The trouble with the City of Fullerton’s Public Records Act system is that responses are so dilatory, so frequently incomplete, and often so non-responsive, as Friends have seen over the years, it’s hard to know if you can draw any firm conclusions from what are charitably called public records.
Here’s an interesting request made a couple of weeks ago.
The request has elicited a “full release” response, so we may infer, I hope, that it really is full.
It’s a total waste of money, but it sure is short…
Why is this request interesting? Because the obscure State Department of Natural Resources is the grant-giving sugar daddy of the 2.1 million dollar UP Trail fiasco.
I noted back on January 27th that there were problems with the Trail to Nowhere project schedule, namely, that the design and construction milestones were seven and five months late, respectively.
It’s hard to know the exact status of this boondoggle because nobody in City Hall is saying anything about it to the public. I (confidently) assume the final design was never submitted to the State because the City Council never approved it, never released a bid or awarded a contract. Construction has obviously not started. Now there are just eight months left to do it all.
The trees won’t block the view…
This is where the PRA request comes in. The response just shares a short email string between Fullerton and Natural Resource Department people trying to set up a meeting for a briefing on some water project up north and its impact on MWD cities’ water supply. That’s it. There is nothing about the grant for the so-called UP Trail.
The project showed little promise, but they didn’t care…,
So what is the status? Were the milestones waived by the Natural Resources Department? Has some schedule modification been made? If so there’s no correspondence (at least none shared by the City Clerk) that show it. That’s pretty odd, isn’t it? Is it possible the State isn’t even keeping track of the agreement and the City isn’t bothering to remind them? That strikes a believable chord.
At this point it seems highly unlikely that the Trail to Nowhere could be completed in time, but maybe hope springs eternal. The State doesn’t seem to care.
Ahmad Zahra and his pal Shana Charles made a big deal about this dumbassery and organized such an annoying Astroturf backing for it, that the previous council majority chickened out and agreed to the mess. They haven’t been talking about it either, even though they already took a victory lap and threw themselves a party.
FFFF received a fun email the other day, pecked out by Fullerton 5th District Councilman Ahmad Zahra. It is directed to Fullerton Assistant City Attorney Baron Bettenhausen, a fellow that the Friends met yesterday. Ahmad writes on January 27th, and is obviously still in a grand funk about losing his precious Walk on Wilshire the previous week.
We’re #1.08!
The tone of the letter is pretty unfriendly since Zahra seems to believe Bettenhausen has left out something real important in the discussion of Jamie Valencia returning campaign contributions. Of course, as we have seen, none of this would have been necessary if Bettenhausen knew the law and had known about the FPPC decision in Palo Alto before January 21st.
But let’s let Ahmad speak for himself:
From: Ahmad Zahra <ahmad.zahra@cityoffullerton.com> Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2025 9:55 PM To: Baron J. Bettenhausen <bjb@jones-mayer.com>; Richard D. Jones <rdj@jones-mayer.com>; Eric Levitt <Eric.Levitt@cityoffullerton.com> Subject: Conflict of interest question
Caution: This is an external email and may be malicious. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments.
Baron, at the last council meeting, you had opined that CM Valencia could vote on the matter of Walk on Wilshire since she had returned the campaign contributions to Tony Bushala and Cigar Shop owner, both of whom have direct economic interests in the decision. Community members have shared with me some concerns regarding your rendered opinion and I’d like clarifications from you.
Was the FPPC consulted on this matter, as has been the practice in the past on complicated issues (example: CM Charles votes on CSUF)? If so, where is their opinion letter and why was it not presented at the time of the meeting?
There’s been a claim that the funds hadn’t been actually returned even if the return check was issued. This is a claim from a resident that raised concerns but no evidence was presented. But it does bring up the question, what evidence did CM Valencia present to you and why was that not made public? This is especially relevant because that reporting period for campaign committees isn’t until Jan 31st, occurring after the meeting itself with no chance for the public to verify any of this.
