You searched for committee - Page 19 of 22 - Friends For Fullerton's Future

November 2, 2009May 23, 201172nd Election

“No New Tax” Ackerwoman Raised Water Rates by 20% in April. Where There’s a Will There’s a Way!

I was dizzy from balancing all those budgets... — Maybe I was just dizzy from balancing all those budgets...

UPDATE: HERE’S AN INFORMATIVE POST WE RAN A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO ABOUT HOW GOVT REVENUE RAISERS DO IT AND EVADE THE “TAXER” LABEL. THE OTHER GIMMICK IS ‘FEE” INCREASES. IT TELLS YOU ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT ACKERWOMAN’S HOLLOW NO TAX PLEDGE.

Yesterday we published an e-mail from Joe Sipowicz about the lame-brain “no tax pledge” signed by Mrs. Linda Ackerman, presumably to shore up uncertainty about her conservative credentials. She needs to.

As Joe trenchantly pointed out, there are all sorts of ways to raise revenue without calling them taxes. Let’s cast our minds back a few months.

Back on April 14 of this year, never dreaming of ever becoming a candidate for political office, Linda Ackerman went along with the pro-government revenue crowd – voting to raise MWD water rates by an astounding 19.7%. That’s right folks. A 20% commodity increase for the water MWD provides to local water purveyors – like the City of Fullerton; and to the OC Water District for basin replenishment.

Here’s the excerpt from the April 14, 2009 MWD meeting minutes.

47859 Regarding the water rates and charges, Business and Finance Committee Chairman Grunfeld remarked on the unprecedented amount of time both Directors and staff spent on the rates and charges, keeping in mind their fiduciary duties and general responsibilities to the 19 million people that Metropolitan serves via their respective member agencies. Committee Chairman Grunfeld then moved, seconded by Director Santiago, that the Board adopt the CEQA determination and approve Option #2 set forth in the revised board letter signed by the General Manager on April 7, 2009, with an amendment to add Item (d) and:

a. Approve an 8.8 percent increase in water rates, plus a $69/AF Delta Supply Surcharge for a total average increase of 19.7 percent, effective September 1, 2009; b. Adopt Resolution 9087 to Impose the Readiness-to-Serve Charge;
Minutes -9- April 14, 2009
c. Adopt Resolution 9088 to Impose the Capacity Charge, said resolutions entitled:

Resolution 9087: RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA FIXING AND ADOPTING A READINESS-TO-SERVE CHARGE FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2010
Resolution 9088 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA FIXING AND ADOPTING A CAPACITY CHARGE EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 2010
and

d. Direct staff to work with the member agencies and the Board to evaluate the historical cost-of-service methodology utilized by Metropolitan, including a review of additional fixed charges, including property taxes, with the intent to ensure that all rates and charges recover the full cost of service when the Board establishes rates for the 2010/11 fiscal year .
Comments were made by Directors for and against the motion with emphasis on the treatment surcharge and decreasing reserves. The Chair called for a vote on the motion.
The following is a record of the vote on the motion:

Ayes: Anaheim (Dir. M. Edwards, 3,466 votes), Beverly Hills (Dir. Wunderlich, 2,033 votes), Central Basin Municipal Water District (Dirs. Apodaca and Hawkins, 11,185 votes), Eastern Municipal Water District (Dir. Record, 6,731 votes), Inland Empire Utilities Agency (Dir. Santiago, 8,440 votes), Las Virgenes Municipal Water District (Dir. Peterson, 1982 votes), Long Beach (Dir. Lowenthal, 3,984 votes), Los Angeles (Ayes: Dirs. Grunfeld and J. Murray. Absent: Dirs. Quiñonez and Sutley. 40,455 votes), Municipal Water District of Orange County (Ayes: Dirs. Ackerman, Dick, and Foley. Absent: Dir. Bakall. 34,917 votes), San Diego County Water Authority (Dirs. Barrett, Lewinger, Pocklington, and Steiner, 38,213 votes), San Fernando
Minutes -10- April 14, 2009
(Dir. Ballin, 150 votes), Santa Ana (Dir. Griset, 2,169 votes), Santa Monica (Dir. Abdo, 2,332 votes), West Basin Municipal Water District (Dirs. Gray and Little, 13,663 votes), Western Municipal Water District of Riverside County (Dir. Lopez, 8,456 votes). Total 178,176 votes.

