Bruce Whitaker shamefully and cowardly removed Barry Levinson from his long term position on the Fullerton Parks and Recreation Commission without any formal written notice and without any reason given. Bruce has shown his hand and I believe Dan Hughes once again has too. Was Bruce in on this possible set up of Levinson gone bad with the FPD? Who knows but one thing is for sure, the way Bruce Whitaker handled this issue certainly provided an opportunity for a game of FPD “gotcha” that almost played out when no one was looking on a Monday night while everyone was home watching the ball game.
This speech by Barry Levinson is probably what got Bruce’s bosses up in arms. We all know that Nelson, Fitzgerald, and Bennett are as tight as a pipe wrench on a busted city water main. We know that Nelson and Bruce have been two peas in a pod for years with Bruce squandering all of the political capital of the recall on firework stands under Nelson’s direction. We all know Bruce has never publicly gone after Fitzgerald’s voting record or her blatant conflict of interest as a lobbyist for Pringle as she holds her next fundraiser at Pringle and associates office but Barry has. Bruce even voted for her to be mayor making it even more difficult to throw her out in November. Nice going Bruce. We all know Barry Levinson stands up for the residents of Fullerton and has selflessly given of himself for years with NO CONNECTIONS to the establishment and has foiled more of their plans to rip off the taxpayers and ruin Fullerton with the developers than anyone in Fullerton. He has been more effective than anyone up on the dais and they know it.
Barry Levinson
Well Barry showed up for the Monday June 13, 2016 Park and Recreation commission meeting for the first time in over 5 years as a citizen instead of a commissioner and sat in the audience. Seated in the audience in the back of the totally empty room in the south aisle were seated not one, not two but three Fullerton Police officers. Yes there were a supervisor and two patrol officers. Why were they there after hours on overtime on a Monday evening in an empty room?
Was Mike Chocek waiting for Barry to make a move so these three can make theirs?
So why were the microphones turned off for the better part of the meeting? The clerk was there typing away and running the computer. Why? What was scheduled to go down?
Was Mike Chocek waiting to present information that was never asked for, waiting to answer questions that were never asked or waiting for just another opportunity to set up Barry Levinson?
I believe the plan was to go down like this. Barry was given no formal written notice that he was removed from the commission. The three officers, including a supervisor, were to wait for Barry to take his seat up on the dais, wait for him to be asked to step down, and then upon the slightest inclination of his questioning or refusal, was to be arrested by these three officers. There is no other reason for not one not two but three officers to be there.
does this face look familiar? Here he is in the video below.
In this video, Veth Mam, a citizen was arrested and framed by the Fullerton police while recording the event. The DA brought the charges even when presented with video evidence refuting the lies of the Fullerton Police officers at the scene. Yes they lied on their police report alleging Veth Mam jumped the cop and started chocking him when in fact the officer grabbed and abused a totally innocent man filming a detainment. After jail time, attorney’s fees and a trial, Veth Mam was acquitted of all charges. He later sued and got nothing.
Barry and I had discussions prior to this meeting and knew that something was brewing considering how underhanded city officials have acted in the past. Our plan was to continue being citizen activists like we have all along. The meeting went on and the officers were never introduced, called upon for questions or even mentioned.
So at the end of the meeting, hours later on a Monday night, I took it upon myself to question this blatant waste of taxpayer resources and ask them personally why they were there, all three of them. As it turns out, Hugo Curiel invited them and I believe it was probably on the orders of Dan Hughes and on behalf of Joe Felz who Hugo repeatedly refers to as “the Boss”. Hugo was obviously the most unsettled I have ever seen him. He couldn’t sit still for most of the meeting, noticeably extremely uncomfortable and nervous. I believe his demeanor indicated that this was not going to be a normal evening. It was also a dead giveaway as Alice Loya kept smirking and smiling as acted as if she was the only one in the buffet line at the Bellagio.