In your opinion that night, while you addressed the letter of the law, did you factor in the spirit of the law? It seems to easy for anyone to take contributions, use them, then conveniently return the funds before a vote. This is especially important to know as CM Valencia was fully aware of the WoW vote since apparently it was a question asked to her during the campaign.
I would appreciate a clarification on these questions and would request that an FPPC letter confirming your opinion on this matter be made available to the public to prevent any legal issues. Any correspondence to the FPPC should also include the concerns of the public for a comprehensive review.
I am also requesting that any action to execute the reopening of Wilshire be delayed until such legal questions are resolved to avoid any legal challenges to the city.
Note: I am writing this email in the interest of the public and thus deem it and any response to it in the public domain and not under any lawyer confidentiality privilege.
Oh dear me. Where to start. Naturally, Zahra wants to make up and nurture a scandal where there is none. He’s obviously been stirring up an element of outraged Fullerton Boohoo to keep the red herring going. He even uses the same language as the Kennedy Sisters: “there’s been a claim,” and “This is a claim from a resident that raised concerns but no evidence was presented.”
FFFF first addressed the non-applicability of the law in question way back on January 21st. We know Zahra reads FFFF, but maybe he didn’t catch that post.
Anyway, Zahra wants to know if the FPPC has been consulted about this horror of horrors. We now know that the FPPC previously ruled on the identical issue in a case in Palo Alto. FFFF relayed that information, here on February 10th. The answer is clear as a bell: the law doesn’t apply. Bettenhausen should have known this before January 21, and maybe even before Valencia gave back money she didn’t have to.
Ahmad made me wear this and took a picture.
Then Zahra’s deep sea fishing expedition turns to the completely baseless “actual claim” that although a check may have been written, it wasn’t cashed, challenging Valencia’s integrity and Bettenhausen’s lack of diligence.
Zahra’s final numbered point is really funny. He wonders why the “spirit” of the law is not being upheld. Poor Ahmad should be addressing his lament to the State Legislature instead of his own attorney, but, whatever.
Here goes…
Zahra wants the FPPC findings on the issue to be made public, and he requests that WoW remain open until such time as the FPPC responds. Zahra’s worried about legal challenges? From whom? The Kennedy Sisters and Diane Vena? Man, what a failed Hail Mary. WoW was unceremoniously removed a few days after Zahra’s demand letter. Thousands more laughed than did weep at it.
Poor Ahmad wraps up his missive by letting his own lawyer know that this email and any response are free from attorney-client confidentiality – in the public interest, of course. That’s good ’cause we got it, Ahmad, being members of the public, and all. Was there ever even a response by Bettenhausen in the end? Who cares
Poor, disheartened Diane Vena reminded the City Council about the Trail to Nowhere at their last meeting. Poor Diane, a liberal activist, and a member of team Jaramillo, is best known for her suspicious nomination of the phony Republican candidate, Scott Markowitz, in the 2024 4th District election.
It may be a total waste of money, but it sure is short…
Well, thanks, Poor Diane. It’s about time someone mentioned the Trail to Nowhere, even if in passing.
Friends will recall that the Union Pacific Trail project – funded by the State of California Department of Natural Resources – was finally approved by the City Council over a year ago. The conceptual “trail” goes from nowhere to nowhere and was going to cost $2,100,000 to build.
Nothing left but empty bloviation…
As usual, the idea was cooked up by City staff as a make work project, and was then vigorously supported by the Fullerton Observer Sisters and a few dozen knuckleheads taken in by the ingratiating Astroturfer, Ahmad Zahra.
Maybe the less said, the better…
Anyhow, Poor Diane believes the Trail has been deliberately put on the back burner due to the Council’s desire to first open the Union Pacific Park, more commonly referred to as the Poison Park. This is true – sort of. In August, 2023 the council majority directed City staff to drop or redeploy the grant and re-open the fenced off park. There was no timetable, and apparently no money either, since the empty park site still sits there 18 months later, even though a conceptual plan was drawn.
