AN OPEN LETTER BY BARRY LEVINSON TO THE FULLERTON CITY COUNCIL – MAYOR JENNIFER FITZGERALD, COUNCIL MEMBERS JAN FLORY, DOUG CHAFFEE, GREG SEBOURN AND BRUCE WHITAKER.


Question:  How did Don Bankhead and Dick Jones get to serve on the Fullerton City Council for a combined 40 plus years?

download (5)

Answer:  The election rules greatly favors the incumbents.

download (4)

 

Now, of course no matter what the election rules are, the incumbent has a natural built-in advantage.  They have name recognition and a record they can boast about, no matter how weak it may be in reality.  They also have made alliances with powerful people in the community, which they can easily use to their advantage.  However, in Fullerton that is only the beginning of the advantage these incumbents have with the current election system in Fullerton.

download (3)

 

You see, in Fullerton, there is no limit on the number of challengers who can run for a council seat.  Usually it takes only 18 to 20% of the total votes to win the election.  There are no runoffs to get to a majority like there are in many cities.  Fullerton’s excuse is that having another runoff election is expensive.  However, it is not nearly as expensive as voting for 6% raises for the police, 9% raises over 2 years for the fireman and 90% pensions and free retiree medical for both groups.  But the establishment elites always bring up money when they are against something and ignore the huge costs when it comes to voting for outsized public union employee raises and benefits.  This is how the politicians who support the special interests cling to power, election after election, after election.

download (2)

 

Demand that the city change the rules to make our election process fairer.  Demand that they institute a requirement that to win a council seat, the candidate must reach a majority, i.e. 50% plus one.

images (2)

 

You may recall, that the last time we had this majority rules system was in the 2012 Recall Election.  The question was the following:  Do you want to recall Council members Bankhead, Jones and McKinley?  When approximately 65% of the voters said they wanted to recall them, new council members were then elected in their place.  Remember, I reminded you that in a normal election cycle it takes only 18 to 20% of the vote to get elected to council.  In the recall vote, double that amount or approximately 35% voted to keep them, yet with this fairer system they were defeated almost 2 to 1.

download (6)

 

This reform will do much more for a fair election process than the currently considered District-wide election format.  All the problems with the current system I have outlined will not be dealt with, with a District-wide election format.

felza-150x150

 

 

Question you might ask:  Why wouldn’t the council install this fairer system and why did they not do this years if not decades ago?

meyer

 

Answer:  It would mean that the process would become fairer and reduce at least partly their built-in incumbent advantages.  And how many politicians do you know who are willing to make it easier for a challenger to beat them and have to relinquish their power?

jan-florry-by-Samahan-Mohagen-10336840_597500127032663_7859966640831628486_n (1)

 

Now if all the council members want to show that they are fair and care about reform they would jump at this chance to make our election process, fairer and more democratic.  The final question is will they do the right thing?

12063992_1697233570500142_1750532264_n

 

I report, you decide.

Barry Levinson

download

 

 

 

  1. #1 by Barry Levinson on March 9, 2016 - 1:44 pm

    A council majority that was concerned with carrying out the will of the people would have made this much needed improvement in our local election process decades ago.

    It is sad that at no point in our illustrious city history has a majority of council members stood up to do right thing with regard to our election process.

    I wrote this article in part to highlight for the readers how our council majorities have let the people down over the course of our city history.

    Government for and by the people demands no less than this very important fix.

  2. #2 by Anonymous on March 9, 2016 - 11:55 pm

    Thank the ACLU, which has successfully sued or threatened to sue several cities for using an election system they claim is unfair to ethnic minority candidates. The fact that Fullerton voters will decide whether the city switches to district elections had absolutely nothing to do with this, or any other Fullerton council.

