Thanks to a federal grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) our city government is being presented with almost $3,000,000 to hire 12 new sworn fire department personnel and subsidize the new employees for three years to the tune of 75%, 75%, and 35%. The new hires will consist of three “Fire fighters,” three “Fire engineers,” and three “Fire Captains.” The City’s obligatory “matching” contribution is $1.8 million for those three years.
Another fire truck will be re-activated at Fire Station 6, requiring promotions of existing FFD underlings to take the vehicle to emergencies. This part of the item is not covered by FEMA.
It’s Item #14 on tomorrow night’s council meeting agenda.
If you want to read about it, here, you’ll see that the staff report is a virtual shell game of verbiage and is based on the notion that savings from the operation of the ambulance service hijacked by the FFD will cover the City’s new expenses; of course these “savings” are speculative – most likely the wishful thinking that goes along with empire building. There is not a single utterance about budget impacts now or in the out years.
Never a fire fighter around when you need one…
Sustainability? It would be nice to know what happens to these 12 positions after the three years are up and there is no longer any federal subsidy. Will these worthy folks be discharged in the name of budgetary constraint? Will they be kept on courtesy of cuts elsewhere? The new jobs will have to have pension costs now, and of course in the future which jack up our required payments to the good folks at CalPERS. On these issues the staff report is silent as a tomb.
There it goes…some might come back. Less overhead!
It’s long been a tenet of conservative principles that these dispensations of largesse from Washington and Sacramento are sort of like a pusher getting his junkies reliant on his dope. Here, specifically I have to wonder why FEMA is even in the business of increasing fire department sizes and budgets and the obligations that go along with that augmentation.
Obviously the agency that is known for helping communities’ response to big crises, mostly of the natural disaster kind, now has a remit and a budget to hand out money without reference to any disaster at all. And that budget most be pretty damn big if Fullerton can get a $2.8 million commitment.
Wouldn’t it be nice if the federal revenue that pays for this were kept at home, in the hands of the taxpayers and their local representatives, in the first place.
Got noise? Lots of noise? The two “doctors” on the Fullerton City Council and their followers like the Kennedy Sisters and tender young Elijah want you to believe this is vibrancy and culture and small business success!
Friends can file this story under a number of different categories: political puppetry, gross hypocrisy, unmitigated gall, comical self-righteousness, offense is the best defense; pick any one you like.
Pay no attention to the overdue bills…
At last Tuesday’s Fullerton City Council meeting we were treated to another diatribe by a guy named Oliver Montecristo attacking Fred Jung, Nick Dunlap and Jamie Valencia. We have already met Oliver, here. Oliver wants everyone to believe that Jung and his colleagues are anti-small business, a new line of attack by Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles, two muppets who have never run a business in their lives.
I sometimes fight for transparency!
It’s pretty clear that Oliver is one of the minions in Zahra’s stable of impressionable young fellas. His other protégé, lively young Elijah Manassero, has taken up the myth of the City’s persecution of Olly’s mom, and the family restaurant, Les Amis. The rents on City property are so darn high! The Kennedy Sisters at the Fullerton Observer have also taken up the Les Amis cause.
The only problem is that the Montecristo clan led by mom, Jinan, have a notorious record of not paying their bills, and encroaching on public property without authorization or permits. Check it out:
Feb 2011 Jinan Montecristo d.b.a. Les Amis Restaurant & Lounge (Jinan) applied for an outdoor dining encroachment agreement.
Aug 2011 After several reviews of the site plan, staff provided a draft encroachment agreement to Jinan for consideration
Sept 2011 Jinan issued a letter to staff challenging the lease rates. Les Amis installed fencing and started operating within the public right-of-way without executed agreement (south patio).
Dec 2011 Staff send revised encroachment agreement for consideration
June 2012 Jinan was issued an Administrative Restaurant Use Permit (ARUP), which included an ancillary outdoor patio. Among other things, the conditions of the ARUP required a valid encroachment agreement pursuant to the Outdoor Dining Guidelines established by the City Council.
July 2012 Staff send revised encroachment agreement for consideration
Dec 2015 Jinan submitted building permit to expand into the north portion of the building.
