks. Either way, as of 1997 and the implementation of Prop. 218, that became illegal.

Flash forward to today, and peruse this year’s budget documents. The Water Fund is Fund 44. Check out the total column on the right.

Summary of Appropriations by Fund.

Notice the amount directly allocated in the 2011-12 budget to the City Manager and Administration: $1.7 million ($29,917 + $1,678,962).

Now let’s see some actual charges. Observe Fiscal year 2009-10, over there, in the left column.

Summary of Expenditures and Appropriations by Fund

Good grief! As you might have guessed (based on this year’s budget), in 2009-10 the City directly charged the Water Fund over $1.5 million for the City Council, City Manager, and Administrative Services; plus fifty grand for Human Resources, and $100,000 for Community Development!

And this means that those services that were originally being used to justify the 10% levy on our water bills are already being charged directly to the General Fund. Double Dip!

Of course it gets worse. We now know the 10%  is a double dip; but hold on to your water bill. Because the directly charged costs for “administration” are considered part of the base waterworks cost; the automatic 10% in-lieu fee (which was supposed to pay for “administration” but that pays for nothing), is applied to that! That increase this year is at least $170,000, if you add 10% to that $1.7 million figure we saw in the first table. Triple Dip!

And that, Friends, is a triple gainer off the high board and right into the deep end of the pool.

 

 

Heeeeere’s Molly!

Almost on cue, who pops up to start cluck-clucking anti-recall nonsense? That’s right, the old dithering bird-brain herself, Molly McClanahan, who was recalled in 1994 for instituting an unnecessary utility tax.

Enjoy the vague abstractions and self-righteous pontification. You are left to your own devices to figure out what in the hell “emotional mischief” is. It’s anybody’s guess.

Let Molly do what Molly does best: babble idiocy about “the body politic” and the “soul of the City.” Let Molly roll out the same garbage she did eighteen years ago: that recall is only supposed to punish “malfeasance.” Wrong, dingbat. That’s what the Penal Code is for. Recall was instituted in California to get rid of politicians who had obviously failed in their duty to their constituents by placing special interests first. And that is precisely what has happened in Fullerton. And that’s why the recall of ’12, like that of ’94, is going to succeed.

 

 

“Dick” Ackerman, Moral Weathervane of the Anti-recall Team. Part 1

Heh, heh. They'll never find out...

Some of our loyal readers have asked us who Dick Ackerman is, and why is he the leader of the opposition to the recall of the Three Shop Worn Stooges on the Fullerton City Council: Jones, Bankhead, and McKinley.

Good question. After all, Ackerman is a resident of Irvine, and although he used to live in Fullerton a long, long time ago, it’s not immediately apparent why he should care about defending the Three Burned Out Bulbs on the council.

Well, these three did support Ackerman’s utterly unqualified wife when the Dickster tried to get her into the Legislature by cooking up a fake address in Fullerton.

But there’s more, and as you may have guessed, it’s the cash nexus. You see, ever since Ackerman termed out of the Legislature he’s been looking to grease his skids peddling the influence he accrued on the taxpayer’s dime. He is employed for lobbying purposes by a law firm called Nossaman; but rather than bring in business he’s actually become embroiled in embarrassing ethical and illegal incidents (more on that in Part 2). The word on Easy Street is that he’s got to bring in some do-re-mi to Nossaman and PDQ, or he’s out.

Which circuitously brings us to the latest round of “affordable” housing projects in Fullerton, the kind of housing that costs two or three times as much to build as the regular kind, and the sort that Dick Ackerman vociferously opposed on principal when he was on the Fullerton City Council. Well that was then, before Ackerman discovered he could profit handsomely from them. Now he is a lobbyist for one of the so-called developers, St. Anton’s Partners, who, not surprisingly, received the promise of millions of dollars in City Redevelopment subsidies from Jones, Bankhead and McKinley on a project just a few weeks ago. Jones, Bankhead and McKinley were so eager to pay off Ackerman that they actually tried to rush through their vote before the public hearing was even held!

