I Aint a Swallerin That Archives - Friends For Fullerton's Future

May 6, 2026May 6, 2026About Us

F-U to North Fullerton, Almost

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 rejected 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 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.

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.

Sitkia Kennedy could be seen in the fifth row applauding these speakers, presumably before she returned to her role of objective journalist.

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.

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…”

May 5, 2026May 5, 2026A Manfro All Seasons

The Party Pooper

by The Fullerton Harpoon8 Comments

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.

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.

May 4, 2026Ahmad Zahra

Three Selfless Heroes

by Disillusioned Ex-Hippy12 Comments

Yes, indeed.

May 1, 2026May 1, 2026Ahmad Zahra

Derek Smith and the Anaheim Cabal

by The Fullerton Harpoon11 Comments

Backscratching is fun – with other people’s money…

This blog has introduced Mr. Derek Smith to our friends. He is the appointee of “Doctor” Ahmad Zahra to the so-called Budget Sustainability Committee. His qualifications? Well, none are apparent. But we do know that Smith is (or was) the political lobbyist for the union that organizes cannabis store employees.

We already knew that Smith’s union was bankrolling a PAC for the benefit of Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo’s scampaign in 2024 to the tune of $60,000, $4000 of which went to The Councilwoman Shana Charles Self-improvement Fund.

And now thanks to detailed reporting by Mr. Duane J. Roberts, a true citizen journalist, we know that the union in question, UFCW Local 324, was up to it’s neck in schemes to bring legal cannabis to Anaheim. Roberts’ post is a must-read, for it details the close alliance between Anaheim’s crooked cabal and the union. For several years Smith and his union worked closely with disgraced Anaheim Chamber of Commerce head Todd Ament, Anaheim fixer Jeff Flint, and the Mayor, Harry Sidhu.

Ament, Flint, and Sidhu (graphic by Duane J. Roberts)

For the cabal the dope incentive was money, and lots of it. Money that would go to the cabal leaders, the Chamber of Commerce, and campaign funds of the later-convicted Mayor. For Derek Smith’s union, the promise of a Labor Peace Agreement (LPA) that would eventually cover even part-time workers was the goal.

First this association of strange bedfellows tried to get the City Council to go along. Then they began the process to put the issue on the ballot, with proposals written by the cabal, and then by the lobbyist for the Long Beach dope cartel; they were submitted by a UFCW Local 324 employee, and then a local realtor and insurance salesman, Belal Dalati, respectively. Both were eventually retracted, but not without threats, according to Roberts.

Left unreported by Roberts was the role of Melahat Rafiei, the acknowledged queen bee of OC dope lobbying, and a player deeply involved with Anaheim’s cabal. She later went to jail after she was busted by the FBI for wire fraud; Harry Sidhu did a prison stint, too for destroying evidence; Todd Ament pleaded guilty to fraud and his buddy Jeff Flint left town – for a while. Nice people, right?

While none of the Anaheim MJ activities were illegal, at least as far as can be discerned, the whole episode gives off a real bad smell; and in the middle of it was Derek Smith’s union.

Anybody who thinks Ahmad Zahra was ignorant of what was going on in Anaheim and with Rafiei (whom he recommended to at least one Fullerton businessman as a necessary contact) is pretty credulous. And his appointment of Derek Smith to the budget committee comes into sharper focus.

All that transparency can give a lad a headache…

The fact that the self-righteous clamorers who have decried the appointment of Tony Bushala to this committee have diligently ignored the appointment of Smith is telling. Bushala’s political involvement is a disqualification; Smith’s political history is assiduously ignored – just like the Fullerton Observer Sisters relentlessly ignored the Scott Markowitz conspiracy and the massive contribution by Derek Smith’s union to a pro-Jaramillo political action committee.

Both Zahra and Charles are beholden to the dope lobby, but they still need another vote to revive the 2020 marijuana ordinance approved by Jan Flory, Jesus Quirk-Silva, and Ahmad Zahra. They won’t get it this year.

April 28, 2026May 4, 2026Ahmad Zahra

Derek Smith and the Budget Sustainability Committee

by Mr. Peabody38 Comments

Reading all that Das Kapital stuff will give a young lad a headache…

The Fullerton Boohoo claque has made a big deal about how Tony Bushala is unfit to be on the ad hoc Budget Sustainability Committee. His disqualification? He is involved in politics. He is a “rent seeker” in the words of Tender Young Elijah Manisserro, who remarkably is not ashamed at being a dedicated Marxist in the 21st Century. Bushala has a conflict of interest, these people keep bleating.