Feb 2016 Staff inform Jinan that she owed $28,659.60 for use of the public right-of-way of private benefit (9/2011 – 2/2016).
May 2016 Modification of an Amended ARUP was approved, expanding existing restaurant into adjacent tenant space. Jinan executed an encroachment agreement for outdoor dining (south patio only; $510/month; $6,120 annually). The agreement also required payment for 12-month prior occupancy ($6,120; negotiated down from $28,659.60).
Aug 2016 Jinan issues a letter to staff indicated they are “unable to fulfill financial obligations” due to “hardship”.
April 2017 Jinan was issued a letter from the City attorney to pay outstanding balance on account.
May 2017 Encroachment Agreement expired.
Aug 2017 Les Amis expanded into the north patio area without a permit/agreement for outdoor dining.
Nov 2018 Jinan was issued a letter from the City attorney, indicating they are in violation of their ARUP, failed to pay the lease outlined in the executed agreement, and are required to remove encroachments (north and south patio) by Dec. 14, 2018. Jinan subsequently expressed interest in continued use of both patios. Outstanding balance was $24,643.70 at the time.
Dec 2018 Jinan signed resolution of breach of outdoor dining encroachment agreement and FMC. Resolution waived outstanding balance on Patio 2 (north patio; $5,263.70), resulting in $19,380 of remaining account balance.
Jan 2019 Staff sent two encroachment agreement(s) for consideration. Jinan expressed interest in removing Patio 1 (south patio) and expanding Patio 2 (north patio)
March 2019 Jinan executed Encroachment Agreement for new north patio only. New Agreement was for $913.75/month ($510 for north patio; $403.75 for prior occupancy fee ($19,300 amortized over 48 months))
Permit was issued for removal of fencing around south patio and installation for north patio expansion per executed agreement.
May 2020 City Council paused collecting lease revenue from all outdoor dining encroachments due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Outstanding balance for all outdoor dining agreements was also waived. Les Amis waived balance was approximately $13,647.50.
June 2022 Council approved new lease rates for outdoor dining on public property.
Aug 2022 Les Amis reinstalled south patio without permits and/or an agreement.
Sept 2022 Jinan submitted application to reinstall south patio.
Aug 2023 Staff reinitiated collecting lease from all existing agreements.
Oct 2024 Jinan defaulted on payments from August 2023 to October 2024, accumulating a dept of $13,468.71. Jinan signed an agreement for a 12-month payment plan to pay the outstanding debt of $13,468.71.
NOTE: this did not include prior occupancy for the reinstalled south patio.
Nov 2024 Jinan executed two superseding encroachment agreements for outdoor dining with the new lease areas and rates.
April 2025 Jinan defaulted on payments, accumulating an outstanding balance of $26,650.96. Staff terminated the agreements, cancelled the payment plan, issued several notices of violations, and required removal of all encroachments. Jinan expressed financial hardship and requested the City revisit the lease rate. Jinan also paid $1,200 toward the payment plan and expressed interest in purchasing the property. The city paused removal to explore options.
July 2025 Jinan was once again requested to remove all unpermitted encroachments. Jinan paid $3,900 toward the payment plan. City Manager agree to extend the time for compliance or a change in the Outdoor Dining policy for 60 days. To date, Jinan has an outstanding balance of $31,185.10 ($5,494.06 payment plan; $25,691.04 encroachment agreements)
Yikes! What a history of screwing the taxpayers. Almost 15 years worth. Poor, small-businessman Oliver was in fourth grade when it started.
Not paying your debts to the public is the best way to become a Sharon Quirk Woman of the Year!
Over the years Jinan has deliberately dodged paying many tens of thousands of dollars in rent to the people of Fullerton. She has illegally encroached onto public property without agreements or permits in place on numerous occasions. The record is abundantly clear: the City has bent over backward for years and years to accommodate this woman; rather than evicting Janin from the City’s property and taking her to court for the rent due she has effectively stolen, they kept giving her more opportunities to rip us off. Pathetic, really.
Found another victim!
Well, Oliver may think the documentation of his family stiffing the public is all nonsense and that somehow he and mommy are victims, doncha know; however, no one except the inordinately stupid would believe it.
