Barry Levinson
As I explained in detail in part one, there is a pattern at City Hall to hide vital information concerning agenda items that come before the Fullerton City Council. Many, if not most
agenda items are lacking key supporting information and documentation necessary for the council to make an informed decision and for the public to know exactly what is being presented for approval. The city recommending the approval of contracts and grant applications without the contract or the grant application available for review by either the city council or the public is just not the way an honest , well-run city conducts business.
I highlighted that this is routinely done for agenda items that have a specific deadline and, to make matters that much more unacceptable, they are frequently brought before the council at the very last minute.
Based on the above, I have four questions for the public that I would like to answer for you.
Question No. 1. Who is ultimately responsible for providing a well-supported agenda for review by both the council and the public? The answer is City Manager Joe Felz.
Question No. 2. Who should be holding our city manager accountable when he frequently does not provide vital information necessary to make an informed decision as part of the council’s packet of information? The answer would be the city manager’s bosses and that would be Mayor Fitzgerald and the rest of the city council.
Closing your eyes will not make this go away
Years of approving items without the documentation-how the heck do you do that?
Question No. 3. Why has every single council member been totally silent as to the very poor and unacceptable job being performed by Joe Felz as it relates to providing the city council well supported and timely agenda items? The answer is they are all frauds. As a council member either you at some point in time take action to correct an ongoing unacceptable situation or you go along with the deception. Our council members have been going along with the deception. Their total silence after my public comment presentation on October 4, 2016 without any doubt proves my point. As far as Bruce Whitaker is concerned, what is so egregious is that he points out some problems but always stops short of actually suggesting real solutions that are readily available to him. Now let me give you Webster’s Dictionary definition of “Traitor”. One who betrays another’s trust or is false to an obligation or duty. In my opinion that definition fits Bruce Whitaker very well.
Question No. 4. What is the solution to these ongoing, repetitive problems? It is a simple two-step solution. First, you throw out all the current frauds come election day. Second, we the public demand that either Joe Felz does his job properly going forward or if we have elected an honest council majority, they would obviously take steps to remove him with someone who will do the job at hand.
So please come election day vote all the incumbents out…Bruce Whitaker and Jennifer Fitzgerald and make sure not to vote for anyone they have endorsed such as Larry Bennett and Sue Gapinski. Then you vote for an honest and brave man who has been representing you for years on his own time and his own dime, Joe Imbriano.
This is what this city needs to begin to turn itself around and to start acting with integrity, honesty and as public servants only responsible and concerned about you…the Fullerton public not the special interests.
Now that you know what to do, it is totally up to the Fullerton public to decide if you want real reform or you want the same old song and dance like we always get from the establishment frauds currently on the Fullerton city council dais.
I REPORT, YOU DECIDE.
Barry Levinson
#1 by Barry Levinson on October 6, 2016 - 11:42 pm
What is so, so troubling is that there was a motion that was passed by council earlier this year to change the order of business by placing the Consent Calendar at the very end? The Consent Calendar is supposed to be for very routine items that require no discussion and can all be approved by council with one vote. A good and proper example is the council’s need to approve the minutes of the last council meeting.
However, the council has been putting many items that should be part of the normal regular business that requires a discussion by council and the opportunity for the public to speak before them on that item For instance at the October 4 meeting the recommendation for the approval of a more than 1.3 million dollar sewer project was one of more than 8 or 9 consent items. This item was totally inappropriate for the consent calendar. I say this simply because it was a large dollar item for a specific project that not only deserved to be discussed before the public but literally cries out for public discussion and scrutiny.
With a Consent Item if a member of the public or the council does not specifically request that it be pulled for discussion, the details of the agenda item never sees the light of day forever.
So instead of moving toward more transparency and honesty in government, our city council is doing the exact opposite. This is one more reason to throw them all out.
This idea to move the consent calendar to the end of the meeting was the brilliant suggestion by so-called Conservative Republican Greg Sebourn. Fullertonians they all need to be shown the door out of city hall.