iCureMelenoma 5K May 2nd, 2015

For 9 consecutive years, iCureMelanoma 5k has been dedicated to WAGING WAR on Melanoma Cancer. Rated as the fastest growing cancer in the U.S. and world, the Surgeon General recently published a "CALL TO ACTION," noting that melanoma cancer has increased 200% since the 1970's. Despite the staggering statistics indicating that 1 in 50 will be diagnosed with invasive melanoma, MELANOMA IS LARGELY PREVENTABLE! Partner with iCureMelanoma as we fight this cancer by funding research for a CURE, creating PUBLIC AWARENESS campaigns and offering FREE SKIN CANCER SCREENINGS! Mark your calendar for the upcoming 5k in Fullerton, CA & get registered TODAY! See you at the finish line!! (Contact: 714-292-6146; Kelly@iCureMelanoma5K.org)

Donate Life 5K Run/Walk 2015

Donate Life 5k Run/Walk

What:
A non-competitive 5K/1K Run/Walk to educate and inspire the community about organ and tissue donation while benefiting the OneLegacy Foundation.

Who:
All runners and walkers, dialysis patients, transplant recipients, organ donors, donors families, allied health professionals and students are invited to come out and participate! Donor families are invited to make their own patch for the OneLegacy Bridging Lives Quilt

When:
Saturday April 25, 2015. The race celebrates the last days of National Donate Life Month.

Where:
California State University, Fullerton campus, around Intramural Field.
800 State College Boulevard
Fullerton, CA.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFO!

OC Register Endorses Sebourn, Paden for Fullerton Council

Editorial: Paden, Sebourn for Fullerton Council

ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER

Published: Oct. 15, 2014 Updated: 5:14 p.m.

Fullerton is recovering from a largely negative bout in the public limelight. A high-profile prosecution for police brutality cast shame on city governance, prompting a recall of three council members and engaging the city in questions of oversight for law enforcement.

The resulting scrutiny bore fruit: Fullerton became a pioneer in using police body cameras and is pondering a civilian review board. Yet, residents are now facing another important election, one that will no doubt greatly influence how the city engages a whole range of issues: Homelessness, infrastructure, pensions, development and more.

To continue the city on its positive path, the Register recommends the mayor pro tem, Greg Sebourn, and challenger Sean Paden for City Council.

Read more...

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/sebourn-638666-city-paden.html 

Sean Paden, JD

Greg Sebourn, PLS

Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association Endorses Sebourn Council

This week the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association joins the Lincoln Club and Atlas PAC with their endorsement of Greg Sebourn for Fullerton City Council.

I am thankful that the HJTA supports my longstanding commitment to keeping taxes low in Fullerton.  The endorsement will certainly lend visibility to the fragile state of Prop 13 and the necessity to protect the future of our aging population to live within their means.

Each of us as renters or property owners benefits directly by keeping the increase of property taxes to a sustainable rate of 2%.  Don't buy into the "split role" nonsense.  Any change to Prop 13 threatens our economic future.

HJTA was founded in 1978 to protect future generations from property tax spiking.  To learn more about the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, please go to http://www.hjta.org/.

Lincoln Club Endorses Sebourn for Council

This week the Lincoln Club of Orange County announced their endorsement of Greg Sebourn for Fullerton City Council!

While I am very grateful to the Lincoln Club for their support I think it is important to share a little about the Lincoln Cub of OC.

They were founded in 1963 with the mission  of 

"...limiting government to those legitimate functions that least intrude on the economy and the individual lives of its citizens while providing a strong defense securing individual liberties.

These principles are paramount: government may only act with the consent of the governed and ought to do only that which the people cannot do for themselves; political freedom cannot survive without the economic freedoms afforded by low taxes and free enterprise; and government conducted in accordance with these principles will result in economic growth and individual liberty for all citizens."

I am humbled and thankful to have the support of the Lincoln Club of Orange County.

If you would like learn more about the Lincoln Club, please visit http://lincolnclub.org/.

August Money Bomb - Donate Today!

Please donate to Greg Sebourn for Fullerton City Council 2014!

Every $5 that you donate pays for one election sign.  

Every dollar counts!