Pickleball for La Communidad…
Poor Diane believes lack of progress on the park is deliberate – a cynical ploy to delay the Trail until the grant money time allowance runs out. This could be true, and I certainly hope it is. Fullerton did renounce the grant in August, 2023 and then backtracked after months of harassment from Zahra’s annoying claque.
The deadline in the grant agreement was October 2025 for completion of the project – including “plant estabishment.” That’s about eight months away. But there are already original milestones that have been missed. Here’s the schedule from the grant agreement:
Final plans were due last June, and construction was supposed to start last August. Has the State granted Fullerton time extensions? If so why doesn’t the public know about it? If not, why hasn’t the State demanded its money back, per the agreement? Good questions, no good answers.
If working drawings have been completed and submitted, the public hasn’t been favored with a glimpse. And you need completed construction drawings to bid a public works project, let alone build it. There’s the hitch. At this point Fullerton would have only eight months to publish plans, receive bids, get a responsive bid, sign contracts and then construct the trail, a project that would turn out to be a lot more complicated and expensive than any of the conveniently departed Parks officials could have imagined.
Alice Loya’s pretty palette…
Why more complicated and expensive? Because of all the toxic water monitoring wells, the need for new water lines, new storm drain systems, and resolution of cross lot drainage issues – none of which are even included in the grant scope of work! It’s a pretty good guess that the cost of construction in the grant application was woefully underestimated. And nobody in City Hall ever admitted the presence of TCEs along the happy trail.
Well, well, well…
I suppose the City could get down on their knees and sing the blues to the state, asking for more time. Maybe staff already has. Or maybe, just as likely, the Department of Natural Resources and its chief, Wade Crowfoot, don’t even keep track of what happens to their money despite specific performance requirements in the grant agreement. After all, it’s not their money. Remember the $1,000,000 Core and Corridors Specific Plan, paid for by a State “sustainability” grant, that vanished into thin air?
Bon appetit!
Well, I guess we’ll have to keep an eye on this to see what’s happening. I’d hope that the Council provides an honest appraisal of the status of this hairy boondoggle, but that’s unlikely. So far nobody but FFFF has told a single truth about this fiasco.
Good God, the latest diatribe from the unhinged Kennedy Sister known as Skasia is a doozy.
In this editorial she really loses touch with reality. An intervention is necessary, but I’m not sure if anybody in that family is mentally balanced.
Ms. Kennedy claims in her headline that Jamie Valencia has returned a campaign contribution and that there is a controversy. Of course she would like to create one, but other than that there’s nothing noteworthy. The “controversy” is entirely the fabrication of Skasia’s feeble and febrile brain.
It seems that Valencia has come under “scrutiny” (passive voice, of course – no who what why or when) for getting a campaign contribution from Tony Bushala. No news there. Bushala gives lots of money to lots of candidates all over Orange County, including Fullerton. But alas! Bushala has opposed the Observer’s pet project – the dismal Walk on Wilshire. And the vote to get rid of it is tonight. Uh oh.
Slakskia tells us this situation “raises questions” about the applicability of SB 1439 (we have no idea who is asking questions – other than Skasia, of course). Naturally, this is a red herring since SB 1439 has to do with regulations on electeds voting on stuff like permit applications, zone changes, government contracts and the like. It has nothing to do with what Bushala likes, or wants, or dreams about. SB 1439 is completely inapplicable to the Walk on Wilshire as far as Bushala is concerned.
The best line is added out of the blue, a sign that poor Skasia can can’t write something an 8 year old would be ashamed of:
During her campaign, Valencia said the street needed to be open for fire and police (it has been OKed by the Fire Department) and suggested “we can find space elsewhere,” without saying where that might be. In 2024, Fullerton recorded 55 car accidents involving pedestrians or cyclists, resulting in 49 pedestrian fatalities and 6 cyclist fatalities.