Tony’s real offense is that he has money and is willing to spend it to keep aggressive imbeciles like Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo from getting into office; and for that he has gained the animus of the Damascus Dodger, Ahmad Zahra and his small collection of sycophants.

But Mr. Bushala is not the point of this post. Rather it is another member of the Committee, one Derek Smith.

Mr. Smith is Ahmad Zahra’s personal appointee to the group, and has a lot of interest in Fullerton’s budget. Why? Because he is the political lobbyist for the local union that represents marijuana dispensary employees. He is part of a coalition that has been trying to get these places legalized in Fullerton for years. Their point man is Ahmad Zahra who doesn’t seem to see a contradiction between dope use and his alleged Muslim convictions.

In the the 2024 District 4 election Smith’s union funded a political action committee dedicated to electing Cannabis Kitty. He funded it to the tune of $60,000 which included a $4,000 payment to Andre Charles, husband of councilmember Shana Charles. How come? To elect the pro-cannabis candidate who would re-instate the old dope law repealed in 2021.

That’s a lot of political activity, activity that has received zero scrutiny by the Fullerton Observer Sisters, Sharon and Sickia. Come to think of it, the delicate rose petal Elijah Manissero has never mentioned it either. How’s that for hypocritical “transparency?”

Moreover, Brother Smith is not an accountant, or a business owner, or a entrepreneur. Instead, he is a dedicated union functionary, virtually the last person I would want on a municipal budget sustainability committee. The apex of Smith’s business experience has been blowing through $60,000 of his members’ dues on Jaramillo. Did he know about the fraudulent Scott Markowitz campaign? I wonder.

Applying the rhetoric and logic of Fullerton’s boohoos would immediately disqualify Derek Smith from the Budget Sustainability Committee. Will anybody apply it? I wonder.

In the meantime Ahmad Zahra the eager messiah of marijuana in Fullerton has once again raised the topic. The issue isn’t dead as far as the dope lobby is concerned.

April 22, 2026April 26, 2026A Manfro All Seasons

When is An Audit Not An Audit?

by The Fullerton Harpoon24 Comments

Well, there she goes. Don’t worry. There’s more where that came from…

When a misleading City of Fullerton agenda proclaims: “Introduction of Special Fiscal Audit – Grant Thornton Risk Advisory Services.”

I assumed, wrongly, that somebody had already been hired to look into the misdirection of funds into the General Fund Reserves that should have gone some place else, a fact that has caused considerable embarrassment to our severely and habitually underinformed City Council. I also figured this firm was going to talk about what they found.

But no.

In fact, the firm of Grant Thornton Risk Advisory Services were brought before the council by the City Manager, Eddie Manfro, simply to make a sales pitch for their services. And what services.

Step one is to be some sort of forensic accounting exercise, a fishing expedition to explore the world of Fullerton’s accounting regime to see what, if anything, is amiss. Nobody said anything, but there must have surely been some internal squirming when the company rep kept using the word “fraud.” And that included our Finance Director and recently anointed City Treasure, Steven Avalos who was sitting in the pit.

The second phase of GTRAS’s endeavor was to explore how the City might improve efficiencies, save money, and help address Fullerton’s grim fiscal situation. Why this all-purpose company was suggested for this task seems odd, the two tasks having nothing to do with one another.

I’ll address the first project first. Why is it necessary at all to delve into Fullerton’s accounting with an audit? We have been told that there were seemingly honest bookkeeping errors – embarrassing, sure and it did alter the already dire projection of General Fund reserve draw downs, but fear not, all was well. The councilmembers kept talking about transparency and public trust, but what does that really mean? Is this serious or just a political pantomime?

Consider the following facts. GTRAS was picked by the City Manager under his own authority and just brought to the council to give them a chance to ratify the decision. That’s a sole source contract, and the public has no idea how much they will be paid, and won’t without a PRA request. Will added scope to the $100,000 contract be reviewed by anybody except the City Manager and Steven Avalos? If some sort malfeasance were actually discovered – purely by accident, of course – would offender(s) names be published? Is any of this going to discussed in Closed Session because it touches on employee issues? Who knows? The Council approved the deal, without knowing whatever it is or might be.

As for the second part of GTRAS offer, the City Manager announced that would be returned to the Council for approval of a $130,000 deal. At least someone might get the chance to ask some pertinent questions, such as why is this “economic development” effort needed, given that Fullerton has highly paid staff who enjoy employment as economic developers. What have these people been doing and why do they need outside help. These people have been on the payroll for years. What have they accomplished?

Sunaya Thomas, in charge of economic development, was in attendance. Her presence at the meeting was an almost begging of the question about her own success in this endeavor, the effort of bureaucrats that never even pays for itself.