And that’s why Ackerman needs to keep Fullerton’s Three Blind Bobbleheads in office, no matter what. There is no noble purpose, no moral justification, no principle at stake. There’s just a big potential payday for Ackerman and his employer, Nossaman. And if you don’t understand that, you don’t know Dick.

Stay tuned for Part 2, in which we share a little Dick Ackerman retrospective.

 

 

State Assemblyman Norby Settles Santa Fe Lease Issue

I was there. So was Ackerman, McClanahan, Catlin and Bankhead.

Here’s a copy of a letter to The Fullerton Observer by our State Assemblyman, Chris Norby, who puts the lie to the notion that Tony Bushala got some oct of subsidy in his lease deal with the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency. It’s funny how those who have routinely handed out millions in corporate welfare to their pals and cronies have chosen to attack Tony for actually paying to renovate the City-owned building!

Well, such are politics. The anti-recall crew are incapable of defending the Three Dessicated Dinosaurs so they have to attack the messenger of the Recall. Anyway, here’s Norby’s letter:

Santa Fe Depot Redevelopment Deal the Best We Could Get

I hesitate to get in the middle of your lively give-and-take with Tony Bushala (Mid-Sept Observer page 9 “Redevelopment Foe Also a Recipient,” and the Early October page 2 Rebuttal ).

However, since I was one of five Fullerton City Councilmembers (including Don Bankhead, Molly McClanahan, Buck Catlin, and Richard Ackerman) voting to approve the old Santa Fe Depot lease, allow me to defend our action.

That lease was the only way to save the historic structure from demolition and make an outdated building commercially viable.

In 1987, the Santa Fe Railroad sold the depot to a private developer who then sought a demolition permit. To avert its razing, the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency acquired the depot and sought bids for those who could preserve, restore and operate it. Agency staff recommended that the Bushala Brothers, Inc. (BBI) be awarded the project.

BBI was the only firm not requesting public subsidies. It offered a $41,000 up front payment to the agency plus $340,000 to restore the building to its original condition. As BBI had just completed an award-winning restoration of the old Ice House (just across the tracks from the depot) it was well qualified. When the depot restoration actually cost $540,000, the overruns were covered by BBI.

BBI also applied for and received the depot’s recognition on the National Registration of Historic Buildings and Places.

The monthly lease payment to the agency is $1,326, which is adjusted annually for inflation. While the Observer contends this is below market rate, it was the best offer we had at the time to restore this historic building. In addition, BBI pays $12,000 annually in building maintenance and for all property taxes and insurance.

The agency retained all rental income from Amtrak for the waiting room and ticketing areas. The rest of the depot was largely baggage storage rooms and an abandoned loading dock – areas difficult to lease out.

I have been critical of redevelopment agencies’ abuse of eminent domain, handouts to developers and diversion of property taxes from public schools. However, I have voted for agency-funded public projects (roads, parks, libraries) and for the preservation of historic buildings, such as the Santa Fe Depot.

One could argue that an old depot was not worth the public investment. However, given the council’s commitment to save the structure, I believe this was the best deal we had.

Chris Norby Fullerton Current California Assemblymember and former Fullerton City Council & Redevelopment Agency Member, 1984-2002

 

They’re Having A Party!

Looks like the anti-recall sponges and parasites have decided to hold a party to raise money for the Three Blind Mice.

Well, good for them, say I. After all, we really need to see what kind of creeps will support the incompetents who created and tolerated the Culture of Corruption in the Fullerton Police Department.

Here’s the flier:

View the flyer

Of course they were going to trot out the Jurassic McClanahan and Catlin – who were both recalled alongside Bankhead in 1994 for imposing a tally unnecessary utility tax on Fullerton. Oh! And here’s Jan Flory who not only supported the utility tax, but even wished it were doubled. And all of them voted year after year to stick us with a 10% tax on our water bills for no damn good reason other than that they could get away with it. Oh, yeah, they also supported every single Redevelopment boondoggle, giveaway, disaster, and money pit.

And Dick Ackerman? Ho ho! We’re onto that slime ball’s influence peddling schemes. Just a few weeks ago the Three Desiccated Dinosaurs awarded the lobbyist Ackerman’s clint a multi-million dollar subsidy for an unnecessary housing project. Awarded for services rendered, no doubt.

