Item 18 on tomorrow’s ridiculously packed agenda are proposals to put a streets and infrastructure tax on the November ballot. One includes a 15 year sunset clause and the other has no sunset at all. The no sunset option in DOA, I’m sure. The tax increase is projected to produce $15,000,000 a year.
The 6.5% sales tax increase is supposed to be restricted to infrastructure, meaning it needs a supermajority (66.6%) of voters to pass. A general tax would only need 50%+1 to pass; but that option seems to have no chance of a majority to put it on the ballot, and is not being considered. Since the August 4th meeting is cancelled so the politicians can attend the cops’ feel-good National Night Out party, this is the last chance to get something on the November ballot.
The people of Fullerton have finally had enough of bad roads that only seem to get worse. But will 67% vote for this? I don’t know. People hate bad roads but a lot of them also hate taxes.
The ad hoc Budget Sustainability Committee did not recommend this infrastructure tax increase. Two members did support it, and only on the condition that the current budget requirement for infrastructure spending remain in place, thus avoiding the usual budget switcheroo. But the idea couldn’t get a third vote. Still, the existing requirements for infrastructure are not being deleted in this ordinance, so at least there’s that.
I am extremely skeptical of Fullerton’s bean counters to keep everything straight, especially given this years accounting fiascos. The language of the proposed ordinance requires an annual audit of the funds, but we know how this goes.
I see the potential for several departments – police, fire, parks stand out – as trying to lay claim for capital project billing using these new funds. The Engineering and Public Works personnel will be the biggest employee beneficiaries since they already generously charge their time to capital projects. Does their current subsidy by the General Fund remain? I sincerely doubt it.
On the happy side, the ordinance would require 75% of the new funds be applied to streets only. Water/sewer and airport expenditures are explicitly verboten using this money, likely because they don’t need it. Still, the plan is only as good as the accounting.
Congratulations, Fullerton. The infamous Trail to Nowhere, or as it is called in City Hall circles, the “UP Trail Phase II,” is now six months old.
None of its adherents inside of City Hall or in the hallowed and self-righteous pages of the Fullerton Observer will ever follow up to actually see if has been a successful expenditure of 2.5 million bucks. The bureaucrats who will be hard at work looking for their next boondoggle will never give it another thought; nor will the cowardly City Council that approved the waste, caving into a gaggle of local fools. It was all for la communidad and when top-down patronizing government is hard at work, money is no object.
But I will keep reminding FFFF.
Because I happen to drive down Highland Avenue and often Richman Avenue I get periodic glimpses into what all that money bought. And what I have seen is precisely what this blog predicted all along. It’s almost always empty. And that makes a lot of sense because it starts in the back of Independence Park and dies at Highland. It doesn’t even connect to Phase I – a deficiency so obvious that you would have thought someone on the City Council might have noticed. If they did they didn’t say a word in objection.
Obviously the community, the supposed beneficiary of this largesse doesn’t use it. Why would they?
In her grant application to the State of California, now retired Park employee Alice Loya bragged about connectivity. There isn’t any. She dreamed up 105,000 anticipated users annually. The users so far could probably be counted in the hundreds. The trail was going to be a miraculous incubator for redevelopment of the surrounding area. All lies. And a plankton colony could have seen it. But not the geniuses in City Hall. Or they didn’t care.
Even as we are being asked to make sacrifices because of their inability to run the City, we have yet another facility without the means to maintain it. Other parks were already suffering from neglect, and of course Hillcrest Park, what should be the crown jewel of Fullerton parks continues to be intentionally neglected through institutional apathy. Its bare hillsides are a testament to that neglect.
And the case of Hillcrest is ironic because many of the casual users are Latinos – just the sort of folks the Trail to Nowhere was meant to patronize. However, a sense of irony is not one of the qualities one associates with government agencies who talk a good talk, but in the end always opt for the park project that will give them something to do.
Last night the Fullerton City Council held a special meeting. They called it a budget workshop, but it sure turned into a lachrymose affair. The weepy speechifying seemed more than a little rehearsed.
The meeting itself was more or less a rehash of previous meetings. Of course it should have been scheduled for July 7th but that would have interfered with the “community” budget sessions that week which staff claimed had 30 attendees; the survey that went out elicited about 70 responses. 100 out of 150,000 people. They had to admit that statistically, the responses didn’t mean much.