Hugo Curiel and Alice Loya. Ms.Loya was apparently able to see through Travertine walls and an elevator shaft the night of the attempted framing of Levinson back in 2014.
So why all the cops with a supervisor just to sit in an empty room for hours in silence? Lying in wait to seize the moment for their boss Danny Boy, intimidation or for information? Well these three models of public service had jack shit for information folks. Listen up. Hugo invited them.
So when I asked them why they were there, they told me it had to do with the homeless issue at Pacific Drive Park. Funny not one staffer or commissioner had a question for the three of them who were probably all on overtime. How many officers does it take to answer staff questions? So as a member of the public, I proceeded to ask these officers questions about the issues at the park as they were supposedly there to answer questions about the park. They of course had no information about the park or anything related to crime or problems associated with the park that Felz wants to fence off and take away from the public possibly to sell it off to Grace Ministries along with the Hunt Library.
Commissioner Silva looks on as truth is being told
Yes sell off public property like the Hunt Library behind our backs to fund the out of control pensions and salaries for people like this.
So tell me how many officers does it take to answer questions of present information to a commission on issues regarding homelessness at a park that sat for hours in an empty room after hours that were never mentioned, introduced or called upon?
How many police officers are required to set up, frame and arrest Barry Levinson? Why do we need Mike Chocek, a supervisor and two patrol officers to sit for hours in a meeting in an empty room on a Monday night and never open their fly traps or answer any questions even when called upon by me after the meeting?
How many officers does it take to set up, frame and arrest Barry Levinson?
How many officers does it take to set up , frame and arrest Barry Levinson?
Why would the FPD’s Dan Hughes want Barry Levinson in jail? Dan Hughes hates Barry Levinson because Barry Levinson is a threat. He exposes corruption that Dan Hughes is involved in. How about “the Boss” Joe Felz?
How about “the Boss” Joe Felz?
Now you tell me after watching this video how the city council including Bruce Whitaker could have done anything but demand a full investigation into what went down with what appears to be the attempted framing of Barry Levinson. After Bruce delivered this speech, he was never the same man up on the dais, never mentioning this issue again and remaining silent on many serious issues that followed even though he promised Barry and I that he would. Obviously he got a talking to and it worked.
Don’t let the flag fool you. Stanford is an empty suit too.
BARRY HAS BEEN CALLING OUT CORRUPTION IN THIS TOWN FOR YEARS LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
Dan Hughes told Bruce Whitaker that he “HATES THE GUY” referring to Barry Levinson
Dan Hughes calls Barry Levinson “CRAZY AND UNSTABLE” at a city council meeting
Dan Hughes claims he can be objective while he hates Barry Levinson and personally runs the investigation, personally interviews the witnesses and writes the report himself and personally submits the complaint to the DA for prosecution but he can be objective right?
Barry was a former chairperson and two time appointee to the Fullerton Parks and Recreation commission. He was put there to do his job by Bruce Whitaker over 5 years ago. Here is just another example of Bruce Whitaker’s appointee Barry Levinson doing his job and for months, the person that put him there, Bruce Whitaker, has totally ignored what Barry has brought forward! So what does Barry get for doing his job? He gets fired by the one who holds himself out as a statesman on the council, Bruce Whitaker. Whatever happened to the audit committee Bruce was crying for? Barry repeatedly hands up the goods on a silver platter and gets set up like a bowling pin. City hall needs an enema like nobody’s business folks.
Ladies and gentlemen, like many of you, Barry and I will never rest until this town is cleaned up and you have our word on that.
Watch who you vote for in November and watch your backs with the FPD-anyone could be next. That is why you will see my name on the Ballot and I won’t take a dime or an endorsement from any of the establishment thugs that are still trying to ruin this town for their own selfish gain and political ambition. Fullerton is worth fighting for because it is our town folks. Lets make sure they never forget that. It is our town, yours and mine. Stay vigilant Fullerton.