The cynical manipulators like Doc Zahra don’t believe it either, but Zahra won’t miss a chance to get some eager fool to stand up and harass the people who haven’t, and won’t make him Mayor.
Shana Charles has flipped her stance on noise regulations. I wrote about it, here the other day.
Previously, the councilwoman proposed a 10pm cutoff on amplified music with an 11pm cutoff on weekends. This is an ideal solution, as it supports residents’ needs for peace and quiet while still recognizing the importance of nightlife to the city’s “vibe.” However, Mayor Pro-Tem Charles has renounced her previous stance and instead, her recent vote indicates that she now stands behind louder music and promotes the disruption of residents.
Shana has failed to side with the reasonable ordinance that would benefit both residents and businesses. Her stance seems to favor only the business side, ignoring the needs of the residents who deserve a quiet environment, especially during late hours. The lack of respect for all of us who live here undermines trust in our local government and shows a disregard in our community’s well being.
Once again, an elected in Fullerton has flip-flopped. Big surprise.
Obviously, Shana doesn’t live near the loud music. The amplified music is constantly disrupting our sleep, even on weeknights when rest is necessary for school and work. This inconvenience is impossible to get used to and negatively impacts our focus, energy, and overall lifestyle. It never seems to quiet and is a constant headache to all of those who are affected.
Shana’s decision was hypocritical and disrespectful to all residents. It just looked political. It’s frustrating to see those in charge act for political reasons rather than in the best interests of the community. Some councilpersons’ choices continue to show a lack of accountability and awareness of how their actions impact everyone else. Decisions like these create disappointment and distrust, making it harder for residents to believe that those leading Fullerton truly care about the people they represent.
We need to hold Mayor Pro-Tem Charles accountable for her actions and recognize what the city really needs, not what Charles wants.
It could be worse. It could be Speed Metal! Wait. It is!
Last night the Fullerton City Council, at long last, approved a noise-related addition to the Municipal Code. The vote was 3-2: Jung, Dunlap, and Valencia for, Charles and Zahra voting no.
This effort has been going on for over ten years, has been diddled with by more than ten City Councilpersons (Flory twice), and five City Managers, acting and permanent.
The ordinance is pretty tame really, with decibel levels I think are way too high, but at least gauged at the property line where the goofy and distracting issue of “ambient noise” can be better put to rest. Hours of outdoor music have been addressed with common sense and respect for neighboring inhabitants.
Fines for violators are in place, and about time, too.
For the business…
It was amusing to watch Zahra and Charles pretend to be “pro-business.” We know the performance was disingenuous because of their cavalier attitude to non-bar businesses on Wilshire Avenue that suffered when that pair closed the street for their absurd “Walk on Wilshire.” They ignored the fact that downtown Fullerton runs in the red and is subsidized by the rest of us. Really their act was about voting against what they characterized as the wishes of “one businessman” regardless of the need for reform.
In what surely must be the dumbest thing said in recent years at a council meeting, Ahmad Zahra claimed as a fact that the “downtown is dying,” a really weird and irresponsible thing to utter. The Dismal Damascus Doctor offered exactly zero facts to support his stupid utterance.
Transparency, uber alles!
Naturally, our friend sweet young Elijah Manassero popped up to inform the council that most of the bar owners were already non-compliant with the new rules. His logic led him to conclude that therefore the new regulations were ill-advised. It didn’t seem to occur to the tender sprout that the continual bar-owner abuse of existing law was precisely why the new ordinance was needed. I have no idea what they’re teaching the young folk these days, but thinking doesn’t seem to be in the bundle, although I’m sure callow Elijah has loads and loads of self esteem.
Now it will be time to see if the City Code Enforcement operation will employ the willingness and the competence to enforce the law. They have stubbornly refused to do so in the past, partly because councilmembers were running interference for the scofflaws. And part of the reason for staff’s reluctance might be because enforcement implies some sort of fault or failure, and in City Hall the decades long mess they made out of downtown Fullerton, has been characterized as a stunning and inarguable success.
Last Tuesday the Council voted 4-1 to deny access to any non government publications on City property.
This seems to be the result of our humble request to allow FFFF a presence thereon, however one never knows since our attorney, Kelly Aviles, never got a response over the past couple of months to our request for access. Oh, well.