In an almost miraculous turn of events, staff cut the earlier projected deficit all the way down to $3.8 million. How, you ask? By eliminated vacant positions and jockeying some funds around.
Staff presented three scenarios: A, B, and C, in least to most draconian order, all draconian, of course. Option C basically kept the reserve funds around $16,000,000 by not using them in the next three years. None of the options involved laying anybody off or negotiating pay cuts with the unions. Keep that in mind, because the weepy handwringing that followed would make you think personal catastrophes had occurred.
Department by department got up to sing the blues to a receptive council. Goddamn, you’d think we were in the Mississippi Delta. The upshot was that nary a single department head had the grit to proclaim they’d get it done no matter what. No, that would be bad form.
I learned a couple of interesting facts. A police corporal – a corporal, mind you – costs $300,000 per year; and an Associate Planner is currently subsidized by the General Fund to the tune of $70,000 a year. While there’s nothing inherently wrong with the latter, the amount is shocking. It either means that Planning fees would not be sufficiently recovering costs, or that someone was projected to be costing the public an awful lot for general, non-billable time in City Hall.
I would be remiss indeed if I didn’t mention the good offices of consultant Grant Thornton, who, by means of a change order, presented a completely useless report whose “conclusions” were a summary of perfectly obvious statements. It was maddening to watch the consultant read off the Power Point slides, verbatim. I wonder how much that cost.
Public comments were highlighted by an extremely angry woman named Jody Vallejo, Chris Norby (who again touted the services of the Sheriff’s Department and the sale of surplus property), and a call in from the funny little boy-man Dominic Moonbeam
Won’t look you in the eye while you’re trashing him…
Then to the Council. Mayor Fred Jung read an odd and uncharacteristically long oration in which he took personal responsibility for the City’s budget situation and yet defended some of his more dubious votes and noted that Placentia’s privatizing their paramedics did them no good since they too, were having a budget crisis, a very strange and illogical statement. He offered that the unanticipated ICE intrusion into Fullerton was somehow responsible for some contribution to Fullerton’s financial woes, but gave nothing to support that claim. Overall, I couldn’t really figure out what in the world he was trying to communicate, although if I heard rightly he did seem to suggest at one point that a general sales tax was needed.
Shana Charles and Ahmad Zahra blathered on and on. I had to leave off to get a couple of frosty beverages. I did get back in time to watch “Dr.” Zahra compete with Jung to take responsibility for the situation, and that was pretty entertaining.
Jamie Valencia in happier times…
Fortunately, Jamie Valencia had little say other than to point out the relation between budget problems and municipal credit ratings; she emotionally and awkwardly read a prepared statement about the crisis, but reminded attendees that she’s only been around for a year and a half.
Why is this man smiling…
Nick Dunlap concluded the speechifying with a soliloquy that included the claim that somebody in the Sheriff Department confided to him that contracting with Fullerton for police services wouldn’t work and that the City would owe the Federal government an untold fortune if the Fullerton Airport were redeveloped. I think both these claims need to be substantiated.
As usual everybody sang the praises of “economic development,” the talismanic chant of those who are either extremely ignorant, extremely cynical, or extremely desperate. Just because it’s been an unproven bureaucratic activity in the past is no reason to doubt its efficacy in the future; it must be protected, even nurtured! No one said anything about proving that economic development even pays for itself. Don’t ask, don’t tell.
Needless to say, everyone also sang the praises of “police and fire” the ruthless and untouchable combination of unions that makes or breaks candidates and whose member suck up 70% of the General Fund.
A Manfro All Seasons…
The three-hour weep-fest ended in the usual way a morass of confusion out of which the City Manager, Eddie Manfo is supposed to make a final agenda item that will lead to an approval of the budget, now two weeks late. He pleaded for some direction about how to come back but got none. Oh, well. Eddie’s services cost us at least $400,000, a year, even more than a police corporal, so he ought to be able figure out something plausible.
In the end Manfro asked if it would be okay if the budget decision were made in August. Nobody said no. Then they all stood up and went home.
A week or so ago the Fullerton City Council reviewed the solicitation for a new garbage hauling contract. Again. FFFF shared the last instalment of the drawn out saga relating how “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra went bonkers because two of the companies offered big upfront payments recouped by a higher CPI multiplier.
The meeting droned on and on and finally the Council went along with yet another temporization – cutting the number of eligible responders to three – CR&R, Republic, and Valley Vista. Republic was told to eliminate its upfront payment plan and revise its fee schedule. The process will now drag on until September, a move that will surely benefit Republic, the current hauler.
