When is An Audit Not An Audit?

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.

A Manfro all seasons…

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 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. 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?

Economic Development is my specialty…

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.

An Audit Report

Off we go, into the Wild Blue Yonder…

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.

The Doctor is In

Some skeptical folks in Fullerton have long wondered aloud if 5th District Councilman Ahmad Zahra is really a doctor. His acolytes and camp followers in the Fullerton Observer call him “doctor” and he doesn’t correct them. Still there’s no evidence that he ever practiced medicine, so the skeptics had some reason to wonder, given Zahra’s ever shifting “origin narrative” and omission of salient features of his past – like the gay man’s stop over in Little Rock, Arkansas to marry…a woman.

But now the truth will out. The FFFF Research Department has done a deep dive into photographic evidence and discovered unequivocal proof of Zahra’s doctorhood.

Unless it was Halloween.

Don’t Worry, Be Happy!

The City of Fullerton has issued a press release to address the recent revelation that $10,000,000 was erroneously counted in general reserves when it really belonged in special restricted categories. Peruse this soporific and condescending verbiage and see if you can read a single reference to City employees having made a mistake, honest or otherwise.

Alternatively, take an Ambien and relax. Everything’s gonna be fine.

City of Fullerton Budget Update

At the March 17, 2026, City Council meeting, City staff presented an agenda item titled “Second Quarter Financial Report for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025–26 and Mid-Year Budget Adjustments.” The purpose of this item was to provide an overview of the City’s financial position through mid-year FY 2025–26, report on revenues and expenditures from July 1, 2025, through December 31, 2025, and present the updated financial position based on the finalized FY 2024–25 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). Following this presentation, the City would like to provide additional context and clarification to support a clear and shared understanding of the information discussed.

The City Council adopted the Fiscal Year 2024–25 budget on June 4, 2024, which included a planned structural deficit of approximately $9.4 million. As part of that budget, it was understood that the City would utilize a portion of its reserves—similar to drawing from savings—to balance the difference between revenues and expenditures. This approach was discussed publicly during the budget adoption process.

Throughout FY 2024–25, the City took steps to manage costs, including holding vacant positions and limiting expenditures where feasible. As a result of these efforts, the City reduced the actual year-end operating deficit to approximately $5.7 million, reflecting ongoing attention to fiscal responsibility.

At the close of Fiscal Year 2024–25, the City’s General Fund—the primary operating fund used to provide essential services such as police, fire, parks, and infrastructure—reported a total fund balance of $30.0 million. A fund balance can be thought of as the City’s overall savings. Of this amount, $19.8 million is held in the City’s contingency reserve, which serves as the City’s emergency fund to maintain services during economic uncertainty or unexpected events.

A portion of the City’s fund balance—approximately $10.2 million—is categorized as restricted, committed, or assigned for specific purposes. During the fiscal year, approximately $2.7 million was more clearly designated within these categories, increasing the allocated portion of the City’s savings from approximately $7.5 million to $10.2 million. These funds support important community priorities such as capital improvements, General Plan updates, Downtown parking, and street and infrastructure improvements, including road repairs. These funds remain part of the City’s overall financial resources but are set aside for their intended purposes.

Additionally, a $2.9 million prior-period adjustment identified through the City’s independent audit was related to the proper classification of assets between the General Fund and the Successor Agency. This adjustment ensures that funds are reflected in the appropriate account in accordance with accounting standards. The funds were not lost or misspent, but rather properly reallocated.

At the end of FY 2024–25, the City’s contingency reserve was approximately 14% of annual General Fund expenditures, which is above the City’s minimum policy requirement of 10%, though below the long-term goal of 17%. Based on current projections, the City is anticipated to end FY 2025–26 with approximately 12% in reserves, which remains within policy guidelines.

There has also been discussion regarding a potential 2% reserve level. It is important to clarify that this figure represents a baseline, starting position in the City’s long-term financial forecast, assuming no changes to current revenues or expenditures. It is neither the City’s current condition nor its expected outcome. As part of the upcoming budget process, the City Manager will present options during public budget study sessions to reduce the funding gap and improve reserve levels over time, ensuring the City remains on a path toward long-term financial stability.