CLICK HERE TO DONATE 

$5

$25

$99

$250

$1,000

$5,000 

Counterfeit COIN - Just the Facts

by Mayor Pro Tem Greg Sebourn, PLS & Council Member Bruce Whitaker

The issue of open negotiations in government finances is nothing new.  In fact, Fullerton considered this at its November 5, 2013 City Council meeting in which the matter was tabled for nearly seven months.

Elected officials have a fiduciary duty to manage your tax dollars and the public has the absolute right to know how and why their tax dollars are being spent.  This right to know is underscored since unionized labor is the single largest budgetary line item for the City and the fact that the City is still operating with a City Council approved (3-2) structural deficit of at least $1.6-million! 

Fullerton taxpayers have a long history of being shortchanged by City Hall.  From illegal taxes to redevelopment waste, Fullerton taxpayers have every reason to question who is proposing to spend how much and on what.  Civic Openness in Negotiations, or COIN, offered a glimmer of hope to Fullerton taxpayers before being surreptitiously replaced with a Counterfeit COIN. 

On June 17 the Fullerton City Council voted 2-3 (Ayes: Whitaker & Sebourn; Noes: Chaffee, Flory, & Fitzgerald) to approve COIN based on the original model approved in other jurisdictions including Costa Mesa.  COIN would have provided a new level of openness and transparency into labor negotiations.  Unfortunately, after that motion failed, three Council Members (Chaffee, Flory, & Fitzgerald) voted to approve an ordinance that gives the illusion of transparency and rigor to a backroom process that has to this day remained secret.

Fullerton’s Counterfeit COIN ordinance lacks the two most critical components that make COIN an effective process for taxpayers and city workers - transparency and accountability.  Supporters of Counterfeit COIN point to the model guidelines “LABOR NEGOTIATION STRATEGIES AND PRINCIPLES” by the Association of California Cities of Orange County (ACCOC).  The guidelines offer up sample language and suggestions for COIN-like ordinances but Counterfeit COIN ignores the first rule of the guideline, Use of Outside Negotiators, as well as the second which calls for use of an independent auditor for financial analysis.

COIN and Counterfeit COIN both have a process for disclosure to the public regarding what the Council and public employee unions have negotiated behind closed doors.  Fullerton’s Counterfeit COIN, however, only applies to written offers.  Further, it does not specify when the details of the proposed agreements, offers, or counteroffers must be made public.  This means there may be countless secret “trial balloons” offered by both sides before settling on written terms.  This is where Counterfeit COIN fails the transparency test.

Accountability is completely absent from Fullerton’s Counterfeit COIN as well.  COIN required that all negotiations and economic analysis were to be conducted by professionals that were not subject to a public pension system and far removed from City Hall.  They are to be independent from the negotiating parties in every way.  Counterfeit COIN offers certain criteria that must be met in order bring in any outside parties. Even if the criteria is met, Counterfeit COIN requires the Council appoint a representative as a representative to the outside Negotiating Team, and further requires that representative be a public employee who stands to benefit by the outcome of the negotiation process.

COIN is really quite simple despite attempts to create the illusion of complexity or difficulty.  There are just three key components of COIN:  Independent Negotiator, Independent Economic Analysis, and Timely Public Disclosure. 

The lack of labor union opposition to Fullerton’s Counterfeit COIN sends the message to taxpayers that this new ordinance brings no substantive changes to the backroom labor negotiations. 

Until a clear majority of the Fullerton City Council is willing to recognize that feathering the beds public employee unions is contrary to their fiduciary duty, Fullerton’s legacy of backroom negotiations lead by city staff to benefit city staff will continue. 

More of the same, same as before.  

MWD Holds On To Surplus Revenue

A message from MWD Director Thomas S. Babcock for the City of Fullerton:

The discussion today with a 3 hour Board of Directors board meeting (usually it has not gone over 1/2 hour). The Board majority approved the distribution of the $75M excess surplus after restoring the reserves to be distributed equally into 3 areas; repair and maintenance (PAYGO); OPEB ($575M underfunded retiree health benefits) and a water transfer fund to allow a restricted fund to purchase water as needed should MET need to purchase water to restore reserves as necessary.An alternative option to this distribution was to refund to the agencies $28M allocated on water purchases to reduce the budgeted 5% increase for 2014 to 3%. With the selection of "Option 1", this option was not considered.  However, a separate motion was made which I seconded to refund the 28% while agreeing to fund the 3 areas in Option 1.  While there were votes for this motion, it failed 75% to 25% based on the agencies assessed value weighted distribution voting. Had this passed, Fullerton would have received a refund of 2014 water purchases for approximately $150,000.It is generally believed that with the current drought condition, MET will sell more water than budgeted for in the 2014 budget and again have a surplus of funds this time next year when the 2015/2016 two year budget is considered.  With the financial reserves at their maximums, I am reasonably sure we will have this agency refund discussion again next year.Another item that was approved was a "freeze" in the ad valorem property tax rate for one year at the .0035% in an effort to stabilize the fixed portion of agency revenues. This is allowed under the Administrative code of the Metropolitan Act.  The current rate represents  a tax of approximately $10.50 for a $300,000 property. The tax would have dropped approximately $0.60 for the same $300,000 had this action not been taken and will result in a $4M increase in Metropolitan's fixed income sources.We had quite a few speakers addressing these 2 items for and against during today's meeting.  There was also a rather lively discussion among Directors.I felt these items were important enough to provide a summary in addition to my report which I will provide at the end of the month. Thomas S. BabcockDirector to the Metropolitan Water Districtfor the City of Fullerton

NO MORE RUBBER STAMPS

Today I received the following email that deserves about a moment of  scrutiny:

Dear Fullerton Mentally Ill Homeless Task Force and FriendsLast night the Fullerton City Council met until the bars closed this morning to deliberate the Multi-Service Year-Round Homeless Shelter being proposed by the County, under the leadership of Supervisor Shawn Nelson, for 301 S. St College Blvd. , Fullerton . 

Passion ran high in the packed chambers where a mixed group of opponents and proponents listened for hours and gave testimony for even more hours. 

Councilmembers Sebourn and Mayor Whittaker seemed determined to prevent the Multi-Jurisdictional Agreement (MJA) language from being added to the State required SB 2 Zoning designation.  This zoning is required by the State to make sure that all cities take some responsibility for their homeless residents.  

Councilmembers Flory, Fitzgerald and Chaffee prevailed with the logic that the County can open a shelter there without permission of the City, and the MJA gives the City the best tool for having a voice in how such a shelter is run. The Second vote of the night was going to be over approval of a draft MJA that included specific responses to the concerns raised by the school and neighbors.  After hours of testimony this item was tabled to accommodate additional specificity requested by Councilmember Chaffee and the City Council to the concerns expressed.  Fullerton staff did a great job putting together a comprehensive presentation, that a number of us participated in, to explain where we are, and how we got here. The final meeting to approve this MJA between the County and City will occur on Tuesday, June 18. 

By that time hopefully the school’s concerns can be more completely answered, and the other concerns expressed can be more comprehensively addressed. 

The challenge for the County laid out by Karen Roper at 1:30am to the City Council, is how to get specific answers to questions that were intended for the non-profit provider to determine in a “design and build” phase, BEFORE the Request for Proposals is sent out.  (since the County wanted to wait to issue the RFP until after they acquired the property.)  SO there are additional steps that will have to be taken to bring this all home.  Hopefully, they are surmountable!! A special thanks to so many of you who attended last night’s meeting, and others who could not be there but wrote letters to the City Council supporting the shelter. 

Sincerelyrusty 

Rusty Kennedy, Executive Director  

OC Human Relations

1300 S. Grand, Bldg BSanta Ana, CA 92705 

714-567-7470fax 714-567-7474 

www.ochumanrelations.org

Rusty Kennedy believes that the multi-jurisdictional agreement (MJA) is a REQUIREMENT under Senate Bill 2 (SB2).  However, the City's attorney, Jeff Goldfarb of Rutan & Tucker, repeatedly made it clear that the MJA was not REQUIRED (shall) but that it was permissible (may) under SB2.  So, while zoning constraints must be identified and codified for shelters, multi-jurisdictional agreements do not need to be codified in the City's municipal code with an ordinance.  It was also made clear by the City's attorney and city staff that the County did not need the MJA in order to proceed with their plans for a shelter anywhere in any city.

Further, since the County can build a shelter anyplace they wish, how much leverage does a city actually have when negotiating the terms of a MJA?  NONE.  So why waste the ink giving the perception that there is a negotiated agreement when in fact there is not?  FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY.