    Oh and by the way, a very small number of voters cast ballots in the recall election and those voters who did answered one question and one question only: Should (name) be recalled? Yes or no? So of course, it’s not difficult to garner 65 percent of the vote when you have two choices. For the next part of the ballot, voters chose among a group of candidates vying for ta seat held by a specific council member. The winning candidates got nowhere near 65 percent of the vote. I also seem to recall that despite being backed by hundreds of thousands of dollars of Tony Bushala’s money, Mr Levinson got his clock cleaned by Doug Chafee. Meanwhile, Tony’s other two candidates, Travis Kiger and Greg Sebourn won their respective races.
    So maybe it’s not the system that is flawed, but the candidate.

    The playing field is same for everyone, so if you lose an election, don’t blame the system. Blame yourself.

    • #3 by Reality Is..... on March 10, 2016 - 8:27 am

      Fact is Barry and Joe would lose under any election system, even one that they created themselves in order to make it biased in their favor. No one in this city would want someone running this city with such biased and preset agendas. Thank God.

    • #4 by Fullerton Lover on March 10, 2016 - 9:07 am

      If I had been a city council candidate that lost the election, I would probably blame the $50,000+ that the public employees unions spent to defeat candidates like Barry that won’t sign off on the public employees bleeding Fullerton’s future dry.

      Or maybe I would blame the $50,000+ that those same unions spent to support candidates like Chaffee, Flory, and likeable loser Larry Bennett.

  3. #5 by Anonymous on March 10, 2016 - 12:02 am

    And of the 30-plus cities in this county, name one that uses runoffs to get down to a certain number of candidates?

  4. #6 by Reality Is..... on March 10, 2016 - 8:26 am

    Since you brought it up Barry, tell me this.

    Over the last 10 years, what is the percentage increase in pay and benefits overall for the City Police and Fire? You see very stuck on the most recent pay raises and you act like a pay raise is such a terrible thing. With that in mind, I’ll be waiting for your last 10 years statistics on the City Police and Fire.

    I’m sure you have no clue what these numbers are but I’m also sure you don’t care because you are solely focused on a biased agenda.

    I’ll be waiting. I think you will be surprised. Especially taking into account the normal rates of inflation, etc.

    Love,

    DannyBoy

    • #7 by Fullerton Lover on March 10, 2016 - 9:46 am

      This is why the city council candidates who are supported by the Police and Fire departments in Fullerton are sans conscience.

      http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2011/peer-into-the-thought-process-of-the-fpoa/

    • #8 by Reality Is.... on March 10, 2016 - 10:53 pm

      Did I miss Barry providing the stats on the last 10 years of pay and benefits for police and fire? Crickets?

      • #9 by Joe Imbriano on March 10, 2016 - 11:49 pm

        How is Barry supposed to get ten years of pay and benefits for police and fire when I can’t even get them to give me the water bills for the Hunt Branch Library. RI, maybe you could put in a word for me huh?

  5. #10 by ??? on March 10, 2016 - 9:13 am

    Also might be worth the few minutes it takes to see how many times Mr Levinson has run for council in Fullerton,and of those times, when has he ever come close to winning a seat.

    • #11 by Reality Is..... on March 10, 2016 - 9:50 am

      But people like Barry blame the system, not the voters or the fact that people disagree with his agendas and his style. We are in a generation of blame, and no self acceptance of issues and mistakes. It’s always someone else’s fault now. Travis learned the hard way about reality. You can buy your way into a council seat but once you open your mouth with your completely biased views and agendas, you will be gone faster than you came in, and you don’t get your money back.

  6. #12 by ??? on March 10, 2016 - 3:34 pm

    Yup, and this nonsense that certain candidates who sellout to the public unions are at an advantage … Let’s follow the trend used by Mr. Levinson and look at past elections. In 2012, Bruce Whitaker, Jennifer Fitzgerald and Jan Flory finished first, second and third in the voting respectively and none of them got endorsements from the union. In 2016, Greg Sebourn was the target of hit pieces from the cop union and still won his seat back.