Well, there’s your sad crew of anti-recall characters. Here’s a thought: let’s sweep the whole rotten Phalanx of Failure into the garbage can of Fullerton history – once and for all!

Can anybody say protest at the Villa del Sol?

 

 

 

Peer into The Thought Process of the FPOA

UPDATE: Here is a post from waaaay back in November, 2010 about how our police union leaders view the political process and their ability to manipulate it to their own advantage. Of course the egregious Andrew Goodrich figures prominently in our post. Be sure to read the last sentence!

Just in case you thought there was any doubt that public service might not be the number one priority of Fullerton’s boys in blue, take a look at the document below, a veritable “how-to” article on political influence written in 2003 by FPD PIO and union front-man, Andrew Goodrich.

See, it’s all about how to leverage your members dues to create a political machine and get what’s coming to you. Actually it’s about defining what’s coming to you and getting a subservient collection of clowns you elect to go along for the ride.

Read “The Value of Political Involvement” (pdf)

I especially enjoyed Goodrich bragging about batting one thousand. The record looked great in 2003, but then the wheels started coming off the squad car. Chris Norby and Shawn Nelson jumped ship PDQ (although Norby stayed on the Police Reservation long enough to vote for the obscene 3@50 deal in 2001, thanks Norby). The pitiful police-backed pipsqueak Mike Clesceri was tossed out in 2004 after a mere one term; and ditto the equally useless Leland Wilson who was just a bad memory by 2006.

In 2010 the union backed a geriatric of dubious mental competency, a poster boy for pension abuse, and a guy who dodged criminal responsibility by giving his DNA to the DA. Hey two outta three ain’t bad – for them. For the rest of us? Not so good!

Bringing shop floor militancy to a police force near you...

And here’s a little bit more about Mr. Goodrich: promoted to “Community Services bureau leader – and police public information officer” last January as chronicled by Barbara Giasone:

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/goodrich-230504-police-fullerton.html

Goodrich also signed the May 3, 2010 MOU on behalf of the FPOA, along with Barry Coffman and Robert Kirk.

And just in case you feel your tax dollars that pay for 3@50, etc. are insufficient thanks to the police for all they do you can always help out some more. Here’s a solicitation we received from the FPOA just yesterday. Your gift is supposed to go to FPOA “community outreach” but IS NOT tax deductible. Hmm. You get a decal of a police badge.

In closing I really feel compelled to wonder whether or not any of the three worthy gentlemen named above have been posting comments on our blog.

How To Manage A Lynch-type Mob

The Orange County Association of Cities is an organization of repuglicans who just can’t stand the thought of big, authoritarian government unless they are milking it for all it’s worth. So it is fitting indeed that this operation should employ former Fullerton City Councilman and State legislator, Dick Ackerman, to teach its members how to “manage” a lynch-type mob (us). Such management presumably means deception, flattery, cajoling, bamboozlement, and ultimately doing nothing.

The choice of Ackerman cannot have been accidental, for he is one of the biggest enemies of government transparency in the State. You may remember some of our posts on Dickie Boy. We busted him cooking up a fake address in Fullerton so his old lady could carpetbag her way into the Assembly and perpetuate Dick’s cozy relationship with big lobbyists. Speaking of lobbyists we also uncovered the Ackermans’ scam non-profit, a gig run by lobbyists to pay for Hawaiian vacations for Dick and his slimy pals in the Legislature. And then of course there was the OC Fair scandal in which Ackerman illegally lobbied his former colleagues in Sacramento. Ackerman’s own billings did him in when exposed by our friends at the Voice of OC(EA). (Parenthetically, the latter incident was the subject of a DA whitewash – hmm).

Ironically, Ackerman has been on of the biggest supporters and promoters of the immensely incompetent and arrogant Three Blind Mice, who presumably, can be relied upon to trek down to the Tustin Ranch Golf Club and hobnob with their repuglican kinfolk and learn from the Dickster all about “shocking crises and what went wrong.”

Come to think about it, maybe Bankhead, Jones, and McKinley should be teaching this course; that is, if they are capable of learning anything at all.