This statement of “fact” has nothing to do with Jamie Valencia, or anything else for that matter. It’s thrown in to show why closing a block of Wilshire is important. The other problem is that it is comical. 49 pedestrian deaths in Fullerton in 2024? Why, we’d all be way safer in Juarez, Mexico during the cartel wars. That is so fucking stupid that we now know we have entered the labyrinthine Twilight Zone of this imbecile’s mind.
Oh, but busy Skasia soldiers on. She has contacted the city manager to see if Valencia must recuse herself on the Walk on Wilshire vote. Eric Levitt has informed Kennedy that a return of the Bushala funds is “in progress.” It isn’t. It was done 2 months ago.
Even then Kennedy isn’t finished. She adds this shining pearl:
“As the city council navigates this matter, the implications of campaign finance laws and potential conflicts of interest for elected officials continue to be significant points of discussion among constituents and stakeholders.”
Here again the poor, self-important dummy is caught trying to make news. To whom are “campaign finance laws and potential conflicts of interests” significant points of interest? We are not told who these “constituents and stakeholders” are, of course, meaning that this is just another irrelevant talking point she hopes one of her readers will pick up and run with at tonight’s meeting.
The shoe fit…
The ironic part of this scatterbrained screed is that neither Skalia or her sister Sharon ever reported on the $60,000 of marijuana money dumped into the 2024 election to help their beloved Vivian Jaramillo.
When not disrupting City Council meetings Skaskia Kennedy is the editor of the still Yellowing Fullerton Observer. A few days ago she published a piece, which I reproduce below, verbatim. See if you can tell what immediately jumps out to me.
The City of Fullerton is working to establish limited inclement weather shelter options for families and seniors (62+) as temperatures drop below 40 degrees or during heavy rainfall. According to City Manager Eric Levitt, efforts have been made to collaborate with various agencies, but securing a provider to operate a dedicated shelter for this winter has proven challenging.
“Unfortunately, there are no similar shelters in Orange County due to the high costs and complexities involved,” Levitt stated. In response to these difficulties, Levitt and his colleague Housing Manager Daniel Valdez have developed alternative options following directives from recent City Council meetings.
The city plans to work with two local hotels to offer shelter specifically for families and individuals aged 62 and older when weather conditions reach critical levels. However, Levitt acknowledged that the initiative will have limited scope due to resource constraints. “We currently have approximately $5,000 allocated from the Housing Fund to assess the effectiveness of this program,” he added.
Council Member Ahmad Zahra sent an email thanking Levitt and Valdez for the update on cold weather shelter for the unhoused and agreed that this is a good alternative option. He wrote, “How would families or individuals over 62 know about this program? Also curious, why 62 specifically?”
In response to Council Member Zahra’s inquiry, Housing Manager Valdez emphasized the importance of prioritizing seniors, who are often among the most vulnerable populations. Citing federal guidelines, Valdez explained that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) defines seniors as those aged 62 and over. “While we will continue to utilize our local shelter whenever available, this initiative offers an additional option for those in need,” he said.
To facilitate outreach, the city will rely on the efforts of Community Outreach Specialists, HOPE Center personnel, and Homeless Liaison Officers, all of whom maintain ongoing communication with unsheltered residents.
As the winter months approach, Fullerton’s initiative aims to address the urgent needs of its most vulnerable citizens despite the limitations presented by funding and provider availability.
Thoughts and prayers…
First, we know this isn’t even newsworthy because nothing has happened. The City Manager Eric Levitt and his hard-working Housing Manager Daniel Valdez are thinking about doing something, somewhere to help homeless somebodies. They haven’t actually accomplished anything worthy of alerting the public.