The MJA was a pre-packaged document created without any input from the Fullerton City Council and designed to make residents feel as if the City had a voice or some control over the project.  

NO MORE RUBBER STAMPS.

Community Meeting January 24th

I hope I see you there!

Who monkeyed with the agenda?

'Tis a good question.

At the October 2, 2012 meeting, just prior to the adjournment, Council Member Doug Chaffee moved to agendize discussing the position of the chief of police in the next open meeting.  Up to that time all discussions regarding the position have taken place behind closed doors during the closed session meetings.

Mayor Sharon Quirk-Silva, who is running against Assembly Member Chris Norby, said she would only go along with Chaffee's motion if it was to discuss the matter and not vote on it.

It bears repeating.  The Mayor said she would approve agendizing the discussion of the position so long as there was no vote taken.  Council Member Chaffee said, "well then why don't we just have a general discussion on the topic."

It was the clearly stated direction from the Mayor to City Manager Joe Felz to place on the agenda a public discussion regarding the position of chief of police.

If I sound like a broken record, play back the City's video at about 4:05:00.  

http://fullerton.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=2&clip_id=400

With this clear direction given, why did the item get agendized with the following language:

During the Staff / Council Communications portion of the October 2, 2012 City Council meeting, staff received direction to agendize City Council discussion regarding entering into negotiations with Acting Chief Hughes for the position of Chief of Police. Recommendation by the City Manager’s Office: Pleasure of the City Council.

Who came up with that?  Who decided that the discussion was "regarding entering into negotiations with Acting Chief Hughes"?

The Mayor agreed to agendize discussing the position but was reluctant to do so until after the election.  Chaffee responded, "then why don't we just have a general discussion on the topic...?"

The Mayor replied, "I can support having a conversation about it, agendizing it for our next meeting, October 16th, but not committing to a vote until the second meeting in November.  Then I think that way we are moving something forward as far as specifics but we're not voting on it, so I could support that.  Is that clear enough?"

"Yes" said Chaffee.

So again I ask, why does the City Council agenda state that the item is a discussion regarding entering into negotiations?

Shouldn't we be discussing terms and conditions?

Since Council Member Chaffee wants to discuss the position publicly, shouldn't the Council discuss what the terms of employment would be for the position?

Or is Fullerton so desperate to hire a police chief that the Council should select a chief before figuring out what the terms should be?  This would be a first.

The agenda memo says that the position has been pending for several reasons, specifically: "further consideration of the position classification; the conclusion of several reports regarding the status of the Fullerton Police Department; and the potential consideration of an informal analysis by the Orange County Sheriff Department."

With those unanswered questions lingering, why would the Council discuss directing the City Manager to begin negotiating with anyone?

And back to my initial question, who misunderstood the "clear" direction from the Mayor and monkeyed with the agenda?

Fullerton Police Department Open House - Oct. 20 10AM-2PM

Thievery or Smart Governance?

"Let's re-purpose the fruits of our crime!"

Last year when I was a member of the City of Fullerton's Water Rate Study Ad Hoc Committee I hoped to end the illegal water tax (done!).  I also hoped to take the money overcharged to rate payers from the General Fund and put it back in the Water Fund where it was intended to be spent.  This would help offset and suspend any immediate need to raise rates for infrastructure investment.  This seemed like the smart thing to do.

However, after many thoughtful discussions and meetings with community members, ratepayer advocates, and tax fighters I realized the error in keeping the money.  From an ethics point of view, it is wrong to keep something that was taken through deception.  It's also wrong to hang onto something that is not yours without the consent of the owner.  

In this case, the City took ratepayers' money and told them it was needed to fund the water system.  The City then raised water rates repeatedly while skimming 10% to cover rising pension costs and personnel benefits.  According to the City's own records 70% of the skimmed funds were spent on police and fire salaries and benefits.  About 10% covered other staff salaries and benefits with the remainder being spent on subsidizing other departments, like Parks & Recreation.  That's the simple but ugly truth.  

None of the skimmed funds were spent laying new pipelines, treating contaminated water, or building reservoirs.  