    • #13 by Fullerton Lover on March 11, 2016 - 2:48 pm

      Why did John Wilson Phillips, son of a banker/developer that owns shopping centers around Fullerton, give the three city council candidates who were recalled that year, McKinley, Jones, and Bankhead, at least $1,000?

      Why did he donate $5,000 to Larry Bennett’s failed bid to thwart the recall of those three city councilman in 2012?

      Why did John Wilson Phelps give Jan Flory $10,000 to run for a city council position paying less than $10,000 per year?

      Why did John Wilson Phelps give $500 each to Jennifer Fitzgerald and Rick Alvarez to run for city council in 2012 to replace the three candidates of his which were recalled?

      http://docs.cityoffullerton.com/weblink/1/doc/520319/Page1.aspx

      Why did he give $10,000 to Jan Flory’s campaign to run for Fullerton City Council in 2012?

      http://docs.cityoffullerton.com/weblink/1/doc/520319/Page1.aspx

      • #14 by Anonymous on March 11, 2016 - 5:39 pm

        Uh …. because he is smart??

        • #15 by Fullerton Lover on March 11, 2016 - 10:23 pm

          …and then how old Jim Alexander’s political contributions on behalf of MG Disposal?

          Anybody in Fullerton honestly think old Jim didn’t buy his way in?

          …you may notice that Jim is also the CSUF’s Director of Property Development.

          Any one else in Fullerton think that old Jim may have his finger deeply in the pie of “College Town’s” development?

          http://www.zoominfo.com/p/James-Alexander/137431397

      • #16 by Anonymous on March 11, 2016 - 5:44 pm

        But here are some even better questions for Fullerton Lover:
        Who would be dumb enough to give Joe Imbriano a dime?
        How will Joe Imbriano raise money for his campaign?
        How much money will Joe Imbriano actually raise?
        Will he even be able to collect the 20 signatures needed to run in the first place?

        • #17 by Reality Is.... on March 11, 2016 - 7:10 pm

          LOL

          • #18 by Fullerton Lover on March 11, 2016 - 10:34 pm

            It’s sort of a rhetorical question, as the ONLY reason that people give money to ANY politician is for ACCESS to them when they need a “favor”.

            This video reminds me of how I picture Reality Is after some one stole the police scanner he used to listen to when he was growing up.

            https://youtu.be/92XVwY54h5k

        • #19 by Fullerton Lover on March 11, 2016 - 11:35 pm

          …now see me personally, I’d be asking myself, ” why would James Alexander/ CSUF Property Services, be giving a lovable loser like Larry Bennett $500 in campaign contributions in his bid for city council in 2014?

          Oh, do you think it’s because Larry is on the Fullerton Planning Commission and can bamboozle the best of them?

          Page 5 of the link to the Fullerton City Clerk’s office document archive…

          http://docs.cityoffullerton.com/weblink/DocView.aspx?id=550388&page=5&searchid=fa45c5e3-5dba-4855-8f9d-12f91d03dbd7

    • #20 by We Deserve Better on March 12, 2016 - 11:42 am

      Do not take my word for how the FPOA Union (Fullerton Police Officer’s Association ) buys influence with city council and OC Supervisor’s elections, listen to Andrew Goodrich: ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Andrew S. Goodrich, Sr., has been with the Fullerton PD since 1990. He was a FPOA board member from 1995 to 2003, and has has served as insurance commissioner, secretary, and most recently, the vice president. He can be e-mailed at agoodrich@fullertonpd.org.