I will get what I want, one way or another…
But hold on a second. How and why is the email correspondence between Ahmad Zahra and the City Manager included in this nothing waste of space? The answers to both questions are easy. The “why” is: a free opportunity for Zahra to posture for his Observer followers – ever active, thoughtful, hands-on – even though his involvement is with…nothing! The “how” is just as easy. It is the ever self-promoting Zahra who has forwarded his correspondence to Skaskia Kennedy to make him look good and to give the Kennedy Sisters another opportunity to promote Zahra in a “news” story.
Legitimate journalism operations don’t let politicians promote themselves, especially when the vehicle is, as yet, a non-story.
On a clear day you can see forever…
Now this can be seen as beating a dead horse, since anybody paying attention already knows that the Fullerton Observer is not a legitimate journalistic endeavor, and the Kennedy Sisters are not purveyors of objective news. Still, we have yet another example of how the they gladly aid and abet Zahra under the cover of journalism – just like they did when they published water articles Zahra plagiarized from an OCWD PR flack.
George Bushala, the public speaker at the December 17th City Council meeting who was verbally assaulted by the Fullerton Observer’s Sharon Kennedy is documenting the harassment he suffered with the Fullerton Police Department . FFFF has received a copy of his communication to Fullerton Chief of Police Jon Radus. Incidentally, it now seems that the second person involved in this abusive incident (as reported by Jack Hutt) was none other than Sharon’s younger sister, Skaskia. Kennedy.
Why write about news when you can try to make your own! (Photo by Julie Leopo/Voice of OC)
Here is Mr. Bushala’s communication to Chief Radus:
Dear Chief Radus,
As you may recall, I was a public speaker at the City Council meeting on December 17, 2024.
During my comments I was subjected to several violent verbal interjections by Fullerton resident Sharon Kennedy and her sister, Saskia Kennedy.
It is my intent with this communication to convey to the Fullerton Police Department my concern that the violent verbal attacks were damaging to me and have caused me significant subsequent anxiety.
Prior to seeking legal recourse, I would like to file a report with the FPD documenting this incident and I ask for your assistance with this matter. I would also ask that you use your office to help in forestalling any more threatening behavior directed at me from the Kennedys, and any others who participated in this public verbal assault on me.
Thank you for your help in this matter.
Sincerely,
George A. Bushala 409 E. Amerige Ave. Fullerton, CA 92832
Well, I think this is a very good idea. We can’t have public speakers intimidated at meetings – that would be a serious breach of the right to free speech that people like the Kennedys pretend to care about. I hope Mr. Bushala seeks redress for this attack on his honesty and his right to be heard.
At the December 17th Council Meeting, Sharon Kennedy, “former publisher” of the Fullerton Observer appeared to go bonkers when a public speaker began enumerating the reasons Ahmad Zahra was unfit to be Mayor of Fullerton.
FFFF artist’s fictional interpretation…
She began screaming from the rear of the council chambers, accusing the speaker of being a liar and disseminating “disinformation” while interrupting both the speaker and the meeting.
Kennedy’s violent outburst continued – she kept interrupting the speaker, who calmly continued to recite the damning bill of indictment against Zahra.
Time to come clean…..
Zahra himself interrupted the proceedings, too, as well he might, given that the list of objections to his mayoralty was so persuasive. Still, it’s bad form to engage public speakers – “chilling” is what County Supervisor Doug “Bud” Chaffee called it in 2012, and it treads upon free speech rights of a citizen, for sure.
Eventually, Kennedy removed herself from the chamber before Mayor Nick Dunlap could ask police Chief Radus to kick her out..
Why write about news when you can try to make your own! (Photo by Julie Leopo/Voice of OC)
Zahra’s supporters like Sharon Kennedy and her sister, fellow Observer Skaskia, continue to ignore his plagiarism, his marriage fraud, his false police report against Fred Jung, his assault and battery guilty plea, his ever-shifting coming out/coming to America tale, and his perpetual victimhood narratives.
Their emotional and psychological investment in Zahra is such that they will never see the real story. That’s the persuasion of the conman when his marks would rather buy into the con than face the truth of their own foolish gullibility. Or they are infinitely hypocritical. Either that or they’re really stupid.