If your employee (think city council) had been overcharging your customers (think ratepayers) to prop up the employee's retirement benefits and pay for office supplies for their side business, wouldn't  you fire the employee (think recall election) and give your customers a refund equal to the amount which they were over charged?  What if...after getting caught the employee concocted a scheme to keep the money or at least most of it?  What if they were convinced that they could do more good with it than your customers could?  Would you really tell your employee to just hang on to the cash and use it more wisely?  Look at it this way, after discovering your child took a cookie out of the cookie jar without your permission, would you let them eat it or maybe give it to the dog?  Or would you make them put it back where they got it?

Opponents of the refund would like you to believe that a refund would drain the reserves and bankrupt the City.  While the burden would be great, this assumes that the City would not cut expenditures in other areas and would instead simply raid the reserves much like the previous administrations continuous raids of the Water Fund since 1970.  

A refund of $7,000,000 is not an insurmountable figure to overcome but it will require a change in the way we do business.  Also, let's consider how much money a "typical" ratepayer can expect to be refunded given that City staff had assumed that the refund was going to be $2,500,000 and not the full $7,000,000.  The difference is due to the "costs" which staff attempted to lay on the Water Fund but which the current council rejected.

Staff had calculated that a "typical" water ratepayer could expect a refund of around $45 per meter.  That figure assumes the refund is $2.5 million, not $7-million.  Ratepayers can expect to receive $120 to $170 each for their portion of the $7-million refund depending on how much they were actually over charged.

While I appreciate the notion of reinvesting the ill-gotten revenue, I believe the ratepayers should have a say in the matter.  Perhaps allowing them to opt out of receiving a refund is more appropriate.  I am open to considering how to manage the refund process but absolutely reject the notion that the City of Fullerton, the same agency that created this mess, should simply keep the money.  

Whitaker for City Council

Join us!

Fundraiser to re-elect

Mayor Pro Tem Bruce Whitaker

                             to Fullerton City Council 2012

Where: The Matador Cantina

in historic downtown Fullerton

111 N. Harbor Blvd, Fullerton, CA 92832

Just North of Commonwealth on the West side of Harbor

Parking and entrance in rear

When: September 10th, Monday evening @ 6:00 pm

for excellent cocktails and delicious appetizers

$25 Supporter

$100 Patron

$250 Sponsor

*there is no maximum contribution limit for City Council

　

Please RSVP to ElectBruceWhitaker@live.com

or Linda @ 714-981-7303

Unable to join us? Please mail contributions to :

Elect Bruce Whitaker 2012

P.O. Box # 1444

                                     Fullerton, CA 92836

Bruce Whitaker Campaign Committee - ID #1330388

L.A. Gangbanger Busted in Fullerton, Two Escape

Story and photos by Jeanne Hoffa/FullertonStories.com –

http://fullertonstories.com/gang-member-arrested-in-fullerton-burglaries/

An L.A. gang member was caught and arrested after a homeowner found him and another man in his backyard  Wednesday in North Fullerton.  The homeowner called police from the 2900 block of Lantana Avenue  after he saw the two men, who were wearing  gloves, lifting his barbeque. The suspects saw him and scaled his back fence, initiating a two hour manhunt  that included a helicopter search by [Huntington Beach]  PD.

Two blocks away, Detective Chris Wren caught  23-year-old Undra Anthony Williams III as he ran from the east alley of the Rolling Hills Manor Apartments on Rolling Hills Drive.  Wren pointed his gun in William’s face and told him to get on the ground. Williams complied, and he was arrested.  Meanwhile  more than a dozen police units set up a perimiter and began a house to house hunt for William’s cohort.  

Read the rest HERE...

Whitaker for Council

Join us!

Fundraiser to re-elect

Mayor Pro Tem Bruce Whitaker

                             to Fullerton City Council 2012

Where: The Matador Cantina

in historic downtown Fullerton

111 N. Harbor Blvd, Fullerton, CA 92832

Just North of Commonwealth on the West side of Harbor

Parking and entrance in rear

When: September 10th, Monday evening @ 6:00 pm

for excellent cocktails and delicious appetizers

$25 Supporter

$100 Patron

$250 Sponsor

*there is no maximum contribution limit for City Council

　

Please RSVP to ElectBruceWhitaker@live.com

or Linda @ 714-981-7303

Unable to join us? Please mail contributions to :

Elect Bruce Whitaker 2012

P.O. Box # 1444

                                     Fullerton, CA 92836

Bruce Whitaker Campaign Committee - ID #1330388

You're Invited...