No news is good news…
The new policy will remove other publications that already have access, namely the Daily Titan, the school paper at CSUF and the yellowing Fullerton Observer, a dreadful compendium of political bias, untruths, innuendo, rumors and libel.
Naturally the Observer crowd began bleating about censorship although nobody is censoring any of their drivel. They are still free to disseminate their trash at George’s Burger and at Ralph’s and any other place that will have them.
The lone no vote came from that champion of free press, Ahmad Zahra, who (we now know) “ran away” from persecution in his homeland and now can revel in yet another layer of heroic victimhood – political refugee! He actually sent a out a press release reiterating his loyalty to our country – the one he snuck into.
I’m not even going to bother reproducing that noble-sounding riff. Just remember this: When this story started Zahra absolutely did not want FFFF in City Hall in any form. A few years back he also voted to legally harass FFFF and to keep suing FFFF over the shared files affair – even after the jig was up. How’s that for First Amendment championship? Paper thin.
A couple months ago FFFFs attorney, Kelly Aviles sent a letter to the Fullerton City Manager announcing our intention to begin a paper edition of our humble blog, and requesting that the City permit distribution of that publication on City property – places like the lobby of City Hall and the Community Center.
You’ve got mail!
Dear Mr. Levitt:
I hope this finds you well. I am writing to you on behalf of my client, Fullerton’s Future, who’s in the process of launching a new newspaper publication to serve the residents of Fullerton. As part of the marketing and distribution efforts, my client seeks to place a newspaper rack in the lobby of City Hall, similar to the arrangements that have been made with other local newspapers.
We respectfully request the City Council grant approval for my Client to install a newspaper rack in the lobby of City Hall. My Client has secured a financial commitment from a local businessman for a significant amount of private financing to launch this new business endeavor committed to contributing to the local community by providing important local news, restaurant reviews, business advertisements, and information that reflects the diverse interests of our city’s residents and their needs for alternative news sources. In addition, an application to form a new 501-c4 will soon be filed with the IRS for this venture.
Please let me know if there are any specific procedures or requirements that need to be followed to facilitate this request or if the Council has any preferences regarding the placement of such a news rack at City Hall. We are eager to comply with any guidelines you may have.
Thank you for your time and consideration and we look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Kelly Aviles
FFFF hasn’t been particularly forgiving of all the murder, mayhem, misbehaving, and costly mistakes our highly paid employees have made over the years with the blessings of boobish city council members; the City has even gone so far as to sue FFFF contributors for mistakes made by employees and our City Attorney; therefore we figured our chance of getting our voice heard in City Hall was nil.
If you check out next Tuesday’s council agenda you’ll notice Item #14. It’s a Resolution establishing a policy that keeps FFFF off City property and limits the presence of non-governmental communications to the Main Library “community corkboard” – at the discretion of the Librarian.
Wow, there’s steaming pile of bureaucratic jargon – enough to satisfy anybody who admires that sort of gobbledygook. My favorite sentence is “The policy emphasizes that all City facilities remain non-public forums.” Wouldn’t want a public forum in City Hall, now would we? That space is reserved for government propaganda.
Stick it where it will do the most god…
I don’t believe this would be on the agenda at all without previous agreement in closed session, hidden away from prying eyes under the deceitful cloak of “potential litigation.” I wonder if they can legally enforce this policy.
We may have to start printing selected copy from our greatest hits and push pin them onto that community corkboard!
Starting out as a boutique hotel, a dumb idea took on a bloated, lumbering life of its own and has been kept alive through bureaucratic inertia and predictable metastasis.
Hostert
Now there’s a new twist. Word on the street is that the family of the guy with the original brainstorm, Craig Hostert of Westpark Development, is suing the current “developers” TA Partners. You may recall that Hostert is dead. His relatives seem to think that his money men, Johnny Lu and Larry Liu of TA Partners, pushed Craig out of his interest in the project. Johnny and Larry are said to be counter suing.
That can’t be good…
Parenthetically, I might add that Johnny and Larry are no strangers to the legal system, having left a trail of bankruptcies, foreclosures, and fraud in their wake. Fullerton being Fullerton.
Enhanced with genuine brick veneer!
