California GOP Initiatives Endorsement Committee Hashes Out Prop 22

Proposition 22 here, is an initiative supported by the California League of Cities and Redevelopment agencies and their lobbyists.

Voting yes on 22 would prohibit the State from restricting the use of tax revenues dedicated by law to fund local government services, community redevelopment projects, or transportation projects and services. It would prohibit the State from delaying the distribution of tax revenues for these purposes even when the Governor deems it necessary due to a severe state fiscal hardship.

The question boils down to whether the State should have the authority to redistribute redevelopment property tax increment funds and use it for schools, and fire departments.

The clip below was taken at the GOP  state convention held this past weekend in San Diego and features the Yes on 22 proponents debating State Assemblyman Chris Norby at the Endorsement Committee meeting. Each party was given 3 minutes to make their pitch, the Yes on 22 proponents spoke for 3-1/2 minutes, however when Assemblyman Norby was only 2-1/2 minutes into his speech (6:58) one of the 22 proponents rudely interrupted Norby and yelled “TIME” even though Norby still had 30 seconds left of his 3 minutes.

My next post will feature video footage of questions and answers by both Norby (No on 22) and the Yes on 22 proponents. There’s also a little treat at the very end of the clip, enjoy!

16 Minutes of Pure Agony

Enjoy these two clips that feature an exchange between County Supervisors Shawn Nelson and Janet Nguyen. The issue is pulling the plug on the moribund Civic Center Joint Powers Authority, an agency that was created when Lyndon Johnson was president, and that has served no legal or practical function for almost ten years.

You would think that supposed “conservatives” would pile on to the opportunity of killing a government entity, especially one that doesn’t do anything. Well, you would have to think again. Just listen to the drivel that escapes the Board Chair’s lips and dribbles down her chin. Ay, ay, ay!

A Masterpiece of Brevity and Focus

The Grand Jury has reported on the OCTA’s budget mess and their deficiency in Bus service.  Here is how the report begins:

The mission statement of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) is a masterpiece of brevity and focus:

“Our mission is to enhance the quality of life in Orange County by delivering safer, faster, and more efficient transportation solutions.”


The report identifies how the OCTA had the right idea when it cut bus services and raised fares by calling the action prudent.  Then later the report notes that the rise in fares had negative effect on the ridership.  Ergo, we must lower bus fares but only after full state funding is restored.

The report also calls into question competing priorities with the federal handout of $2.25 billion for high-speed rail and the $143 million set aside for the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center, which the City of Anaheim is not contributing to.  The Grand Jury points out that OCTA needs to review its priorities with these funds.  The Grand Jury says that the “governmental relations committee of the OCTA Board should urge Orange County ’s congressional delegation to lobby for legisla­tive modification of the $2.25 billion.”

The final recommendation by the Grand Jury is for OC’s political and transportation leaders to hold a series of public meetings, the goal of which would be aimed at creating a countywide transit agency that will have sufficient au­thority and funding to overcome parochial­ism in developing a modern transit system.

I love this gem from the report:

One member of the transit agency’s board char­acterized the economic impact this way: “The busi­nesses and industries in Orange County that depend on low-income workers would grind to a halt.”

It would appear that we taxpayers subsidize bus service (to the tune of more than 80% of the total cost) so that low-income earners can keep their low-income jobs which helps keep low-income employers staffed with low-cost employees…  Ergo, you and I subsidize burger stands, Walmarts, and rich people with nannies and maids.

Thanks OCTA!

C-Span Features Fullerton’s Friend & Fighter Jack Dean in Washington

Click on Jack and watch him go!

Dear Friends: The issue of Pension Abuse continues to dominate the National, State and local scene. If you haven’t already heard Jack Dean with Pension Tsunami speak on this important topic, hopefully today is a great relaxing day to do just that.  Happy August 1st, 2010!

“Would you support our efforts to make our neighborhood historic?”

I received this post from a Friend who wishes to remain anonymous for reasons that you may understand after you read this post.

Think historic neighborhoods. Immediately, one’s mind goes to such places such as Bungalow Heaven in Pasadena, Harper’s Ferry, West Virginia and others where houses, landscape, and layout reflect a distinct architectural coherence.