      THE VALUE OF POLITICAL INVOLVEMENT Your association’s role in local politics
      By Andrew S. Goodrich
      Politics is always an interesting game. It can be gut wrenching, but always interesting. We need only look to our own recent national election to see the process at its best (or worst).
      The reality is that, as a local police (or sheriff’s) association, our ability to influence national, or even statewide elections is minimal to non-existent. However, there are numerous opportunities to influence those elections that are closer to home, namely elections for city council and county supervisor.
      I will put in the punch line here, at the beginning of the story, in the hopes that after reading
      it, you’ll want to read on. In the past two city council elections in our town, we have actively endorsed five candidates for office. This includes a candidate who was running against a two- time incumbent. We are batting 1,000; all five candidates (including the one running against the incumbent) have been elected to office.
      Now, back to the story about a medium-sized association in a conservative Orange County city that had a great political awakening starting in that very notorious last election year.
      Fullerton is by most measurements a medium or greater sized city and agency. With a population of about 122,000, and a police department of 150 sworn officers, it would be in the top 200 largest agencies in the nation.
      However, Fullerton is overshadowed by Los Angeles, Anaheim, Santa Ana, and a host of smaller agencies. Just a stone’s throw north of Disneyland, Fullerton is a very conservative community, with a conservative city council and leadership history.
      For years, this conservative element dominated city politics, including the way in which elections were run and candidates chosen. Like most of our government, incumbents rarely (if ever) lost contested elections.
      Meanwhile, the men and women of the Fullerton Police Officers’ Association (FPOA) saw their salaries dwindle when compared to neighboring agencies. While still not being underpaid, there was significant disparity between very similar agencies. In addition, equipment and working conditions were also on the decline.
      Fullerton is one of two local agencies in all of Orange County without working computers in the patrol units, and the police station is a relic held over from before World War II as a Public Works Administration effort.
      On the other hand, the community is extremely supportive of the police department and its
      officers. Fullerton PD is a very high-service department, handling calls that many other cities would balk at.
      The FPOA was like most smaller associations, who did little other than give away money to a few local causes and pay for legal representation for the members. A Political Action Committee (PAC) was started around 1994 in a well-intentioned effort to have a voice in local affairs. However, the PAC did little other than offer token endorsements to candidates, and offered no real support or clout.
      There were rumblings among many of the members to step-up association activities, and take
      a more activist approach to everything from negotiations to political campaigns. There was an election for the 1999 presidency of the FPOA between a moderate former vice-president, and a more radical (and younger) officer. The moderate candidate won by a margin of one vote. There was a rematch for 2000, and this time, the “radical” won with about 70 percent of the vote.
      When our new president came into office, he had a broad goal of making the FPOA a more viable employee association, attempting to have a voice in city affairs through an active campaign for political candidates. He and I spoke at length on how to accomplish these goals, and devised a strategy that worked for us. The agenda we ended up with was influenced by a variety of sources, including information we had taken from other local associations who were already politically active, strategies from a police union seminar, and our own ideas.
      I cannot overemphasize the importance of leadership. Many of the people who were involved all year long were the same people that had been involved in the past, but hadn’t had the direction or will to do what we wanted and needed to do.
      This is not a “knock” on our previous presidents, just a difference of direction and devotion. A core circle of leaders is needed who are willing to make the tough decisions, in spite of the inevitable consequences that result when authority is challenged. Without this core, the effort would have been a disastrous failure.
      Another factor to consider is the political backlash. There will be many in your city or county leadership who do not want you to be politically active. “They” have had things their way
      for years and years, and “they” do not want a group with the credibility that you have usurping “their” program. We felt a lot of pressure from the local newspaper, various leaders and administrators during our first real election cycle in 2000.
      One of our first tasks was to review the candidates that the previous board had endorsed for the 2000 primary. These endorsements were made at the end of 1999, and we wanted to make sure that they reflected our changed attitude.
      One of these candidates was our own city councilman, who was running in a hotly contested primary for a state Senate seat. There was talk about whether to pull the endorsement because of perceived past grievances. What followed was heated debate between all of the board
      members, who were almost evenly split.
      One of the hardest things that police officers acting as board members must do is divorce themselves from many of our natural instincts. Politics isn’t like friendships, or even working relationships. Politics is business, and seldom black and white. There are not simply good guys and bad guys, with no middle ground. The political arena is almost completely gray.
      In the end, we decided to keep the endorsement in place, but only after making our concerns very clear to the candidate. He still had our support, and we demonstrated our serious intentions. We have gone on to develop a good working relationship with this candidate.