Last night the City Council appointed a new Mayor for 2025. And guess what? It isn’t Ahmad Zahra, the evasive and prevaricating Middle Eastern medic. He’s been on the City Council for 6 years and has never been able to get two other votes to make himself Mayor.
Why not?
It’s because the majority of his colleagues don’t like him. Not at all. From his self-serving behavior, his sanctimony, his manic publicity seeking, his peddling salacious gossip about his colleagues to local blogs, and his filing a false police report against the new Mayor, he has demonstrated time and again his toxic personality, clearly unfit to be the figurehead of the city.
It’s never even been necessary for the other councilmembers to consider Zahra’s illegal immigration into the country through a phony marriage to a woman in Arkansas; or his assault and battery case against a woman; or his serial plagiarism of water articles written by an Orange County Water District bureaucrat to appear to be some sort of expert.
Last night meeting did have some fun moments, too, that FFFF will share from the video stream when it’s up.
George Bushala, a new local hero…
Of course there were the usual gaggle of boohooing Zahra disciples, people dumb enough to fall for his routine. But one man, George Bushala stood up and completely dismantled Zahra – by actually citing the facts about the man’s background narrative – not the bullshit his followers like so much to lap up. It was a damning bill of indictment and it was beautiful to behold.
Bushala’s statement wasn’t stoically accepted by Zahra, who cried out that he was the victim of a personal attack – pretty rich coming from the creep who has been orchestrating public demonstrations against Jung, Dunlap and Whitaker for several years; demonstrations full of insult, character assassination and innuendo. Personal enough? The non-plussed Zahra had to be admonished not to interrupt public speakers.
From the back of the audience one crazy-bonkers woman started screaming about lies against Zahra. She kept interrupting Mr. Bushala, who calmly waited each time before requesting to able to continue. After being castigated by Dunlap to shut up, the belligerant shrew finally left the chambers in a fit of purple pique, before the cops could hustle her out.
Crazy is as crazy does…
And guess what? It was none other than one of the operators of the “independent newspaper” The Fullerton Observer, Sharon Kennedy!
New Mayor.
Anyway, as far as the vote went, Nick Dunlap decided to nominate Shana Charles for Mayor, a gambit no doubt mean to get some love from Fullerton Democrats. Of course it won’t; and in any case Shana Charles nominated Zahra. Jung nominated himself. And the result was Charles 1, Zahra 2 and Jung 2. On the second try it was 3-2 Jung, with newcomer Jamie Valencia supporting her political mentor. So we’ll be favored with Jung’s rich baritone act for 2025. We’ll also hear about the horrible unfairness of it all for a while, but if you think about it, Zahra could have made Charles Mayor but he obviously didn’t want to. Misogyny?
A special meeting of Fullerton’s City Council is taking place tonight. Why? To address the so-called 6th Cycle of the Housing Element of the General Plan and the concomitant Housing Incentive Overlay Zone, or HIOZ, for those who prefer government acronyms.
Where’s the Class 2 Bikeway?
The City Council has already postponed rubber stamping this twice which is odd, because they usually clean their plates like good little boys and girl.
People who need people…
Friends may recall that City staff proposed the opportunity overlay to construct as many as 30,000 new units with almost zero City control. This, even though the Sacramento houseacrats only demanded 13,000. I say “only” even though this lower number would still add twenty to thirty thousand new residents to Fullerton with new, massive apartment blocks on re-zoned commercial and industrial property.
I previously opined that the 30,000 number was just a dodge, to give the City Council the appearance of having fought a tough fight to “save” Fullerton, while quietly acquiescing on the destructive 13,000 mandate. This would be of particular benefit to the 2026 re-election chances of Shana Charles and Ahmad Zahra, both of whom are ardent lefties and both of whom would love to see those 13,000 units without regard for the damage dome to the City’s schools, roads, infrastructure and neighborhood cohesion.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see a roll-out of the usual suspects singing hosannas to the Council for acceding to the 13,000 units.