I wonder if GTRAS will actually suggest something that might help, outside of taxes. Personally, I doubt if their suggestions would even pay for their own service. That we will probably never know because no one will talk about it. This will be an agreement with no metrics for success or failure, just more electronic billboards and hotel occupancy taxes. Staff reductions? Getting rid of all our brand new “firefighters” and ambulance drivers? Don’t be ridiculous.

Anyhow our brave Council voted unanimously to proceed down this dark corridor, protesting their sincere desire to pursue those most elusive prey: transparency and public trust. No one said much about accountability. They never do.

April 20, 2026April 20, 2026Ahmad Zahra

An Audit Report

by The Fullerton Harpoon16 Comments

At tomorrow’s Fullerton City Council meeting, agenda item #1 features a report by the firm of Grant Thornton Risk Advisory Services. They will present what the City is calling a “special fiscal audit.”

What does that mean, and what are the results? Unknown because there is no staff report – not even a little introductory prose. This is in keeping with former City communications regarding the recently revealed erroneous assignments of millions into General Fund reserves – money that was supposed to go elsewhere. The last post FFFF did on this subject in March pointed out the condescending gobbledygook press release that emanated from City Hall. I believe this “audit” was commissioned to address the big errors and allay fears that some sort of malfeasance took place.

I hope that Messrs. Shawn Stewart and Charles Mayes (CPA) of Grant Thornton will present something real simple. Like maybe a diagram, or a flow chart to explain how these bogus transactions took place. Where did the money come from, where did it go, and when was it fixed? One hopes there will be no verbal or logical gymnastics to dodge assignment of responsibility. Does one hope in vain? And of course please let us know:

What are the true balances in General Fund and Capital Improvement Reserves.

Item #12 on the agenda is a report on staff vacancies and retention recruitment efforts required, as usual, by a nosey and intrusive State legislature. I’m not sure what the purpose of the law is, but the information contained in the report is worth considering. According to staff there are currently 65 vacancies, two thirds of which are non sworn, general public employees. 65 vacancies is about 10% of the total labor force.

In past years the vacancy rate has done as high as 25% in Fiscal Year 21/22.

Here’s the issue. How many of these vacant positions are included in the current 25/26 budget deliberations? All of them? Some cities use a “vacancy factor” in their budgeting – an estimate of how many vacancies will be unfilled in the fiscal year. Does Fullerton do this? They should if they don’t.

I also note that the labor force in Fullerton is up 7% since 22/23 even as dire predictions of the structural deficit were publicized. Why did this happen? The architect of past city budgets, City Manager Eric Levitt quit and took a higher paying job in San Bernardino last year so no answer will be forthcoming from him.

As an example of a recruitment the staff report includes this graphic from last fall:

An Associate Planner goes for $84K to $108K per annum – not counting benefits and pension costs, of course. If those are generally calculated at a modest 25% we can assume this Associate Planner will cost the taxpayers around $120,000 a year, which I think is fairly reasonable.

If we assume the average total cost of those 65 vacant positions is, say, a conservative $100,000, then we are looking at an annual cost of $6,500,000. That closes a lot of budget deficit, right there.

Pro sales tax advocates will claim there is a vital quality-of-life issue at stake, as if the number of public employees in City Halls guarantees such a concept; these vacant jobs are key to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in Fullerton. The same alliance of cops, “firefighters” and local City Hall camp followers who pushed Measure S in 2020 will claim it to be so. These are the same folks who get guaranteed defined benefit pensions, step pay increases, etc. They make no sacrifices and are rarely asked to do so. That task falls upon the citizenry.

April 15, 2026May 4, 2026Ahmad Zahra

Yes, He Is A Film Maker!

by The Fullerton Harpoon14 Comments

Some have questioned Dr. Ahmad Zahra’s claim that he quit his life as a man of medicine for a life as a filmmaker. But this claim is no longer in doubt.

A Friend has forwarded this image of the extraordinary Ahmad Zahra that clearly shows the good doctor from Damascus as a big time Hollywood cinematic auteur.

So there you have it. Who are we to argue with our own eyes?

April 9, 2026April 9, 2026Ahmad Zahra

Trouble in College Park

by Disillusioned Ex-Hippy36 Comments

College Park is an old neighborhood adjacent to Fullerton Junior College. Back in 1979 the City designated it as an historic preservation zone. That was 46 years ago if you’re counting. The area is full of little bungalows and small spanishy looking houses. It’s a nice neighborhood even if you add in the dinky roundabouts on Wilshire – the brainstorm of Wild Ride Joe Felz, who certainly could not have navigated them on election night, 2016.

But I digress.