      I should address here the whole idea of a police association supporting any candidates for office. Many of our rank and file wrestled with the idea of whether it was appropriate for us as an association to “sully ourselves” in local politics. It took a great deal of education and debate, but the vast majority was convinced.
      Law enforcement has always had an interest in politics. Whether it’s the “Three Strikes” law, legislation allowing maliciously accused officers to sue their accusers, or 3%@50 retirement, law enforcement has a definite interest in law and politics.
      When it comes to local politics in a city of our size, an organization such as ours is one of the few groups citizens feel they can trust. So it is not only our own self-interest that we are looking after, but also the health and well-being of our community.
      We developed our position in the community by donating $15,000 per year to local groups, individuals and charities. This includes a small scholarship program that we began in 2001, where we give six local high school seniors $500 toward their next year’s college tuition. Politics is all about money. In order to be effective, a “war chest” was needed. Our president made the rounds of the PD, and personally spoke with every member. Our PAC membership went from about 50 to 98 percent.
      Next, we decided to admit our own fraility and limitations as we ventured into this unknown territory. We were all cops, moonlighting as board members and political activists. It was decided we would hire an experienced political consultant to help and advise us along this complicated path.
      We realized that it would cost about $15,000 to hire a consultant, but the board was determined to do this the right way, and the expenditure was approved. It seems as if many associations decide to “go it alone,” hoping to save money.
      Having an experienced consultant on staff was invaluable. He assisted with strategy, legal questions, and interviews with candidates, developing mail pieces, and analysis. Convincing our membership that this was a necessary expense was well worth the effort. I cannot overstate the need to have a good political consultant on board your program to run an effective campaign.
      The next thing we did was to interview all of the candidates who would come to see us.
      We asked the tough questions, and chose to endorse one candidate who was a sitting councilmember, and a second who was a complete newcomer. We took a big risk, and chose not to endorse our sitting mayor.
      We sent out several professionally produced mailers, including absentee ballot applications. These mailers included one which had several of our members standing together, with pictures of our candidates superimposed over us, and the phrase, “We stand behind Clesceri and Norby for City Council”.
      Lastly, we did something very unusual for a police association. We walked precincts. Our consultant produced “precinct walk kits” for each member to take with him/her on the walk. We only spent our time speaking with high potential voters, and targeted the districts to maximize our effectiveness.
      Our candidates came out with us, talking to the members and the citizens. The result was an average of a plus-20 percent vote for our candidates in the precincts where we walked.
      We told our members that one four-hour block, every two years, wasn’t too much to ask for, and most agreed. We had a high participation level that paid off on Election Day.
      The results on Election Day were that both of our candidates won. But of course, our lingering question was, “Was this a fluke, or were we genuinely effective in our campaign?”
      Much too quickly, 2002 arrived and the process was started again. In the interim two years, we raised our PAC dues to $5 per pay period (every two weeks). This earns our PAC about $33,000 every election cycle, which is the minimum we need to be successful. Our dues had been $2.50, but this was not sufficient for the election program that we wanted to run.
      In 2002, we partnered up with our firefighter association in support of three candidates. Partnering with the Fullerton Firefighters Association (FFA) allowed us to pool our resources and produce a more effective campaign. One of these candidates was a long-time councilmember. The other two were newcomers, and one of these newcomers was running against a sitting incumbent.
      This was a big risk for us. Do we risk alienating an incumbent that has a very good chance of winning? With the advice of our consultant (who we called back to help us again), we believed that she could be beaten. The other newcomer was running for an open seat, but against a candidate that had been the favorite, and had many other local endorsements.
      Once again, we put up signs (“Your Police & Fire support Nelson, Bankhead, Wilson for City Council”), sent out mailers, and walked precincts.
      Election Day came and went, and when the votes were counted, all three of the candidates who
      we supported had won. We were most surprised (pleasantly) that our newcomer had beaten the two-term incumbent. We felt pretty confident that our question on the day after Election Day 2000 was answered. “It wasn’t a fluke, and we were genuinely effective!”
      What have we gained from all of this? We are now on very friendly terms with our council members. We know them, and they know us. We have the ability to call on one of them, and talk about our point of view and our concerns to a willing listener. This is all that anyone can ask.
      And as elections go, we’ll be at it again in 2004. We ask all of our members to contribute to the PAC, and we ask every member to contribute in some way each election cycle. This can be putting up signs, or walking precincts.
      This is not an easy road to navigate. It takes leadership, determination and resources. However, the reward can be significant, especially if your city/county has ignored your voices for too long. Meanwhile, during the past two years, we have been in the process of constructing a new
      police department building, and are awaiting final software implementation for our patrol unit computers.
      All in all, I’d have to say it wasn’t a fluke after all.
      ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Andrew S. Goodrich, Sr., has been with the Fullerton PD since 1990. He was a FPOA board member from 1995 to 2003, and has has served as insurance commissioner, secretary, and most recently, the vice president. He can be e-mailed at agoodrich@fullertonpd.org.