The City’s financial outlook reflects broader trends impacting many communities, including rising costs for labor, materials, and services. At the same time, revenues remain stable, with property tax revenues increasing by 6.23% due to growth in assessed property values.

To help illustrate, the City’s finances can be compared to a household budget. Revenues function like a paycheck, expenses represent the cost of essential services, and the fund balance serves as savings. Over the past year, the City used a portion of its savings to support planned expenditures, while continuing to maintain an emergency reserve. Moving forward, the City is focused on aligning ongoing revenues and expenses to support long-term financial sustainability.

The Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) referenced above is the City’s official year-end financial report and is independently audited. In simple terms, it is similar to a household’s year-end financial statement—it shows how much money came in, how much was spent, and how much remains in savings, along with how those funds are designated.

Looking ahead, the City will continue to evaluate cost containment strategies, operational efficiencies, and potential revenue opportunities, which will be discussed during upcoming public budget study sessions along with updates to the City’s multi-year financial forecast.

In summary, the City of Fullerton’s financial position reflects a planned and publicly approved use of savings to address a budget gap, along with standard accounting updates to ensure funds are properly tracked. No money was lost, missing, or improperly spent. Approximately $2.7 million was reclassified to reflect funds set aside for specific purposes—such as road repairs and capital projects—and a $2.9 million adjustment was made to the appropriate account for those funds. The City ended FY 2024–25 with 14% in reserves and is projected to have about 12% this year, both above the City’s minimum requirement. The 2% figure referenced in recent discussions reflects the City’s baseline financial outlook if no changes are made to current spending or revenue levels, underscoring the importance of taking action. The City is actively working to reduce the budget gap and strengthen its financial position moving forward.

The City of Fullerton remains committed to transparency and keeping the community informed. Residents are encouraged to review financial documents available on the City’s website and participate in the budget process.

Small Stuff Adds Up

The Fullerton City Council agenda for tomorrow’s meeting is pretty light. Except for a budget discussion everything is “Consent Calendar.” One of those items caught my attention. Item #10 is an emergency, non-bid request to work on some drainage channel wedged between the Uptown Apartments on Yorba Linda and the 57 CalTRANS right-of-way.

Staff is claiming the project (whose scope isn’t described, other than “a damaged wall”) is necessary due to “recent rain events,” always a useful pretext for doing stuff. The channel isn’t one of those big ones with perpendicular walls, but from a satellite view it looks like a simple concrete “V” ditch that enters and exits a concrete drain structure.

It must look something like this, right? A concrete “V” in cross section with woven wire mesh or thin rebar. Has a part of the been washed out or undermined? Who knows? We just know there’s some sort of damage, and I’d bet the “recent rain events” are an excuse for a long-developing issue.

Here’s a google earth view of a portion of the the existing “V” ditch that is either buried or washed out.

This is the funny part. The City Engineer has estimated a construction cost of $105,000, but with an overhead of almost 20%. That’s ridiculous. At $100 an hour for staff time we’d be looking at 200 manhours, or one person working on nothing else for five weeks. The design is negligible since you can just sketch a plan and pull a cross section and specs out of the Green Book or other standard sources, like I did, above. Administration? Processing? You’ve got to be kidding. And then there’s the amount budgeted for “contingencies.” $75,000, or 75% of the construction amount. So they really don’t know what the scope is and are expecting surprises.

If I were on the City Council I would be asking staff about these figures. They don’t make sense, at least not on the surface. Something is going on.

When the 57 freeway was built this drainage flow was created by a giant berm, but I have to wonder how and why the City created a drainage right-of-way on what appears to be the CalTRANS right-of-way, or on private land since the property looks like a jagged remnant of the State’s freeway land acquisitions.

Someone might also reasonably inquire into how come this thing is an emergency at all. That seems awfully strange. The rainy season is virtually over and the amounts of water collected here seem pretty insignificant.

But back to the finances. The problem with all municipal public works budgets are the amount used to cover staff expenses and overhead, and this, normally around 10% or more, is already padded. If you think about it, money from infrastructure funds are being used and abused to support to bureaucracy instead of pouring concrete.