Noticeably absent from the final three was EDCO – the original preferred vendor of city staff. Why they were not given the same chance as Republic to delete the big cash offer and rejigger their numbers is unknown. What is known is that Republic, the company that came in dead last in the first round of staff analysis, moves ahead with several nice comments from some of Fullerton’s Left Guard who seem to be terrified of change.
CR&R, you may remember offered what looked like a $4 million gift for the City to pave a few potholes. But companies like this don’t work for free and surely they can lower their fees by getting rid of the Trojan Horse gift. That’s nothing but a hidden tax, right? Just better hidden than EDCO’s or Republic’s.
Valley Vista will surely never get more than three votes since they contributed to the Fullerton Taxpayers for Reform PAC that went after Fullerton Boohoo darling Cannabis Kitty Jaramillo in 2024. Zahra and Charles won’t vote for them because of this political involvement although they certainly wouldn’t mind had Valley Vista given money to the dope lobby’s Working Families for Jaramillo PAC. The Fullerton Observer Sisters like to remind their readers about the bad, bad folks at VV.
But Valley Vista doesn’t need four or five votes, only three.
The Council also decided to let its members talk to vendors directly, something that they had prohibited themselves from doing, apparently. Will the they share who they talked with, and what about? I wonder.
Anyway, let the death march continue. Sure it’s a big deal, but there’s no reason this shouldn’t have been locked up a long time ago.
Fullerton’s so-called Ad Hoc Fiscal Sustainability Committee met again, and probably for the last time last Thursday. Like its predecessor, the meeting expended hours of lots of peoples’ time and accomplished nothing. Not very little. Nothing.
Hours and hours of already familiar Power Point readings.
Three things worth mentioning happened.
Miss Daisey was driven…
First, Daisy Perez, the Assistant City Manager reminded the committee that if the City were to get a dedicated “infrastructure” half-cent sales tax increase, that money could be diverted to pay for “maintenance” of police and fire department facilities. She said nothing about a commensurate reduction in the “public safety” budgets and naturally nobody on the committee asked her.
Later, when pressed, the City Manger had to explain that he needed some sort of City Attorney blessing before he could share polling questions asked by the City’s quality of life/pro tax consultant. Huh? The only people who get to know the questions are the ones who got phone solicitations? What bullshit is this? Fortunately, Joshua Ferguson was on hand to share the nature of the questions his wife got; of course they were directed to promoting a sales tax increase of some kind.
You will be taxed…sooner or later!
Later still, when everyone was fatigued, Perez tried to get the committee to vote on a laundry list of options, all of which would be passed on to the council. This is the precise swindle that occurred during the redistricting process courtesy of City Clerk Lucinda Williams – when Fullerton Booohoo was trying real hard to keep Jesus Quirk-Silva in a political job.
Chris Norby, our former City Councilman, County Supervisor and Assemblyman showed up to save the day. He shared the value of vacant properties the City owns, and threw in the airport. These collectively are worth half a billion he asserted. He didn’t remind committee members that these properties would be declared surplus, and that “affordable” housing developers would get first shot at them. He reminded the committee that sales taxes are inherently regressive, perhaps thinking anybody cared about that.
In the end a completely improper process of trying to vote on something, anything, occurred. Without following any order except prompting by staff, the committee voted 3-2 against a Tony Bushala suggestion of a 1/2 cent sales tax dedicate to infrastructure, and keeping in place an existing ordinance guaranteeing a certain percentage of funding for infrastructure.
Peace. No, piece. Another piece of your money. You have it. We want it.
Then the appointees of the liberals Shana Charles and Ahamad Zahra, Derek Smith and Jennifer Duong proposed their own idea: a one cent general sales tax. This failed 3-2, also with Bushala, Wehn and Wozab voting no.
Finally a legitimate motion was made by Eric Wehn and seconded by Bushala: investigate the possible sale of the water function to an independent water company. That proposal was finally passed 3-2 again with the liberal appointees voting no. This idea really has no place to go, except that an exploration of the Water Department’s vacant property should be definitely considered for offloading.
There seemed to be confusion about whether the committee could meet again to keep kicking the can around. No decision was made on that as far as I can tell, but I’ve seen so many Fullerton meetings dissolve into incoherence at their end that I really can’t say.