#1 by Barry Levinson on July 23, 2016 - 4:04 pm
For those who argue that the police and fire have not received “decent” raises for a few years, I have this to refute that statement. You see Fullertonians, the percentage of their base pay going to help cover the pension obligation for the city, i.e. from the taxpayers has gone up significantly over the last few years. I do not have the exact figures in front of me but I can tell all of you that going back about 5 years the percentage paid by the taxpayers was in the 30% range. Now it is at or above the 50% range and estimated in the near future to approach 60%. So even though their base pay raises were not substantial in the last few years before the very large increases approved for this year, how much it costs the taxpayers to give them their salary and great benefit package has gone up double digits yearly over the last 5 years or so. Has anyone working for a private company averaged double digit increases for their entire pay packages? I think not!
#2 by Reality Is..... on July 23, 2016 - 8:47 pm
LOL you are so lost. Not even close to true.
Go to the PERS web page if you want to read about police officers through this state and what they pay and what they get when they retire. 3% at 50 doesn’t exist for new cops the last few years anymore though. And most cops are now paying 9% more to their retirement than they were a few years ago.
So again. Show me the last 10 years and we will see how much less they make now than before, even with the 2% raise.
Keep grasping though. You hate is starting to make more sense each time you type.
#3 by Barry Levinson on July 24, 2016 - 1:50 am
Reality Is complains that police now pay 9% of their pay while we the taxpayer are now paying 50% of their pay for pensions and scheduled to go higher. Let us do the math. 9% divided by 59% equals approximately 15%. In a year or two it will be 9% divided by approximately 69% equals 13%.
Please also not that when the new benefit was instituted in 2002 by a vote of the Fullerton City Council every Fullerton police officer was eligible for the 3% at 50 pension, even if they were under the old less generous rules for decades. This alone is costing the taxpayers hundreds of millions if not billions of additional dollars. The “experts” at CALPERS at the time said that this huge retroactive and going forward increase would cost the taxpayers absolutely nothing. In government they call this a “rounding error”.
Compare it to social security where we in the private sector get a small percentage of the police pension benefits but pay 50% of the premiums into the system not 15% or 13%. NOTE that with social security your employer pays a matching contribution. If you happen to be self-employed, you are responsible for paying both the employee and the employer portions, i.e. the whole amount. The police for their very generous pension should at least pay the same percentage of the cost as we do in the private sector for a much, much smaller social security benefit. That would mean that instead of paying 9% of their pay for their pensions they would pay 25% of their salary for pensions or one half the total amount paid into the CALPERS fund annually.
#4 by Reality Is.. on July 24, 2016 - 9:39 am
Wrong again. Keep trying.
The city pays 9% per check and the city matches the 9%.
It’s that simple.
Yes I know you would love to end the retirement of the city employees that are now elderly. You want to terminate a contract that someone else agreed too. That’s how you roll. Put 60-70-80-90 year old former employees on the street and homeless. That’s doesn’t surprise me at all.
So yes. As a Fullerton police officer I put an average of $500 per check into my retirement for 30 years which is about $360,000 or over $500,000 when invested properly, matched by the City, you feel that’s bad. I don’t. I feel well deserved. That’s where we differ. Just like you think the recent 2% isn’t deserved. Is what it is. That’s what life is all about.
And for those viewers that might think you know what you are talking about, Fullerton is in the PERS system just like all other police agencies in California. Fullerton isn’t their own scandalous system as you would lead them to believe. They are also below the median in pay for OC And local agencies.
Will the PERS system blow up someday? Never know. You and others said it would blow up 10 years ago. Still thriving as we speak and only a few cities have claimed bankruptcy trying to end their PERS obligations. It hasn’t worked yet.
#5 by Fullerton Lover on July 24, 2016 - 10:57 am
Nice story, but is it grounded in Reality?
Interesting editorial which should concern all residents that will be expected to make up the shortfall in the PERS retirement fund in todays OC Register…
“The East Bay Times reported last week that CalPERS’ retirement debt “averages out to $11,000 for every California household which is relevant because taxpayers, not government workers, must make up the shortfall.