Noes: Burbank (Dir. Brown, 1,803 votes), Calleguas Municipal Water District (Dir. Grandsen, 8,160 votes), Foothill Municipal Water District (Dir. J. Edwards, 1,272 votes), Fullerton (Dir. Blake, 1,457 votes), Glendale (Dir. Kavounas, 2,226 votes), San Marino (Dir Morris, 399 votes), Three Valleys Municipal Water District (Dir. De Jesus, 5,031 votes), Torrance (Dir. Wright, 2,186 votes), Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District (Dir. Robinson, 7,257 votes). Total 29,791 votes. Not Participating: Pasadena (Dir. Brick, 2,037 votes). Total 2,037 votes. Absent: Compton (Dir. Arceneaux, 362 votes). Total 362 votes.
The Chair declared the recommended water rates and charges and resolutions to impose charges for fiscal year 2009/10 passed by 178,176 ayes, 29,791 noes, 2,037 not participating, and 362 absent.

Thanks, for that one Linda! Anything else you’d like to share with us?

October 29, 2009December 28, 200972nd Election

Linda Ackerman Runs Away From GOP – Steps In Elephant-sized Pile

by Grover Cleveland1 Comment

In what seems to be an increasingly desperate campaign, the Ackerwoman sent out a mailer to Democrats trying to woo their unlikely votes. Nothing all that unusual there. The only problem is she says that she “is not defined by being a Republican.”

Can someone please help take my shoes off?

Oh, oh. Seriously no bueno (as Art Pedroza would say) in some circles. See, Linda is a national GOP committeewoman and is a (seemingly permanent) fixture on the OC GOP central Committee. This has caused a bit of a stir, even at the Red County blog that heretofore had been treating the Ackerman, Inc. prevarications with kid gloves. Blogger Allan Bartlett has demanded Ackerwoman’s resignation from the national committee post haste.

So now Linda has to start scrapping off the bottom of her Gucci shoes, explaining to friend and foe alike just what that mailer really did mean. If she placates the Republicans, she’s sure to offend any Dems or DTS voters stupid enough to have fallen for the ruse in the first place.

O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!

October 29, 2009January 4, 2010About Us

What is “The Alliance for California’s Tomorrow”?

by The Fullerton Harpoon11 Comments

I have friends all over California and some of them are very generous.

You’ve gotten a lot of junk mail from them lately, about the 72nd Assembly race, and mostly reprehensible attacks on Chris Norby. Never heard of this operation with the lame name? Don’t feel bad. Hardly anyone else has either. That’s because it doesn’t make anything, doesn’t stand for anything, and doesn’t even exist – except on paper. It is a political Independent Expenditure “Committee” that’s sole reason for existence is to funnel lobbyist money into political campaigns.

But let’s let Repuglican Bigmouth Jon Fleischman tell it:

“Just heard from Jim Nygren the consultant for the Alliance for California’s Tomorrow, the Sacramento insider crowd that is ponying up big-time to try and elect Linda Ackerman in AD 72.”

Jim Nygren. A political “consultant” who operates a slush fund for “insiders” to get one of their own in power. Redevelopment abusers, gambling interests, etc., etc. These are the real supporters of Team Ackerman. And boy, oh boy do they want their cardboard cutout up in Sacto. where they can put her to work over rigatoni with clam sauce at Spataro.

And check out Fleischman’s post: they’ve lined up the punch drunk Bankhead to provide testamonials for Linda Ackerman, the woman whose husband, Dick, famously coined the moniker “Blankhead”! One letter is meant for Reeps the other for Dems. Geez, they think of everything! But given Bankhead’s embarrassingly vacant performance on the council dais lately, one has to wonder if his support is worth much.

I'd like soup. Are we having soup today?

October 26, 2009December 28, 200972nd Election

Pechanga Indians Buy More Favors from the Ackermans

by Travis Kiger6 Comments

A few days ago, the Pechanga Band of Indians kicked down $15,000 to send out mailers on in the 72nd on behalf of Linda Ackerman. The money arrived at the same time as the $25K kicked in by billionaire owner of the City of Industry. And on the 23rd a new expenditure has been reported that specifically targets Chris Norby.