      • #21 by Reality Is.... on March 12, 2016 - 8:24 pm

        Damn again that’s the best you can do is an article from 2004? On police union politics? Goodroll isn’t even in that union anymore. He’s with the big boys now after Travis helped get him promoted. You guys can only come up with old shit to talk about to bash the cops. Yawn.

        • #22 by Joe Imbriano on March 12, 2016 - 10:53 pm

          RI what do you know about the 15 police cars at the Transit center and the woman arrested for filming the police?

        • #23 by We Deserve Better on March 13, 2016 - 11:23 am

          Reality Is ignores the facts about the FPOA and their documented strategy to buy influence at Fullerton City Hall. Yes this is a big deal. I know facts, the truth, and doing what is right has no bearing on you Reality Is but thank God there are better people in the world and especially in Fullerton than you.

          • #24 by Reality Is..... on March 13, 2016 - 4:24 pm

            I don’t ignore anything that the police union does politically. It’s reality. It’s part of police life across the nation. Policing is political. It always has been. It’s more political now than it ever has been. Just like everything else, it’s all about the appearance of political correctness now. There is nothing to hide. The police union’s across this nation meet with politicians daily. They donate to their political aspirations. They meet with city council members and state leaders often. So not sure what you mean by their strategy to buy influence. No one has ever said that policing and police unions aren’t political. I’m still waiting for Barry and Joe to show me the pay and benefits scale over the last 10 years for our comparison as to why they get such boners over the latest 6% raise that was spread out. I’ll be waiting awhile. It doesn’t fit their biased agendas.

  7. #25 by We Deserve Better on March 10, 2016 - 9:31 pm

    ??? – Lies, lies and damn lies. Flory had major support of the unions in 2012 and Ms. Fitzgerald gives out their raises like it was cheap candy.

    Readers should know that the Fullerton establishment is worried about the upcoming election and have establishment hacks trolling this website to spread false information.

    • #26 by Reality Is.... on March 11, 2016 - 7:05 pm

      If you research the same so called trolls have been on Fullerton blogs for more than 10 years. I’ve been around for 25 years and involved in Fullerton for 49 years. So nice try. Most people are just loyal Fullertonians that want a good city like we have now. We almost lost our solid city to Bushalas Klan when he bought a few seats on the council with the blood from Kelly. Luckily that was short lived. The last thing we need again is councilpersons with a preset biased agenda.

      • #27 by Anonymous on March 12, 2016 - 6:43 am

        “. . . been around for 25 years and involved in Fullerton for 49 years.”

        That explains a lot, time for you to shuffle off.