What we don’t think of is the hodgepodge of homes built over a span of more than fifty years within the boundaries of Skyline, Frances, Luanne, Canon and Lemon here in Fullerton. True, the neighborhood has a sort of charm. But this four block area (oddly denuded of trees) doesn’t fit the definition as historic.

Yet, for over twenty years, this neighborhood has been besieged by a small but persistent group to designate itself as such. The original movement came about when a neighbor (who has since moved away) decided the mix of 60’s ranch homes, 30’s Spanish Mediterranean  and 80’s boxes needed to be protected.

Why? Because the empty lot behind her house, which she had enjoyed as her own personal open space, was going to have a house built upon it.  This led to a movement asking for historical designation, with one very vociferous neighbor putting out a letter decrying such crimes as pink flamingos in yards. It ended when a flock of roving pink flamingos went from yard to yard, to rebuke this snobbishness. It was clear then, as it is now, that the historic designation is more to control everything from the color of homes, the installation of skylights, solar panels, to pink flamingos in yards.

In more recent years, the issue was raised again when a member of the Fullerton Heritage group moved into the neighborhood.  This woman could often be seen taking photographs of her neighbor’s homes. She personally crossed the boundaries of neighborliness by posting a photo of one on their website as an example of “muddled and conflicted” architecture. Battle axes were raised when during a neighborhood meeting, an argument ensued. This busybody sat in the back, mute –rendering herself all but invisible. At no point did she offer any explanation why this issue meant so much to her that she was willing to pit neighbor against neighbor.

The reasons for not wanting this ridiculous designation are simple.

1.     There’s no consistent architectural coherence in the boundaries of Lemon, Skyline, Frances, Luanne and Canon. While there are individual examples of historically significant architectural styles, as a neighborhood – it lacks consistency and coherence.

2. It would give Fullerton Heritage – and the City Planning Department far too much power over our neighborhood. Note, they already have ultimate veto power over designs submitted to the city for everything from new development to remodeling in other neighborhoods designated as a historical zone. In one neighborhood, they vetoed the homeowner’s request to install a skylight. Such oversight is petty, and subject to the changing whims of the board.

3. This will lead to more “fake old” McSpanish architecture. Another uninformed member of the Fullerton Heritage group noted at a meeting at Hillcrest Park that she thought the predominant style in the neighborhood should be “Spanish Mediterranean,” whatever that means.

4.     The $1000 fee for the designation doesn’t even begin to cover the costs of actual staff time. In addition, this doesn’t cover the costs of ordered revisions by the owner’s architects or engineers. Fees like this are never gotten rid of, rather, the fee could be raised and the neighborhood would have no control over the amount they have to pay.

5.     The city of Fullerton has a permit process already in place. This is an added layer of bureaucracy with not only more additional staff time needed, but oversight from an outside organization (Fullerton Heritage).

6.     A small cadre of neighbors has already been vociferous to the point of rudeness about things they don’t like: the color of a neighbor’s home, plantings, flamingos, and more. Worse, their gossip has hit people in ways that have become personal. While we realize they are voicing their opinion, we’d hate to give them permission to authorize or disapprove on any official level.

At some point one must work with and trust the neighbors.  Most of the neighbors who support this notion have lived in the area for 40 years without the intervention of the city. Why they think they should leave future generations with a law to be enforced long after they have enjoyed their own latitude –is for reasons of ego.  While the notion of a historic neighborhood seems appealing, in reality it is cumbersome, vague and will leave future homeowner’s with no choice but to deal with more government and bureaucracy. It was clear twenty years ago as it is now:  these people need to get a life.

All we can do is work with one another, and be neighborly but not meddlesome.

Martha Montelongo on the Air Live with Jack Dean

Join Martha Montelonga live and her guest Fullerton Tax Fighter Jack Dean of Pension Tsunami, tomorrow (Saturday) morning at 10:00A.M. to noon on Outlook with Martha, possibly the name for her new show, on CRN Digital Talk Radio on the story about the $800,000.00 annual salary for the City Manager of the City of Bell, CA.   Could this be the story that breaks the public employee compensation and pension abuse of the public trust and budgets?   Will it be the match that lights a fire under the taxpayers, to cause a productive and revolutionary revolt?