Since all these funds are laundered through the bogus “Alliance for California’s Tomorrow” IE committee, it’s hard to pinpoint who paid for what. But it hardly matters. The other day one of our writers supposed that Roski might want to keep his hands off Norby directly. Now it appears that that is not the case since the funds go into the same pool.

But back to our Native American brothers.

Why would a bunch of Indians way out in Temecula be interested in the race to represent North Orange County?

ackerman-casino-map

Dick Ackerman has a history of pandering to the Indian gambling cabal, going out of his way to give them fat favors from the State on behalf of Orange County residents. Over the last few years, Ackerman spent an incredible amount of energy pushing deals through the California legislature that would allow Pechanga to add tens of thousands new slot machines. Somehow this was all justified by calling Orange County a “core geographic area” for the distant desert casinos.

Native American dancers celebrate the blessings of Irvine's Great Dick Ackerman — Native American dancers celebrate the blessings of Dick Ackerman

Now it’s Linda Ackerman’s turn to run for office, and the Pechanga Indians know where to put their money. Linda is sure to continue her husband’s tradition of repaying special interests with special favors to the detriment of Orange County residents.

October 24, 2009December 28, 2009About Us

Ed Roski Blowing Smoke for Ackerwoman

by The Fullerton Harpoon3 Comments

Well, we predicted the presence of Ed Roski in the campaign for the 72nd Assembly District, here. Roski has made a fortune in commercial real estate, not to mention controlling the dubious City of Industry – a Redevelopment Valhalla – as his personal fiefdom.

Chris Norby has been a staunch foe of Redevelopment abuse, and has singled out both the City of Industry as well as its attempt to swipe an NFL team (to play in a stadium that dodged full environmental review – courtesy of the legislature) for scrutiny; so Roski’s participation in the election seemed a forgone conclusion.

Furthermore, Team Ackerman, Inc. has a well-documented history of supporting Redevelopment boondoggles and misuse, including building a football stadium at CSUF for a non-existant team, and then underwriting a losing fundraising campaign for it.

A late expenditure report by our parasitical pals at The Alliance for California’s Tomorrow shows that Roski dumped $25,000 into their committee this week. The expenditures are for “data” and “printing,” so presumably a mailer is on the way.

What’s curious is that the expenditure is that it is designated as “for” Linda Ackerman, whereas we had assumed Roski was going to be the designated hitter against Norby – so that the Ackerwoman could keep her mitts clean. That theory was undermined when Ackerwoman had to do the dirty work herself in her disgraceful mailer about the bogus sexual harassment suit. The fact that Roski is weighing in now – but not specifically “against” Norby – might indicate that he’s seen some polling numbers and doesn’t really want to offend Assemblyman Norby, but needs to show the flag, at least. But we merely speculate.

What’s also curious about the expenditure is the timing. Thousands of absentee ballots have already been returned. Why did Roski wait so long to kick in? Desperation by Team Ackerman, Inc.? Who knows?

When we get the mailer, we’ll share the contents.

In the meantime maybe our Undercover Surveillance Unit has picked up on a conversation between Dick and Ed. If so, we’ll keep you posted.

October 23, 2009January 4, 201072nd Election

The Strange Case of the Eli Lilly Five Grand

by Grover ClevelandLeave a comment

Some of my best friends are lobbyists...

In a late expenditure report filed 10/19/09 an independent expenditure committee basking in the hilarious title Alliance for California’s Tomorrow; A California Business Coalition (interpretation: a front for whatever corporate donors and PACs want to spend money on to promote their own enrichment by manipulating the Legislature, and meanwhile keep their hands clean – sort of). This particular IE was in support of Linda Ackerman, naturally. They paid for a mailer.

The report shows three donations: $10,000 from California Cable & Telecom Association (10/15/09), State Building & Construction Trades Council of California(10/16/09), and the real curiosity – $5000 contributed last July 20th.

Why did Eli Lilly, the drug maker, just happen to put five big ones in an IE in the middle of July. What for? It doesn’t seem that it could have had anything to do with the other money put in for the Ackerwoman campaign in mid-October. On July 20th the Duvall story was still a month away from breaking, although the actual incident had already occurred, and apparently several people already knew it was out there. So the reason for the mid-summer contribution is strange. Was it just a periodic payment Eli Lilly tossed into the Alliance for California’s Tomorrow kitty? That seems pretty hard to believe. So what was it for? And how did it come to be used for in the 72nd campaign?