        • #28 by Reality Is..... on March 13, 2016 - 4:25 pm

          But I’m only 48 years old LOL

  8. #29 by Anonymous on March 12, 2016 - 12:43 am

    It’s no secret everyone knows “Reality Is” Fullerton PD’s very own Joseph Goebbels Andrew Goodrich. That’s right Dan Hughes’ very own fluffer. Goodrich, the mastermind behind the attempted Kelly Thomas cover-up. Keeping his fingers crossed and his lips puckered up begging he will be Capt. Goodrich one day.

    • #30 by Fullerton Lover on March 12, 2016 - 9:08 am

      This article I provided a link for, is an article that Andrew wrote to the boys in blue here in Fullerton, outlining all of the ploys that their union should develop and carry out to ensure that the Fullerton PD would never have a shortage of political puppets to do their bidding on the city council dais…

      http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2011/peer-into-the-thought-process-of-the-fpoa/

    • #31 by Reality Is.... on March 12, 2016 - 8:22 pm

      But I thought Tony Bushala and Travis said that Goodrich would be fired years ago? And all they were able to do was get him promoted again? And now he’s on the doorsteps of being the next Captain when DannyBoy retires next year? And once DannyBoy leaves, Goodrich will also hate Barry and Joe the same way DannyBoy does? I kinda wish Joe or Barry would somehow be able to buy a seat onto the council. They would make a political move against the police in the first year in violation of POBAR and cost the city millions right away. This is ball for the big boys kids. Not fairy tale ball like you boys dream of each night. Now let’s play ball.

  9. #34 by Anonymous on March 12, 2016 - 12:54 am

    Like it or not, one needs money to run a political campaign and it has to come from somewhere. Can’t wait to see who Joe’s financial backers are, assuming there are any.

  10. #35 by Anonymous on March 13, 2016 - 12:09 am

    twenty years from now, these nimrods will still be playing the Kelly Thomas card, posting links to ancient blog posts and bringing up crap that has long been forgotten by the rest of the world.

    • #36 by Fullerton Lover on March 13, 2016 - 10:37 am

      …the internet NEVER forgets.

      Your flippancy will instead serve as a reminder to those with a conscience, as to why we should never bury misdeeds, and instead remind ourselves and each other to bring them to the surface, to prevent the from reoccurring in the future.

    • #37 by Reality Is..... on March 13, 2016 - 4:19 pm

      The key is that as long as people can only bring up things from years and years ago, or say that churches never help the homeless and the poor, then everyone is doing a great job and the best job possible. That’s all that matters. Many people, including Ron Thomas, only cared about media exposure and money when it came to Kelly Thomas. That much was clear in the end. Those people have now come and gone and we will never hear from them again. Even Bushala smeared Kelly’s blood all over his face to get what he wanted, and now he’s long gone as well.

  11. #38 by Anonymous on March 13, 2016 - 2:16 pm

    Agreed! And that is why we should never forget the cyber bullying, nastiness, lies, personal attacks and utter hatred perpetrated by the FFFF website and the person behind it. And we need to prevent creeps such as that from ever again attempting to influence public opinion.

  12. #39 by Fullerton's Conscience on March 13, 2016 - 11:31 pm

    Fullertonians the Fullerton establishment is very worried. They are now working overtime on this website. They keep on repeating the tired old saying, is that all you got, but have you noticed they have absolutely nothing.

    This is the same group of people that has run Fullerton into the ground and continues to steal from our kids future for their own greed. Who in the private sector has received a 6% a year raise and gets a 90% pension as early as 50 years of age? No one. Yet our council members still vote for these ridiculous raises for the greedy self-centered, selfish safety unions and their membership. They (the council and the public unions) could care less that our city infrastructure and most of our parks are a disaster. They could care less that we can not afford their extravagances.

    • #40 by Reality Is..... on March 14, 2016 - 10:35 am

      Isn’t that my point? We have nothing because this city is running smoothly and perfectly. You bring up crap from 10 years ago as if it’s happening today. It’s old news. Saying that police and fire get a raise and have a retirement package that they pay into, means nothing as well. That’s through PERS and it’s the same retirement package that every cop has throughout the state of California. You act like Fullerton has this special retirement package that no one has.