Fullerton’s illustrious ad hoc Budget Sustainability Committee was treated to a marathon “we’re cut to the bone” presentation by the City’s department heads last Tuesday night.
One of the interesting concepts for revenue enhancement, albeit one-time, came from our Director of Public Works Stephen Bise.
It seems that over time, unrefunded “engineering” fees from City permit applicants adds up. Currently, the City has about $700,000 in such fees sitting idly in a Public Works account. According to Bise some of the fees were collected way back in the 1990s. The City Council would have to put its seal of approval on the deal and a notice to the rightful owners of this money would have to be made.
Similarly, funds gathered from contractor bonds and not claimed piles up, too. Bise reckons that ampount is $145,000. Presumably the same process for keeping that dough would be deployed.
This situation begs the obvious question: what responsibility does the City have to notify its customers that they have positive balances; or better yet, why can’t the Public Works Department simply write checks and return the money to its rightful owners before it piles up? There seems to be an unwritten rule that the money belongs in City funds (gathering interest at least) until such time, if any, that the owners request reimbursement. It really is a form of indirect “taking.” These individual amounts may be small, but as Director Bise indicated, are substantial in aggregate.
Apparently Fullerton made a grab of these bond funds a few years ago that had accumulated up to 2016. That amounted to $800,000. The next decade’s worth is now on the table, apparently. Can the Council resist seizing this cash? I wouldn’t bet against it.
As to the process of notification I admit my ignorance. Are such notifications made to the real owners or their heirs and assigns? I wonder. It would be so much easier to put a public notice in a “newspaper of record” where virtually nobody would ever see it; and then put it on a Council Agenda, posted 72 hours before the meeting where even fewer people would see it.
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?
On Tuesday night the Fullerton City Council did something very rare for a government agency. Nothing.
The issue at hand was a response to a State mandate to get rid of non-functional turf by denying it potable irrigation water. Therefore it was believed that some sort of xeriscape would be needed to replace the lawn in front of City Hall. I have has posted a couple times about this nonsense.
Oh Dear. Surveys were conducted, the charade of public input was exercised, copious staff time was spent culling and collating in preparation for the inevitable routine: hiring consultants and “designers,” organizing charettes, redrafts; months of fruitful effort developing bid quantities, taking bids, awarding and managing contracts, etc., etc., ad nauseam.
And then the remarkable occurred: leave the damn thing alone. In fact, while you’re leaving the grass alone, re-open the fountain that has been shut down as a virtue-signaling gesture years ago. Staff didn’t see that coming. Neither did I.
Some folks rightly pointed out that the lawn was functional – as a gathering place for meetings, protests and even municipal-sponsored events! First Amendment and civic pride. That sealed the deal.
But the road of lawn laissez-faire was not without a couple of speed bumps. “Dr.” Ahmad Zahra wanted a grand public arts gesture somewhere on the lawn; maybe All the Arts for Kids could help! Seeing the opportunity for a grand social gesture slipping away Shana Charles asked that “options” be presented to the Council, completely contradictory to the motion that had been made to leave the damn thing alone. She used to make this strategy of last minute obfuscation work, but it won’t work this time, despite her insistence on MORE TREES, maybe even an enormous fig that would serve as shade for generations to come.
Completely absent was the Fullerton Heritage Group who should have been there to protect the integrity of the original building elevation’s relationship to its surrounding. Nick Dunlap got it. The formal exterior of the building was part and parcel with the site design – created 65 years ago. It’s a landmark. The Heritage Group wasn’t interested, apparently.
I wonder if anybody has notices several empty tree wells in the sidewalk along Commonwealth in front of City Hall. There used to be shady ficus trees there (see picture, above), but not any more. If anybody had given this any thought they didn’t say so.
Anyhow, well-done Jung and Dunlap and Valencia for doing the smart and the right thing.
Right after the City Council votes to ban nitrous oxide in Fullerton, they will discuss the creation of an ad hoc (that’s Latin, darlin’) committee of two councilmembers to work with staff to develop sales tax ballot measure language. It’s item #20 on your scorecard.
Well, there she goes
The tax idea was floated by an earlier ad hoc committee, the so-called Sustainable Budget Committee, or something suchlike. That committee ultimately decided to recommend to limit the parameters of the tax to two different special half-cent sales taxes, one for infrastructure and one for our old friend “public safety.” It was probably reasoned that they would get more support than a general sales tax, but they need a two-thirds vote of approval for a special tax – a tough nut to crack.