For private-sector employees, we invest our pre-tax cash into a fund – and sometimes employers match a portion of it – and our final retirement payout is determined by how much we put in the account and how well the investments perform. We combine that with a reduced retirement lifestyle and other investment income.
For public employees, their agency guarantees a retirement payout based on a formula (plus a bunch of pension-spiking gimmicks). It invests the funds employers and employees contribute. When investment returns are great, the fund has plenty of cash to pay for pension promises. But when they are low, an unfunded liability – or taxpayer-backed debt – emerges. That’s why CalPERS’ piddling earnings should concern us.
State courts have consistently ruled public employees’ pensions can never be reduced – even going forward. They are safe unless a municipality goes bankrupt. As debt rises, local and state agencies have to contribute more. Services have to be cut.
CalPERS and its union-dominated board are all about protecting these enormous pensions, so they tell the rest of us not to worry. They even justify plans to expand benefits. The people who directly benefit from the system get to make all the decisions. Other people pay the tab. It’s the opposite of our personal-investing scenarios
For private-sector employees, we invest our pre-tax cash into a fund – and sometimes employers match a portion of it – and our final retirement payout is determined by how much we put in the account and how well the investments perform. We combine that with a reduced retirement lifestyle and other investment income.
For public employees, their agency guarantees a retirement payout based on a formula (plus a bunch of pension-spiking gimmicks). It invests the funds employers and employees contribute. When investment returns are great, the fund has plenty of cash to pay for pension promises. But when they are low, an unfunded liability – or taxpayer-backed debt – emerges. That’s why CalPERS’ piddling earnings should concern us.
State courts have consistently ruled public employees’ pensions can never be reduced – even going forward. They are safe unless a municipality goes bankrupt. As debt rises, local and state agencies have to contribute more. Services have to be cut.
CalPERS and its union-dominated board are all about protecting these enormous pensions, so they tell the rest of us not to worry. They even justify plans to expand benefits. The people who directly benefit from the system get to make all the decisions. Other people pay the tab. It’s the opposite of our personal-investing scenarios.
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/calpers-723305-employees-retirement.html
#6 by Fullerton Lover on July 24, 2016 - 11:31 am
Another article from the OC register stating that the bad news is that the Public Employee Retirement System, or PERS, lost billions and fell drastically short of their expectations…
…the GOOD news is that the residents of California will pay the difference!
http://www.ocregister.com/taxdollars/calpers-722198-year-percent.html
#7 by Reality Is..... on July 24, 2016 - 2:05 pm
Yes FL. Part of business right?.Trump style?
#8 by Barry Levinson on July 24, 2016 - 11:41 am
Reality Is is flat out wrong when he states “The city pays 9% per check and the city matches the 9%.” To say that the city i.e. the Fullerton taxpayers are only paying 9% is a flat out not true and either Reality Is is misinformed or is intentionally misleading the readers.
He is also wrong about my position on city government pensions. My position has always been that I am in favor of keeping the defined benefit plans which guarantees a certain pension benefit at retirement. But the percentage of final pay to be paid as a benefit must either be lowered or police and fire must pay more into the system or a combination of both. The current setup is creating massive revenue shortfalls and causing city services to suffer greatly. Please just look at our roads…third world country standards.
#9 by Reality Is..... on July 24, 2016 - 2:04 pm
Then tell me what percent the city has paid the last 30 years. Go ahead since you seem to know. I know. Do you?.
So what is your recommendation for the current people in the current system? Many people have tried to do what you say but it fails every time. Doing what you say puts many elderly broke because it’s busts the PERS system forever. It won’t happen. You can’t stop the current system without taking away the retirements of many elderly people that have no other choices right now.
So yes, that doesn’t surprise me you would back that. And just making a defined system right now isn’t feasible.
Next?
#10 by Anonymous on July 24, 2016 - 11:47 am
It can’t last. Joe nails it. Currency collapse is imminent.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxM7tsGoU10