The amounts in this instance are small, but they are indicative of an ongoing philosophy of abusing Capital Improvement budgets. Some might argue that unused funds will simply be returned to the fund from which they came. Could be. But how would anybody know?

More Trouble Down On The County Farm Vis-a-Vis the Do-Si-Do

Do with American flag, busy digging an escape tunnel…

The Voice of OC is reporting more suspicious activity on the part of crooked former County Supervisor Andrew Do. Do is already in the lockup after admitting to scamming OC out of millions in criminal scams with pals to steal COVID relief funds. His daughter, a co-conspirator got a slap on the wrist while his wife, Judge Cherie Pham still revels in the title of “Your Honor.”

“Now, auditors from the Weaver-Tidwell firm say they’ve reviewed over $486 million of contracts and found a series of questionable expenditures where Do ordered county staff to approve a vendor without the proper paperwork or covered up where grant money was actually going.” 

You are ready to depart, young grasshopper…

Do is gone, but his self-proclaimed protégé and great friend, our County Supervisor Doug “Bud” Chaffee, isn’t. He has been stonewalling the Do affair from his dais and even now is quoted as saying:

 “I don’t want to keep spending money if we can’t recover it in some way. The report is disturbing but it’s not what I’d call evidentiary quality.” 

Right. Why pay to find out what happened and where the money went, and who benefitted? Nothing to see here, folks. So sayeth Chaffee, the staunch defender of public resources. Quality evidence is so darn expensive.

Paulette Chaffee discussing complicated education issues with a bunch of helium-filled balloons in front of her garage…

The rancid rodent Chafee has ten months left in his sketchy Supervisorial career. Perhaps he doesn’t want it tarnished by more scandal. Or maybe he’s got his own skeletons locked up some place he doesn’t want auditors poking around. Don’t forget the Little Lady – Pilferin’ Paulette is once again running for public office with her fake “4th District Ambassador” label, a non-job her hubby created to get her photo ops.

But if Chaffee hopes for peace and quiet he hopes in vain. Yet another galactic fuck up in which Andrew Do’s name is attached is addressed in a new Voice of OC post. Apparently the County claims a vendor in the public mental health game, Mind OC, owes them $65,000,000 for payments made without supporting evidence of accomplishment. And guess what? Mind OC has ties with…Andrew Do. Get this:

“Lawyers noted that Do helped increase Mind OC’s role in managing medical operations at the site, despite them being unlicensed, and pointed to a $275,000 contract the nonprofit created with the wife of Do’s then chief of staff Chris Wangsporn.” 

Wangsaporn is not in jail, and neither is his wife. I don’t know whether Mr. or Mrs. Wangsaporn are or have ever been subjects of FBI investigations, but the Mr. W currently peddles his services as a government lobbyist. As usual, our DA Todd Spitzer has been singularly uninterested in the activities of Do and his Chief of Staff.

Off we go, into the Wild Blue Yonder…

And now back to Chaffee. How much did he know about his best bud’s side gigs on the Board of Supervisors? What did he know and when did he know it? Chaffee has a million dollar+ office budget to help him “supervise” and there seems to have been nobody looking into a damn thing; if they did, Chaffee said nothing about the ocean of cash that was disappearing through the OC Health Care Agency funnel, abetted by the politcal puppets that ran it. And what did Pilferin’ Paulette know about the chicanery down on the County farm?

Traut endorsers. Look at names #1 and #2!

Have any of the current 4th District candidates addressed this ongoing scandal at the County? I am unaware of any statement promising a clean sweep and a reckoning for those who aided Do in his malfeasance. I would think this is something Fred Jung, Connor Traut, and Tim Shaw would be all over. But opposing corruption is scary because you never know who might prevail. And some of the miscreants may have endorsed you!

Zahra Tells All – Part I

Land of opportunity…

No, of course not. The truth is not in him. If it were he would have explained how he, the first gay Muslim in America married a local woman in Arkansas to jump the Green Card line.

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

The Damascus Dodger is featured in a three part interview with Stiskia Kennedy in the Fullerton Observer. It’s an opportunity for the Kennedy Sisters to give the scam artist another of their tongue baths and to avoid anything that resembles the truth about Zahra and his career, a career that resembles a jailbreak more than anything else.