I don’t know what the lawsuits might entail, legally, but due to the incompetent actions of Councilmembers Bruce Whitaker, Shana Charles, and Ahmad Zahra in upzoning the property, there could be a lot at stake. Remember, the City sold Westpark/TA almost two acres of land for $1.4 million (less demolition costs) while making it worth ten times that amount by abusing the allowable density in the Transportation Center Specific Plan.
Right now the City Hall silence remains deafening. We do know the council met in closed session about this awhile back, and still the public remains in the dark. Why hasn’t the City kicked Johnny Lu and Larry Liu to the curb long ago? They were supposed to have performed all sorts of stuff by now. Here are Johnny and Larry’s milestone obligations per the Development and Disposition Agreement, approved at the end of December, 2022.
Read. Weep.
Westpark/TA Partners are clearly in default. Plans submission was supposed to take place in December 2023 – fifteen months ago. Permits were required to be obtained fourteen months ago. Grading was supposed to start eleven months ago. Above ground construction was supposed to start by the end of last October – five months ago. See a pattern?
For some reason TA Partners was given some wiggle room in the actual verbiage of the contract for plans submittal – 240 days which would have been February of 2024, still thirteen months ago, and still a massive default.
Was there an “Unavoidable Delay?” Who gets to know? Why would the City fail to exercise its right retake the property? If you see a councilperson, please be sure to ask. Of course you won’t get an answer as the whole thing is shrouded in Closed Session secrecy. Without any action on the part of Fullerton, the two fly-by-nighters are still in possession of entitlements worth a pile ‘o cash – enough to excite the pecuniary envy of Mr. Hostert’s heirs and assigns.
I get the strange feeling that this latest legal entanglement might have repercussions for any case Fullerton might have in getting rid of Johnny and Larry. It shouldn’t, but it might be cause for staff to continue to string this thing out since it has been such a lucrative toy for Fullerton’s crack “economic development” employees.
It means you aren’t very smart. You aren’t attractive. You aren’t talented. You aren’t educated. You do have a chip on your shoulder and you do seem to think people owe you something. Mostly because you grossly overestimate yourself, and the Kennedy Sisters think you check all the right boxes.
But I checked all the right boxes…
On Tuesday evening Ms. Jaramillo appeared at the Fullerton City Council to take the council majority to task for rejecting her nomination to the Planning Commission. It was a graceless, rude performance.
She didn’t seem to grasp the irony in her insulting the people who voted against her, just like she did last December in what we wished had beenher final goodbye statement. Alas, no. Here is “Cannabis Kitty” showing up again like a bad penny. Some of her comments about the council majority:
Afraid of her, or;
Childish in their rejection of anything Zahra
Disgusting
Idiotic
She whined that voting “no” on an appointment was just never done! And recent appointments by Jamie Valencia are “the usual suspects,” unqualified “bozos” only wanting “personal glory, and who are not “interested in the betterment of the City.” Not like her, of course. Why, one of these appointees, a former Mayor, was even referred to by Fullerton employees as “Mayor Bozo,” Jaramillo recalled.
She failed to mention that object of her denigration, Chris Norby, is also a former County Supervisor and State Assemblyman now willing to serve on a low-grade committee almost nobody knows about because he is simply a good citizen.
Zahra wants you for Ahmad’s Army!
Of course Jaramillo got her facts wrong, or more likely, pretended to, omitting that only a few weeks earlier her sponsor, Ahmad Zahra voted noon Valencia’s appointment of Arif Mansuri, a professional engineer, to the Transportation Commission.
Jaramillo essentially identified Valencia a puppet of Jung, who she wrote off completely as a “little dictator.” She was “bummed,” she said because the absent Nick Dunlap wasn’t there to hear her lament of his action. She had hoped better of him. She didn’t remind anybody that in her December letter to her friends at the Fullerton Observer she referred to Dunlap as a knucklehead. Short or selective memory?
The happiness vanished in a political haze…
Now I don’t know about you, but it looks to me like Jaramillo is just prone to insulting people who refuse to acknowledge her superior qualities. Of course she is bitter about losing to some unknown who’s only lived in Fullerton “a hot minute.” I don’t care about that, but I find it surprising that her own sense of entitlement is so immense that it would cause her to expect the targets of her abuse to appoint her to anything.