      Do yourself a favor. I keep asking for it but no one wants to respond. Based on this recent contract with a 6% raise, go ahead and lay out the last 10 years of pay raises and benefit increases for police and fire in Fullerton. You will find that overall they have received a decrease in overall compensation and pay more into their retirement packages now, consistent with the statewide trend through PERS. So go ahead, do it with just pay if you want. I want you to see that they haven’t even received raises that cover the year cost of living adjustments.

      Yes streets are in disrepair. That’s a statewide issue as well. Fullerton is doing great and has reserves and leaders that care. The last thing Fullerton needs is someone like you guys with a biased, set agenda, that is full of hate and anger only looking to punish anyone or anything that has been done over the years that goes against your agenda.

      Love,

      DannyBoy

      • #41 by Fullerton Lover on March 15, 2016 - 12:23 pm

        Which of you people who reside here in Fullerton, DON’T realize that by having an out of control downtown serving cheap booze to attract the college age kids, that it’s YOU the resident who is left footing the bills to pay the dozens of police and fire department personnel required to babysit these fools once they get inebriated and try to drive home to mom and dads?

        This driver crashed their car last night right into the back of a big rig on Bastanchury on the way home to their parents.

        From the pictures in the article, I can’t figure how the driver didn’t decapitate themselves running into the back of the big rig.

        http://www.ocregister.com/articles/road-708277-big-bastanchury.html

    • #42 by Reality Is..... on March 14, 2016 - 10:37 am

      And if you actually look into this web page, you will see there are about 2-3 of us that respond and do blog entries against the biased agendas of Barry and Joe. The rest of you all circle jerk each other, maybe 10 people total. So we just like to point out how biased and full of hate you are, and continually remind you that you will never lead this fine City.

  13. #43 by Anonymous on March 14, 2016 - 9:19 am

    Great news our less the honorable city attorney was denied his Westminster pension because he did not work the minimum number of hours to qualify (even though he for years signed time cards stating he worked 40 hours a week. CALPERS also said that their was no City Attorney employee position and therefore he was an independent contractor not entitled to an employee pension. Now if our OC District Attorney had any courage and integrity he would be filing charges against the Fullerton and Westminster City Attorney. How about it Tony? How about doing the right thing?

(will not be published)


Copyright © 2013 TheFullertonInformer.com. All rights reserved. TheFullertonInformer.com is the legal copyright holder of the material on this blog and it may not be used, reprinted, or published without express written permission. The information contained in this website is for entertainment and educational purposes ONLY. This website contains my personal opinion and experience based on my own research from scientific writings, internet research and interviews with doctors and scientists all over the world. Do not take this website, links or documents contained herein as a personal, medical or legal advice of any kind. For legal advice, please consult with your attorney. Consult your medical doctor or primary care physician for advice regarding your health and your children’s health and nothing contained on this website is intended to provide or be a substitute for medical, legal or other professional advice. The reading or use of this information is at your own risk. Readers will not be put on spam lists. We will not sell your contact information to another company. We are not responsible for the privacy practices of our advertisers or blog commenters. We reserve the right to change the focus of this blog, to shut it down, to sell it, or to change the terms of use at our discretion. We are not responsible for the actions of our advertisers or sponsors. If a reader purchases a product or service based upon a link from our blog, the reader must take action with that company to resolve the issue, not us. Our policy on using letters or emails that have been written directly to us is as follows: We will be sharing those letters and emails with the blogging audience unless they are requested to be kept confidential. We will claim ownership of those letters or emails to later be used in an up-and-coming book,blog article,post or column, unless otherwise specified by the writer to keep ownership. THE TRUTH WILL STAND ON ITS OWN AND THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE-SEEK IT AT ALL COSTS!