In a recent discussion, I spoke with Fullerton City Council Member Ahmad Zahra about his role and responsibilities. We engaged in a Q&A session that delved into the challenges and rewards of serving the community at the municipal level. 

Bushala says stop!

First Satkia wants to know how to stand up to influential donors. Suddenly Tony Bushala’s unseen presence fills the room. Zahra’s response? He lies of course. Naturally, Zahra is a profile in courage, standing up to the “special interests” over whom he prevailed in his two elections. This demanded his “wisdom and thick skin.” This history is false, of course. Nobody knew who he was in 2018 and he slipped in past a couple others; naturally he ignores the facts of his 2022 run when his victory was not won on any issues, but by spending $120,000. And then there was his recruitment of Tony Castro, the dummy Latino candidate who the OC Dems set up to take votes away from Oscar Valadez. Oops.

Stikia follows up with campaign finance. Zahra complains about political action committees and the poor plight of the “community-focused” candidate (presumably just like him). No questions are asked or answered about Zahra’s big campaign donors, just as the Kennedy Sisters never bothered to ask who gave money to Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo in 2024, and what they hoped to get out of it. The cannabis workers’ PAC gave $60,000 to help Cannabis Kitty, but that’s not the sort of mean, nasty PAC Zahra has in mind.

Malo, indeed…

Zahra says his opponents spent more than he did and he still won in 2022. That’s a lie, too, but he knows the Sisters won’t check him on it. Dredging up another Fullerton Boohoo gripe about Mr. Bushala, Zahra bemoans the fact that donations can be returned so that councilmembers can vote on the donor’s project. This is reference to Councilwoman Jamie Valencia’s return of money to Bushala before the vote on the stupid Walk on Wilshire in which Bushala had no legal interest. That return wasn’t even necessary per state law so why is this a problem?

What, me lie?

Staksia’s last question is about ranked choice voting about which her interlocutor knows nothing and doesn’t care. He wants to curb “unethical practices” by PACs, saying nothing about the fraudulent candidates Tony Castro and Scott Markowitz whom his party set up so their pals like Zahra and Jaramillo could get elected in Fullerton. And that betrays Zahra’s true feelings about the community he pretends to love so much.

Poor, Sad Sukhee Resurfaces

Friends may remember the name: Sukhee Kang. Sukhee is one of those common cases where political ambition to hold office leaps far ahead of ability or commonsense.

Way back in 2016 Sukhee quit Irvine where he had been a Larry Agran flunky on the city council and bought himself a mini-McMansion on a Fullerton golf course, behind a security gate. Remember? Mr. Kang’s lust for higher office caused him to carpetbag in order to run for the State Senate. I seem to remember one of his lackeys in Irvine defended this foolishness as a sensible “empty nester” move and downsizing on the part of Sukhee and Mrs. Sukhee.

Sukhee got schooled…

As usual, Sukhee had a phony ballot designation as an educated (he taught some made-up footling class at Chapman) and he was an author, too, producing a self-published biography. Sukhee promoted the fact that he was a veteran, although it turned out it wasn’t of our army.

The writing was on the wall…

Sukhee had all the usual endorsements – loads of Dem politicians, the sort of thing we now know is almost worthless. But Kang didn’t reckon with FFFF or Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform. He came in third and it was sayonara, Sukhee.

Anyhow, we learned shortly thereafter that the empty nesters had flown the coop – back to Irvine, demonstrating the bullshit of the rationalization.

I’m a leader. Larry told me to put that there…

Now Kang has kangaroo’d back into politics. He’s running for the Irvine City Council, a sad attempt of a 75 year old man to be relevant. It’s even sadder than an old dude trying to be important. The Irvine Council now has seven seats instead of five, and poor sad sack Sukhee has to run for a paltry district seat now.

Irvine District 1 residents may not even remembers this creep’s ditching Irvine just to run for an available office in a whole other town. Hopefully an opponent will remind them of Sukhee’s stay in Fullerton.

The Marovic Drama Resurfaces

Here’s a fun item on Tuesday’s Closed Session calender.