No, it’s not a musical recording. Not exactly. There’s no music, but there’s a lot of singing sad songs and lamentations.
Fullerton Boohoo, old and new…
It seems that what’s left of Fullerton’s Old Guard liberals and a scattering of younger adherents to no-fault government are having a real hard time grasping the reality of the Fullerton City Council’s new commonsense majority. These lefties don’t ask a lot of intelligent questions. They believe in empty abstractions and are happy to regurgitate whatever nonsense is spoon fed to them by the likes of Ahmad Zahra. They are appalled by councilpersons Jung, Valencia and Dunlap who have the audacity to question the go along, get along status quo of unaccountable government.
The meeting on Tuesday, March 4th was a total disaster for the so-called “progressives”
We noted that the idea of exploring charter city status for Fullerton was moved along, despite the all the silly fears of those gathered together by Zahra to oppose the concept.
What we didn’t cover was the introduction of measures to keep people from camping in public places and the protection of public facilities. It’s about time the City decided to end its attraction to vagrants who pose a public safety risk. Those votes were 3-2, of course, with Zahra and Charles siding with the immigrant homeless instead of their homed constituents.
No bueno…
Other issues were agendized, too. There was the topic of a letter opposing an AQMDs ban on gas appliances. Seeing the practical problems of the policy, the majority decided to oppose the measure. The vote was the same 3-2. Since there’s nothing a liberal likes more than following the mandates of completely opaque government agencies, Zahra and Charles were compelled to vote no, citing “public health.”
The following entertaining interchange took place (according to the Fullerton Observer Kennedy Sisters with their usual additions):
Mayor Jung without asking for council comments, said “I will move the item” – but Councilmember Zahra said he had some questions.
Councilmember Zahra made some clarifications, “For those who mentioned this was overreach from the state – this is not from the state. The governing body [SCAQMD] is multiple cities in Southern California, a regional body of members from LA, Orange and San Bernardino counties.” He said the letter merely states that we are supporting this – or not supporting this. So nothing is being imposed here locally whether it [the letter] goes out in the negative or positive. The actual SCQAMD meeting where this will be decided happens on May 2 – so anyone passionate about it can attend that meeting,” he said.
Mayor Jung “Is there a question somewhere in there?”
Councilmember Zahra passing over Jung’s unnecessary interruption went on to say – “The clean air rules are for manufacturer’s not residents and the rules transition gradually. So no one is going to come and take your gas stove. If we are looking at this from a public health view – he said we do have high air pollution in Orange County – those are facts. I think we should stay out of this discussion for now, or – in my opinion – we should support public health. So I am not in favor of sending this letter out.”
Jesus H., speaking of gas emitting appliances…
First, Mayor Jung was actually following Robert’s Rules of Order, in which motions drive discussion, not the other way around. But Zahra had questions, right? Questions? No, that was a lie. he wanted to make yet another campaign speech, and he did. Jung, quite reasonably, lost his patience with the usual Zahra pontification, and asked where the questions were. The “interruption” was not unnecessary since Zahra had already interrupted a legitimate motion; Jung’s was appropriate response to Zahra’s out-of-order speechifying, which Jung did allow to continue.
Naturally, Zahra lied once again, trying to make the SCAQMD look like a sovereign local agency, when in fact it gets its diktats from Sacramento, via the California Air Resources Board (CARB), the Governor, and the Legislature.
Finally, there was a traffic issue, the topic being the signalization of the Euclid/Valley View intersection. Staff supported this, but only by using some sort of grant money, meaning it’s not a priority; the guesstimate for the cost would swallow up the City’s total traffic signalization budget for a year. As a side note, there’s already a signal at the Hiltscher Trail crossing – just a few hundred feet to the north.
Zahra and Charles really wanted to throw half a mil at the problem and move on.
However, in the end the council chose to turn the item back to the Traffic and Circulation Commission for more review and more public outreach. For some reason Zahra pushed for “closure” on this issue, probably just out of spite, and to make the council majority look bad in front of the audience. But since they had no dopey, liberal ideal that could be used to manipulate anybody Zahra and Charles went along with sending the thing back to the TCC.