Yet, consider this coincidence-wise: one of the 2008 board members of The Pacific Policy Research Foundation (Linda Ackerman’s fake 501(c0(3) Hawaiian vacation scam) was Dan Howle; and Howle directs government affairs in Sacramento (lobbyist) for pharmaceutical giant…Eli Lilly. It’s a small world after all in Sacramento. And boy is it loaded with lobbyists.

October 20, 2009December 28, 200972nd Election

OC GOP says “No more RINOS”; Could Ackerwoman, Bankhead & Jones Be Out of Business?

by admin7 Comments

Our friend Allan Bartlet over at Red County reported that the GOP’s Chairman Scott Baugh gave a “fiery speech” last night indicating “that it is not going to be business as usual anymore for the OC GOP Party………no longer will incumbent Republicans be given safe quarter for their re-election if they have strayed to far off the reservation………..made it clear that he is not looking for ideological purity per se, but Republicans in the mold of Arnold Schwarzenegger, John McCain & George W Bush for example are not going to be allowed to ruin the party’s economic and fiscal credibility anymore…..Clearly this is an unsustainable path we are on and our elected GOP leaders in DC and Sacramento have been part of the problem. So tonight he announced a contract with the OC GOP voters. It’s not going to be good enough just to have an “R” by your name if you are a candidate or elected official. The “R” has got to mean something.”

Hmm. Let’s reflect on this for a moment. Okay. Baugh throws the Central Committee some red meat. Hooray! But don’t forget that the Central Committee is chock full of Repuglicans led by Ackerman and Ackerwoman; and Baugh is surely the biggest ‘Pug between San Onofre and the 605. When push comes to shove Baugh, Inc. will go with whichever candidate is the best ‘Pug team player, i.e. the one that is most ambitious (but not too ambitious, right, Ed?) and most likely to perform years of kickoff team duty – there’s only one QB, right, Dick?

It would be awfully strange for an organization made up of so many very selfish and self-interested politicos to all of a sudden change its stripes. Good grief, look at Fullerton: Sa, Godfrey, Jones, Clesceri, Munson (the one that didn’t win) Wison – RINOs all; and all backed by the GOP establishment – again, and again.

So for now we are well justified in assuming that Baugh is just blowing smoke up the Central Committee’s nether portal. And you what? A lot of them appear to like it.

October 19, 2009October 20, 2009About Us

Irony: Ackerwoman Complains About Norby Mailer

by The Fullerton Harpoon6 Comments

I lie about him and he tells the truth about me. That's not fair!

Too funny! Our inside sources tell us that Ackerwoman has filed an ethics complaint to the GOP Central Committee about a Norby flier supposedly tying her to her husband’s budget deals in Sacto.

Since Ackerwoman is tied at the hip to her husband Ackerman, it seems like a fairly reasonable association to make. After all, she was handsomely paid to raise funds for his campaigns so presumably she believed in the product she was pitching.

What’s really comical is that Ackerwoman has the nerve to show her mug in public at all after the scurrilous hit piece that she put out on Norby, let alone complain about “ethics”! The bogus piece she mailed out will no doubt earn her a cross-complaint when the Central Committee Ethics Committee next meets, as will the fact that she isn’t even living in the district where she only recently registered to vote.

Hypocrisy, deceit, dishonor, egotism, power fetish – the list just goes on and on. Who dug up these wretched people?

October 18, 2009December 28, 200972nd Election

Martin Wisckol Caught Pimping for Linda Ackerman – Again.

by Grover Cleveland17 Comments

Maybe the Register’s Martin Wisckol is worried about the impending collapse of his employer and is thinking about future work writing press releases for Dick and Linda Ackerman. Looks like he has already started.

Last Wednesday Wisckol tossed up this powder puff blog post addressing the issue of Linda Ackerman’s “experienced businesswoman” self-applied label. Exercising all the journalistic curiosity of a sea cucumber he coughed up this pearl:

I asked her last week what her business was. She responded that she was on the Board of Directors of the USCB collection management company, a director on the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, was finance director of the Marian Bergeson Series, and was executive director of the state Capital of California Preservation Fund (I haven’t been able to find a Web site for that).