Somebody’s gotta suck it up…
And that hypothesis seems right on. The Council has already directed staff to remove the Chapman and Commonwealth “corridors” from the HIOZ plan where the application would have been the most damaging and controversial. And paring back the scale of the disingenuous plan gives a victory to the Save Fullerton crowd who may have actually believed the 30,000 units was an authentic proposal. That group includes some our friends at the Fullerton Observer who will happily embrace the 13,000 as a wonderful compromise.
Pantomime…
Why all these meetings? Maybe it’s a necessary part of this Kabuki to give the façade of public review to something that was always a foregone conclusion – satisfying the knuckle headed legislators and the faceless bureaucrats in Sacramento; and their running buddies in the Southern California Association of Governments, and the California League of Cities.
And why a Special Meeting, other than to instill a sense of Heap Big Emergency about bowing to the diktats of an out-of-control legislature?
I have to admit I haven’t been paying much attention to the development of Fullerton’s “6th Cycle” General Plan Housing Element. I figured it to be a fruitless paper chase in which a consultant got paid a bunch of money to produce umpteen pages of incomprehensible gobbledygook. Turns out I was right about that.
If the paper fits, push it!
The other thing that caused indifferent resignation on my part was the housing mandate decreed by the State Housing and Community Development Department, often referred to as “State HCD.” It so happens that their mandate for Fullerton was to create the opportunity for 13,000 new residential units, as determined by yet another faceless bureaucracy, Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), whose mission is to do whatever the State wants, regardless of what is good for its constituent members. The 13,000 units are part of SCAG’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA, pronounced ree-nuh). These people sure love them some acronyms.
Where these 13,000 unit opportunities are supposed to go in a built out city is no mystery. It will require re-zoning commercial, office professional, and industrially zoned property to admit new residential use. Lots of it.
Well, that’s bad enough, but our crack Community Development Department saw fit to propose a new zoning overlay that could accommodate 30,000 new units. You read that right. 30,000 units, a sum that could increase Fullerton’s population to near the quarter million mark. Their justification? It’s so they won’t have to do anymore bowing and scraping to State HCD. At least not for a while. Or so they say.
The whole thing is ludicrous. First, the rationale for giving the Sacramento boneheads more than they demand is crazy. It’s like paying a million bucks in ransom when the kidnapers only asked for half a mil with no guarantee they won’t do it again. Then there’s the practical side of this. There would be no new roads, no new sewer and water superstructure added, no new schools built, and sixty thousand new auto trips daily. And don’t forget the inadequate parking. It’s a farce piled on top of another farce. But somehow everything will work out, our six-figure experts tell us..
The mechanism to perform this new housing miracle is the called the Housing Incentive Overlay Zone (you guessed it, there’s an acronym – HIOZ). Staff and their consultants have identified hundreds and hundreds of real estate parcels that would receive the new overlay zone, but they don’t seem to be unduly concerned about the effect to the City of Fullerton of losing land for commercial and industrial purposes. It seems that in the grand bureaucratic scheme of things, satisfying other bureaucrats in Sacramento is even more important than losing that sales tax revenue they’re always hunting around for like rabid wolverines.
Pantomime…
Well, fear not, Friends. In reality the 30,000 units was likely just Kabuki theater meant to look like a good faith effort to outdo even the demands of anonymous paper-pushers at SCAG. The City Council discussed this issue last week and there’s no way any of them are going to give the State more than it wants.
Of course, there’s another possibility, too. A political one. The utterly incompetent Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles, Fullerton City Council’s two ultra-liberals, are up for re-election in 2026, and, cynic that I am, I have to wonder if they both won’t use this silver-platter opportunity to campaign on how they defended Fullerton’s quality of life by fighting hard against 17,000 apartments that were never going to happen anyway. Now that would be cynical, wouldn’t it?