And some backstory for the uninitiated:

Meet the new proprietor, same as the old proprietor…

Three and a half years ago, Mario Marovic, who owns the building on the northeast corner of Commonwealth and Harbor, agreed to a deal with the City to remove the City’s (formerly Florentine’s) notorious “bump out” encroachment that was stuck onto the side of his structure, on the public sidewalk – a space he didn’t own and was making improvements to at the time.

Formerly a public sidewalk

The idea, I suppose, was to get Marovic to rid the public sidewalk of the illegal room addition without the City having to pay for it and answer embarrassing questions; and Marovic would get to open his fake Irish pub, a facility whose CUP drawings included the bump out. Happiness all around, right? Only a couple decades late.

Wrong.

It turns out that Marovic never had any intention of demolishing the bump out. The deal required demolition to start March 2023, three years ago. Of course Marovic has done absolutely nothing except submit a claim for damages to the City provoking a lawsuit that has dragged on for over a year.

Zahra Congratulates Marovic for his lawsuit…against us.

Will this saga finally be over on Tuesday? Don’t bet on it. The City is always diffident in these matters, going so far as “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra mugging with the scofflaw and giving him some sort of certificate of appreciation; but Marovic isn’t the diffident sort. He may be tired of paying legal bills, but there’s almost nothing stopping him from resetting the clock and beginning a whole new delay cycle.

The Strange Tale of the Missing and Reappearing Bushala “Puff Piece.”

Here’s a strange story reported on the Orange Juice blog last week by Vern Nelson.

Miaad the correspondent.

It seems that a post was published on the Fullerton Observer site in early January – a letter to the Observer Sisters from Miaad Bushala, niece of Tony Bushala. Her letter was all about how a Fullerton cop stopped her father, Albert, for rolling through a stop sign. Albert rolled down his window with the light of Christmas kindness in his eyes. The policeman, Officer Levin warned him about the dangers of such incautious motoring.

Patrolman Levin

Officer Levin, under the influence of Yuletide kindness, and captivated by the kind quality in Mr. Bushala’s demeanor, did not cite the careless driver. Instead of a ticket, he kindly handed the wayward motorist a $10 gift certificate to a coffee place.

Cookies and dough…

Subsequently, all of Mr. Bushala’s family appeared at police HQ on Christmas Eve with a plate of cookies, and a check for $10,000!

But then Ms. Miaad’s post quickly vanished from the Fullerton Observer blog, only to reappear virtually unchanged a few days later as an attempted news story in the Orange County Register, courtesy of Claire Wang. Most peculiar, no?

And finally, a few days ago, the very same story made its way back into the Observer, this time offered up under the byline of someone named David Spargur, who now cites the Register as a source!

How odd.

Satkia Kennedy on the job…

Vern Nelson noticed the switcheroo and contacted the Kennedy Sisterhood to find out why the original “letter” from the daughter about her papa’s kind generosity to the Fullerton Police Department was deleted. Nelson tells us that the story was removed at the request of Miaad herself who, upon further reflection, thought the thing appeared a little self-serving. That’s the narrative as told by Sitka Kennedy, anyhow.

And yet somehow the incurious OC Register got the tale, and for some reason decided to treat the donation as unquestionable philanthropy, and hence newsworthy; once the Register ran their bit the Kennedys obviously decided that it was okay to publish a redo. How come?

One observer, FJC teacher Jodi Balma, mentioned the Register article on Facebook. She called it a “strange puff piece” and reminded her friends that “Bushala” has lots of business with the Fullerton government at contentious meetings. This frequent Voice of OC “expert” had obviously mistaken Albert for his brother, Tony!

Jodi Balma knows a lot more than you do…

But Jodi, like the proverbial blind porcine, had unknowingly stumbled upon a truffle! As Vern Nelson reminds us, Albert Bushala owns numerous properties in downtown Fullerton that have nightclubs, and that he and his tenants have lots of business before the City Planning Commission that can use the kind assistance of a friendly police department.

Albert Bushala

Informed sources tell us that Albert Bushala currently has a Conditional Use Permit submitted to operate an events venue in the 100 block of West Commonwealth that will have a liquor license. Proposed hours of operation? 6am to 2pm.