Fear Mongering, Part 2

I never thought my previous post on the title subject would lead to a second post on the issue but I think perhaps now would be a good time to do so.

If you recall, I mentioned that fear is used as a means of control.

As an elected council member my fear is limited to making a poor decision that has unforeseen and negative consequences.  I fear that I will wake up on a Wednesday morning to find out that the previous night's decision would have a drastic negative impact.  But decide, I must; that is what your elected officials must do.

So with each decision, with each blog post, with each public appearance, I run the risk of saying or doing something that will have a negative impact and that, to some degree, makes me fearful.

However, I must keep a level head and remind myself and those around me that I am human and inclined to act as such.  "Be humble" I say to myself.

And if I should say too much, stumble or miss a step, the press is there to remind me of who I represent.  While we can certainly argue the role of the press and the various biases that each media outlet may have, it is of the utmost importance that all of us remember the role of the press.  In my opinion and that of many, the press serves the people equally as much as government itself.  The modern press is able to tell the public that which government would rather not share.

Sometimes the government (an all encompassing term which could include public employees, elected and appointed officials, etc.) makes an embarrassing mistake, like when Fullerton police officers mistakenly raided the wrong house.  Sometimes government withholds information because of ongoing investigations, like when the Fullerton Police Department refused to release the video of police confronting Kelly Thomas on July 5th.  In these two examples the public by and large knew of the incidents' occurrence and even some details.  However, it takes a complete disclosure of the evidence to paint an accurate picture of the events.  Since former Fullerton Police officers have certain rights of appeal with respect to their employment, I will not comment further on that case.

In both cases, though, the press had a specific role to play in sharing information with the public.  While the press can request information all day every day, it takes the government (again a broad term) to provide the press with the information.  We have the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that guarantees that the press can operate without interference from government.

But what about when a government has information which the public would take great interest in if the press knew of its existence and were to report it.  What if the government chose not to release it or even make its existence known?  This is where the importance of an elected representative can make all of the difference.  Having officials willing to open their doors to the press and the media and allow for complete, and sometimes even embarrassing, transparency is in my opinion the only way to ensure an honest government that places the citizens first.  Fear of the truth is power to some and terror to others.

"The basis of our governments being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter. But I should mean that every man should receive those papers and be capable of reading them." --Thomas Jefferson to Edward Carrington, 1787.

Special Meeting Called for July 24th

The Agenda:

5:00PM
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC COMMENTS
City Council  /  Successor Agency  will hear public comments on matters appearing on the  Closed
Session agenda.

RECESS to Closed Session
CLOSED SESSION

1. QUARTERLY LITIGATION UPDATES:
CONFERENCE WITH  LEGAL COUNSEL  – EXISTING LITIGATION Per Government Code Section 54956.9(a)
Name of Case: Frederick Ron Thomas v. City of Fullerton
Case Number: 30-2012-00581299-CU-PO-CJC

Name of Case: Hanson, et al. v. City of Fullerton
Case Number: 30-2008-00102055-CU-EI-CJC

Name of Case: Ernest Benefiel v. City of Fullerton, et al.
Case Number: SACV12-202-JVS

Name of Case: Catherine Sobieski v. City of Fullerton
Case Number: 30-2011 00459515

Name of Case: Brooke Minter v. City of Fullerton
Case Number: 30-2011 00512267

Name of Case: Vickie Scott v. City of Fullerton
Case Number: 30-2011 00495959

Name of Case: Stanley Goering v. City of Fullerton
Case Number: 30-2011 00518204

Name of Case: Leon Lester Gray v. City of Fullerton, et al.
Case Number: 30-201100505234

Name of Case: Harriet Heninger, et al. v. City of Fullerton
Case Number: 30-2011 00506572

Name of Case: Clara Atkins v. City of Fullerton
Case Number: 30-2012 00550335

Name of Case: Daniel Komaromi v. City of Fullerton
Case Number: 30-2011 00495715

Name of Case: Mark Walker v. City of Fullerton, et al.
Case Number: 8:12-CV-00949-AG

Name of Case: Andre Wendell v. City of Fullerton, et al.
Case Number: 30-2011 00572073