If Bell City Manager retires now, he stands to reap over $30 million dollars in retirement funds.  He’s not the only one with outrageous pensions.   He’s just the worst case by far, but we’ll look at the more common, and yet still, very unjust overcompensation awarded to various officials and ex-officials, all on the dime of the taxpayer, who is on the hook to pay, no matter what.

Metrolink Expanding, But Where Are The Riders?

The following commentary was sent to us by a friend who is concerned about a questionable Metrolink service expansion from Fullerton to Laguna Niguel.

A fourth track is currently being built at the Fullerton Station, exclusively for Metrolink’s new Orange County service — dubbed Metrolink Service Expansion Program (MSEP) by the folks at OCTA. I believe the concept is flawed from the start, and last I heard it is costing taxpayers at least $417 million.

Anyone up for a ride to Laguna Niguel?

I’ve asked numerous people at Metrolink how OCTA justifies the demand for this service. Nobody has an answer. Since it will run between Fullerton and Laguna Niguel only, it’s totally useless for commuters needing to get to Los Angeles. In my experience riding Metrolink, there are very few passengers riding such short distances in Orange County. If a person can afford $14 for a round-trip ticket Fullerton to Irvine and back, there’s a very good chance they already have a car and won’t bother to ride the train.

Furthermore, this service won’t appeal to bus riders unless OCTA drastically reduces the fares. That won’t happen… they just raised the fares again on July 1st. OCTA’s pipe dream to operate this service “every 30 minutes” makes a stupid idea all the more ludicrous.

There’s an angle to this which will affect the Fullerton Station (and the surrounding area) in a big way. Since the northbound trains terminate at Fullerton, the station area will become a layover terminal (akin to an airport) for people needing to get to Los Angeles. Suppose somebody takes the wrong northbound, thinking it goes to Los Angeles, and finds themselves in Fullerton having to wait HOURS for the next train to Los Angeles. There will be people sleeping on benches, sleeping on the ground, leaving their trash all over the place, etc, etc. The local restaurants will have to deal with freeloaders using their bathrooms. It just won’t be a good situation.

Who Should Pay To Clean Up The Mess in Downtown Fullerton?

Welcome to Downtown Fullerton

Surely not the businesses that don’t sell booze.

Last year a few downtown Fullerton property and business owners lobbied the City Council to impose an tax assessment on downtown Fullerton. The purpose of this “Business Improvement District” was to raise money to clean up the mess introduced into Downtown by the numerous booze joints and illegal dance clubs.

The first step was predictable: hire yourself a “consultant” who will tell you what you want to hear. But the price tag was too steep and the promoters couldn’t get a clear majority of the Council to go along.

But apparently now Councilwoman Sharon Quirk-Silva has changed her mind about hiring a consultant to meet and greet and spread the BID propaganda.

The direction here is all too clear: build up some momentum toward the idea and then rely on the self-interested parties to vote their interest and hope that the other property owners don’t catch on.

Well I think this stinks. Why should all the downtown property owners pay to fix the problems caused by the bar owners and their out-of-control customers, not to mention a City policy that has enabled all these problems? And let’s not forget – former police chief and council candidate Patrick McKinley who liked to look the other way.

And why should the taxpayers keep footing the bill?

Ever Get The Feeling…

…that somebody is loading you up with a pile of road apples?

Be sure to pour it on nice and thick...

Good thing Sharon Quirk-Silva knows when to call for a tow. Had it not been for Quirk-Silva the city may have broken the law (again). Watch and see for yourself when Mayor Bankhead asks the police captain how he is supposed to break the law after the tow truck drivers explained to the city council the state law pertaining to private parties towing vehicles.

The city attorney Elena Gerli sure expends a lot of words, but she manages to evade the main issue: her proposed code amendment was created in a vacuum.

So how much per hour are we paying for this mumbo jumbo?