Good enough. Sounds like business stuff to me.

God, I can't believe he bought that. Dick we gotta put that nice boy on the payroll...

Sorry Martin, but it’s not “good enough” just because she said so. To pass along this tripe suggests that you are either stupid, lazy, or are shilling for Ackerman, Inc. Since we assume the Register doesn’t knowingly employ overtly stupid people, the options are narrowed.

We’ll help out by citing our post that pretty effectively dispatches the Ackerman “experienced businesswoman” fable.

Let’s recap. Linda’s on the board of a collection agency, USCB; a job she got by virtue of her husband’s influence and that meets three or four times a year? That may provide a little extra pocket money, but it hardly constitutes what a reasonable person would call business experience.

She’s on the executive committee of the Marian Bergeson blah blah blah. A training ground for female GOP politicians. Another part-time gig base on her political connections. In any case her self proclaimed responsibility (from her own website) is “finance development” not “finance director”, ya chowder head. Development means calling up lobbyists and asking them for money. You know, Martin. The same lobbyists who lobbied her husband.

Likewise she got an appointment to the Board of the MWD – a political, not a professional appointment, Marty. Do you really think she would have gotten that without her husband’s name. So she goes to a government agency meeting once a month to be told how to vote. No business experience there, either.

A committee to restore the historic working spaces of the Capitol. WTF? Are you kidding, Martin? That sounds like business to you? To us that sounds like the bored wife of a legislator or a socialite, or both. There’s probably a real good reason there’s no website.

Well, Martin, we have just covered the sum and substance of Linda Ackerman’s “business” experience over her 45 years of adulthood. And here it is, again:

No real experience in the private sector
Never owned or operated a business
Never employed anybody
Never signed the front of a paycheck.

In fact, Linda Ackerman’s only real experience is raising money from lobbyists, for this or that personal Ackerman benefit, mostly her husband’s campaigns. And for that she was amply recompensed for her part time work. Come to think of it, we’re now pretty sure the woman has never even held a real job of any kind.

So come on Martin, how about a little real work yourself. Quit passing along Ackerman campaign mush gussied up as the truth. Why not try to do something honorable before you get the axe?

October 16, 2009December 28, 200972nd Election

The Repuglican Culture of Power & Profit

by The Fullerton Shadow5 Comments

Unenforceable laws were made to be broken — If it isn't illegal, it can't be wrong...Dick told me to say that.

Over at his Repuglican PR firm, er, Red County blog, our old playmate Matthew Cunningham has taken great offense at the good post “Rogue Elephant” wrote on the Orange Juice blog the other day, and that we generously shared with the Friends, here.

Why is he offended by Rogue Elephant’s post and our take on it? Because the post pointed out that former State Senator Jim Brulte gave Linda Ackerman $3900 out of his bogus BoE in 2014(!) campaign committee. We pointed out that her husband’s equally bogus BoE 2010 (created in 2006!) committee also gave her the same amount. We noted that these committees were basically money pots that politicians could use to finance their maintenance of power and influence. In other words a scam – create a committee for a fake political campaign and then use it as an influence buying cash cow.

Cunningham got his knickers in a real wad and noted that FFFF is a political committee, too, and that there is no difference between us and the donors to Ackerman. See, it’s all about free speech. Shame on us.

What a howler.

Just say something. Anything. And keep saying it.

It seems to have escaped Cunningham’s notice that we are not politicians; we don’t raise funds under the guise of a phony run for office. We aren’t pretending to run for anything as a way to hang on to money raised for other offices. We don’t redistribute money as a way to influence elections and buy friends. Our purpose is to to promote causes and candidates we feel are worthy, but we’re not in it to amass wealth, or to keep control of wealth courtesy of people who contributed for other purposes. Too bad none of that can be said about Brulte or Ackerman.

Repuglicans have gotten into the nasty habit of using the “free speech” complaint as an argument to support any kind of deceit practiced in the pursuit of power. But at the core the issue isn’t about free speech – it’s about a fundamentally dishonest way of maintaining influence in Sacramento. Of course the crooks and their hangers-on can’t admit it. If it ain’t illegal it ain’t wrong. Plus the Democrats do it too!

What a culture.