Of course, a General Tax increase only needs a 50%+1 threshold to pass. But you need a council super- majority – 4 votes – for that to get on a ballot, and that seems highly unlikely.
You will be taxed…sooner or later!
It’s been painful to watch this drawn out Kabuki and it seems as it if will go on at least until the deadline for getting on next year’s ballot. Fortunately there is little chance that Mayor Fred Jung will let the obnoxious and incompetent spendthrift “doctors” Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles anywhere near this language-developing process.
We have all seen the way that these government-written ballot measures twist language and logic to try to fool the public to approve them. The examples are so plentiful they hardly need enumerating. Remember the ill-fated Measure S in Fullerton? Hoo Boy was that some seriously misleading bullshit. Hopefully, Jung can require a simple and honest text without the usual treacle.
My cynical side wonders how much of the infrastructure tax language will actually include funding for the cops and financial bailout for the idiotic firefighter-union-members-as-ambulance-drivers decision, or FEMA FFD expansion grant nonsense. Anyway you cut it you want those well-funded unions on board for the inevitable campaign PR campaign.
Cry harder…
Fullerton Boohoo and the Kennedy Sisters will be crying out loudly that the fix is in by their new bogeyman – the evil Bushala Bloc – and that any ballot measure language will be crafted to fail without the steady guidance of our in-house council “intellectuals.” Tender young sprout Elijah will demand TRANSPARENCY. They may even still squawk about the need for a General Sales Tax increase, after all. But I think that Good Ship Lollipop has sailed.
On Tuesday the Fullerton City Council killed a plan by Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles to dole out $200,000 to the victims of Immigration and Custom Enforcement depredations.
The item was “tabled,” meaning it isn’t coming back. Fullerton does this because two councilmembers can keep bringing something back ad infinitum unless a majority makes a positive vote that it not come back. Fred Jung, Jamie Valencia and Nick Dunlap voted in the affirmative.
The idea itself, as with most squishy-feely liberal brainstorms, was based on the supposition that the people of Fullerton should pay for legal help and “basic necessities” i.e. food, rent, etc., for people harassed by ICE – even and especially undocumented immigrants, i.e. Illegal aliens.
Off we go, into the Wild Blue Yonder…
The idea was to toss the money into the caring hands of non-profit entities who would then distribute the largesse, somehow, somewhere, to somebody. Deduct administrative overhead all around. The opportunity for waste, even if the cause were just and appropriate, should be obvious to anybody with sense.
Sense. Therein lay a problem.
As usual with this sort of thing, the council chamber was packed with pro-government giveaway types, many from outside Fullerton – people who believe it is the taxpayers job to subsidize their charitable impulses. This attendance will be misrepresented by the Fullerton Observer Kennedy Sisters and other boohoos, of course, as “the People” want this or that; or “the People have spoken;” or “listen to the People;” or to be more precise “Fred Jung failed to listen to the People.”
Put the money in the hole…
What the majority of people in Fullerton really think about this Berkeleyesque scheme isn’t known, but I bet eight or nine in ten would be against jumping this issue up to first in line.
The discussion did give opportunity for a budget discussion that proved more cloudy that clear. Shana Charles seemed to think she had discovered a vein of gold somewhere in the give-and-take, but of course didn’t have a clue about what she had heard. To her and her playmate, Zahra, $200,000 is just a drop in the proverbial bucket and of no real concern.
Doc Z. gets Syrious…
The funnest part of the evening came when the serial liar Zahra told his own immigration tale of hardship getting a green card.
The one-time Mrs. Ahmad Zahra.
This is fabulously disingenuous because we all know now that he got his green card through marriage fraud with one Michele Salmon, an Arkansas woman whom he married, then quickly abandoned in Little Rock as he went to pursue his Hollywood Dream. FFFF will be sharing a video clip of this newest chapter in Zahra’s chameleon-like origin story, when the City puts it on online.
Organizing this is a full-time job!
The whole scenario was another one of those Zahra/Charles performative, made-for-effect gatherings to promote themselves, and no doubt to try to make the council majority look bad. That’s a poor political strategy. It’s going to backfire badly on Zahra, if he decides he still needs a councilman’s income after 2026; and just as disastrous for Shana Charles who has already announced her continuing “journey.”
“Charles Voted to give $200,000 to Illegal Aliens.” And so on.