Name of Case: Scott Williams, guardian ad litem for Allison Williams, a minor v. City of Fullerton
Case Number: 30-2012 00579867

Name of Case: Melinda Glover v. City of Fullerton
Case Number: 30-2012 00580366

2. PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT Per Government Code Section 54957.1(a)(5)
Title: Chief of Police

3. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL  – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Per
Government Code Section 54956.9(b)
Significant Exposure to Litigation: Two casesFullerton City Council / Successor Agency Agenda

ADJOURNMENT
The next  special City Council  / Successor Agency / Public Financing Authority meeting  is July 24, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber, 303 West Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, California.The public may inspect any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Council / Agency / Authority regarding any item on this agenda at the City Clerk’s Office located at 303 West Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, California and the Fullerton Main Branch Library Information Counter located at 353 West Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, California during normal business hours.  The City will also post such writings and documents on the City’s website at www.cityofffullerton.com.


CITY OF FULLERTON
CITY COUNCIL / SUCCESSOR AGENCY /
PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY /
HOUSING AUTHORITY
SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA
JULY 24, 2012 - 6:30 P.M.
Council Chamber
303 West Commonwealth Avenue
Fullerton, California
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
INVOCATION
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
CLOSED SESSION REPORT
PUBLIC COMMENTS
City Council  will hear public comments on matters appearing on the Special Meeting agenda as it
considers each agenda item.

REGULAR BUSINESS
1. 2010 TAXABLE TAX ALLOCATION HOUSING BOND PROCEEDS
On July 17, 2012, City Council directed staff to agendize a  discussion of the 2012 Taxable Tax Allocation Housing Bond issue.  The Bond  proceeds were  intended to improve or increase the supply of low and moderate income housing in the City.
Recommendation by the Housing Successor Agenda:

1. Direct staff to complete requirements of AB 1484 and hold a housing study session, followed by a regular item to review affordable housing options in the City,
including options to defease bond funds.
2. Keep  freeze in place for  all potential bond funded housing  programs until
completion of  AB 1484  requirements and then provide direction on all options
related to the 2010 Taxable Tax Allocation Housing Bond.

2. PENSION AND OTHER POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFIT LIABILITIES
Discussion of the City’s pension and Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) liabilities.
Recommendation by the Human Resources Department:
Should the City Council determine to proceed with an independent analysis, direct staff regarding scope of analysis, formalize agreement and appropriate funds from Group Insurance Fund to pay for study.  

3. AUTHORIZED COMMUNICATION ON BEHALF OF THE CITY OF FULLERTON
Policy discussion regarding authorized communication on behalf of the City.
Recommendation by the Human Resources Department:
City Council discussion.

4. DRAFT ORDINANCE - HIRING OF POLICE CHIEF
At the July 17, 2012 meeting, City Council directed staff to prepare a draft ordinance related to City Council appointment of the Chief of Police.
Recommendation by the City Manager:
Review draft ordnance and provide direction to staff.

5. PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST
City Council directed staff to agendize a discussion of a recent public records request.
Recommendation by the City Manager:
Pleasure of the City Council.

6. APPOINTMENTS TO REGIONAL ADVISORY BODIES
City Council is scheduled to consider appointments to regional advisory bodies at its August 7, 2012 meeting.  In the interim, City Council may wish to consider the status of those currently named to serve on the various outside boards and commissions.
Recommendation by the City Manager:

Confirm resignations / terminations of current representatives to regional advisory
bodies.

CITY COUNCIL / SUCCESSOR AGENCY / STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
City Council may ask a question for clarification, make a brief announcement, make a brief report on his / her activities, request a report from staff at a subsequent meeting concerning any matter or take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda.


ADJOURNMENT

The next City Council / Successor Agency closed session meeting is August 7, 2012 at 5:00 p.m. in
the Council Chamber, 303 West Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, California.

The next regular City Council / Successor Agency / Public Financing Authority meeting is August 7, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber, 303 West Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, California.


The City will rebroadcast this City Council / Successor Agency / Public Financing Authority meeting on Time
Warner Cable Channel 3 at 6:00 p.m. the Wednesday and Sunday immediately following the meeting.  The public may access meeting rebroadcasts on demand at www.cityoffullerton.com.