At the last City Council meeting a woman who lives on Cornell Avenue in the district complained about a building on her street under construction that was completely out of character with the neighborhood and the preservation rules, adopted in 1996, that are supposed to protect against such things. She kindly reminded the Council that she lives in D5 – Ahmad Zahra’s district.

So I went over to the 100 North block of Cornell Avenue and snapped some images.

Now I’m not an architect, but something is awfully wrong here. Yeah, it’s a big box with cheap, misaligned windows that is completely out of scale with the houses around it. Yikes. Check out the puny little rooflet over the cheapo Home Depot door.

How could this happen? It looks like somebody in City Hall dropped the melon with a loud plop. As I understand it, there is a staff process for reviewing these developments. Did it occur? I don’t know. But whether it did or didn’t happen, the problem is obvious. If it didn’t, why not? If they did what sort of knucklehead(s) could have approved this?

Eyesore is right.

At the meeting Development Director Sunaya Thomas preposterously claimed this hulking monster was somehow an ADU development – meaning a mere accessory dwelling unit, a “granny unit,” and that the City had no real control over the design of the beast; and also that it was up to the owner to figure out parking for his tenants! Up to the owner? Since when?

Of course Ms. Thomas is talking out of her backside, as is so often the case. The rules for preservation in the R2P zone are called out in the Municipal Code – Chapter 15.17.60, from which I quote:

All proposed development, including the rehabilitation of existing structures, will be reviewed for compliance with established design criteria and standards, specific to the preservation zones and identified significant properties. These adopted design criteria and standards, entitled “Design Guidelines for Residential Preservation Zones,” are intended to serve as a baseline — a set of elementary guidelines — by which a proposal will be evaluated.

Here are the the guidelines, supposedly unknown to the very person in charge of applying them to new development in preservation zones:

https://www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/1232/637436214735730000

I learned a long time ago that it’s almost impossible to make Fullerton planning bureaucrats do their jobs (see noise ordinance issues). The defensiveness and lack of shame will always prevail. But this is appalling. The rules are there to follow, not to pick and choose.

Thomas failed and failed badly. The Council was lied to on Tuesday night. Does anybody care?

Hopefully the D5 council representative Ahmad Zahra, who champions transparency and accountability, will get to the bottom of this fiasco.

April 3, 2026April 7, 2026Ahmad Zahra

Fullerton’s Big Log

by The Fullerton Harpoon112 Comments

No, it’s not the Fullerton Observer itself, but it is a story related by Stikia Kennedy on that unfortunate publication’s blog. The post seems to have vanished, as is sometimes the case when it suits the publisher/CEO. In this instance it caught the attention of Mr. F.L. Olmstead before it was dispatched; and he sent it to me.

It seems that a local resident named Jensen Hallstrom has been jumping a short wrought iron fence to make homemade repairs to the big slab of redwood dedicated to veterans. It’s in Hillcrest Park not far from the Isaac Walton lodge.

Mr. Hallstrom has been seen at local City Council meetings sharing his personal efforts to repair damaged and missing names. That was was a big mistake, for apparently he has been issued a cease and desist letter from the City, to and from his trespass and his activity.

Not asking real questions is a great way to avoid getting real answers…

Ever the intrepid partisan, Shakira Kennedy seizes upon this David and Goliath tale to spin a yarn about it is somehow the result of the ethics of the Council majority, honesty, transparency and yakkity yak yak yak. It doesn’t seem to have occurred to Kennedy that Fullerton parks staff just hates it when private citizens do unsupervised stuff in City parks, and no political interference is necessary. That fight’s been going on for 35 years, without a peep by two generations of Observers.

Anyhow, Mr. Hallstrom should also know better. He got into a squabble with the City a few years back over the impromptu and unauthorized “native garden” he planted along the Hiltscher Trail. This latest effort seems to suggest a fundamental immaturity on his part.

Shiitake Kennedy’s older sister Sharon even put in an appearance in the comments to decry the event and wonder aloud if Jones and Mayer didn’t have anything better to do than to get the City involved in more legal activity in which they get to bill more hours.

Now that’s ironic. Did either of the Kennedy’s raise an objection about the legal costs associated with the idiotic lawsuit against this blog that was approved by a liberal Council majority? Did any Observers call out the enormous waste of legal fees involved in the foolish and Air Combat lawsuit caused by an incompetent Airport Director who couldn’t understand his own lease? Of course not.

Accountability doesn’t apply to the left-leaning Democrats favored by the Kennedy Sisters whose gaze becomes myopic when dealing with the likes of Ahmad Zahra, Jan Flory, Jesus Quirk Silva and their ilk.

Why this post was pulled is anybody’s guess. Maybe it will mysteriously pop up in the Register.