City Council Special Meeting Scheduled for July 2nd

1. DECLARATION OF JUNE 5, 2012 MUNICIPAL ELECTION RESULTS
The City of Fullerton held a Municipal Election on June 5, 2012 to consider the recall of three Members of the City Council and vote for replacement candidates should any of the recalls succeed. The Orange County Registrar of Voters has certified the results of the June 5, 2012 election.

Recommendation by the City Clerk’s Office: Adopt Resolution No. 2012-57.

RESOLUTION NO. 2012-57 – A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FULLERTON, CALIFORNIA, RECITING THE FACT OF THE SPECIAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION HELD ON JUNE 5, 2012, DECLARING THE RESULT AND SUCH MATTER AS REQUIRED BY LAW

ADJOURNMENT – The next special City Council / Successor Agency / Public Financing Authority / Housing Authority meeting is July 3, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber, 303 West Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, California. The next regular City Council / Successor Agency closed session meeting is July 17, 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 July 17, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber, 303 West Commonwealth Avenue, Fullerton, California.

Taking Office

"So when do you take office?"  That seems to be the big question on many people's minds.

It's needlessly convoluted so stay with me.

Thursday morning, June 28, at or about 9:00AM, a City Council meeting was to be held in the Council Chambers to accept the results of the recall election.  However, the City Manager reports that recalled council member Dick Jones backed out.  Mayor Quirk-Silva and Member Bruce Whitaker were willing to be there.

As of this morning, Mayor Quirk-Silva was planning on calling for a special meeting on Monday morning, July 2nd, at 9:00AM.  I have been told by City Manager Felz and City Attorney Jones that recalled council member Pat McKinley has promised to participate.  According to City Manager Felz, Mr. McKinley has planned to be out of town this week for perhaps several months.

Regardless of whether the July 2nd meeting occurs, I have been told that Mayor Quirk-Silva will have a meeting Tuesday night.  This would be a normal meeting but it had been canceled due to the July 4th celebration on the following day.  So, if Monday's meeting is canceled, perhaps Tuesday's meeting will result in the new council being able to act.

If Monday's and Tuesday's meetings fail to have a quorum and seat the new council, I have asked City Attorney Jones to take the matter before a judge on July 5th.  If that does not happen, I am preparing to take the matter before a judge on July 6th myself.

July 17 is tentatively scheduled to be the first regular City Council meeting though will be largely ceremonial including public ceremonial swearing in of the new members.  There may be an item or two that will be addressed but I don't know what those will be.

As we approach this tumultuous transition in Fullerton's governance, I reflect upon President George Washington's Farewell Address and the elegance with which he stepped down.  With quiet dignity and gentle words of wisdom, he stepped aside to allow someone else, John Adams, to preside over the United States.  It is too bad that some of the recalled council members appear to have neither dignity nor wisdom to do what is right.

Council Member-Elect

Now that I am finally getting caught up on emails and phone calls, I want to express my gratitude to my supporters and the voters of Fullerton who cast their ballots for me to be your newest City Council Member.

You walked the precincts, made phone calls, spoke with your friends, made t-shirts, wore t-shirts (I have a few left if you would like one), and donated your time, money, and energy to help me win!  You represented me when I could not be everywhere all the time.

You cast your vote for me.  You believe in my vision of open, honest, and transparent government.

Thank you!

I have a deep and profound respect for the public trust that has been placed upon my shoulders which I do not take lightly.  To the voters who voted for Jane, Rick, or Paula, I hope we can find common ground from which we can work.  As your council member, I represent all of Fullerton.  Let's make the most of it - Fullerton is OUR home. 

Sincerely,

Greg Sebourn

Fullerton Recall Election Results

Shall F. Richard "Dick" Jones be recalled (removed) from the office of City Council Member? Completed Precincts: 87 of 87 Vote Count Percentage Yes 10,017 65.5% No 5,273 34.5% For Member of the City Council Candidates to succeed F. Richard "Dick" Jones Completed Precincts: 87 of 87 Vote Count Percentage TRAVIS KIGER 6,873 55.5% GLENN GEORGIEFF 2,932 23.7% ROBERTA J. REID 1,074 8.7% DOROTHY A. BIRSIC 801 6.5% MATTHEW HAKIM 706 5.7% Shall Pat McKinley be recalled (removed) from the office of City Council Member? Completed Precincts: 87 of 87 Vote Count Percentage Yes 9,983 65.6% No 5,234 34.4% For Member of the City Council Candidates to succeed Pat McKinley Completed Precincts: 87 of 87 Vote Count Percentage DOUG CHAFFEE 5,451 42.3% BARRY LEVINSON 3,956 30.7% MATTHEW ROWE 2,775 21.5% SEAN PADEN 709 5.5% Shall Don Bankhead be recalled (removed) from the office of City Council Member? Completed Precincts: 87 of 87 Vote Count Percentage Yes 10,012 65.7% No 5,225 34.3% For Member of the City Council Candidates to succeed Don Bankhead Completed Precincts: 87 of 87 Vote Count Percentage GREG SEBOURN 5,143 40.5% JANE RANDS 3,340 26.3% RICK ALVAREZ 2,829 22.3% PAULA WILLIAMS 1,387 10.9%

Election Day - June 5, 2012

Today is the June 5th election that Fullerton voters have been waiting for.  Please take a few minutes to hit the polls and cast your ballot.

On a similar note I want to share with you some of what I saw throughout the campaign.

First of all, I believe that ALL of the replacement candidates ran a clean and honest campaign.  I know many of my signs were taken but do not believe that any of the candidates took them.  Throughout the campaign all of my interactions with other candidates were congenial and professional.  I tip my hat to all of them for their willingness to step up and represent their city.

Leading up to today I have heard a small minority blindly lay the blame for for the Fullerton Recall on Tony Bushala.  Blaming Bushala for the council majority's collective failings is tantamount to a child blaming their parent for scolding them after being caught with their hand in the cookie jar.  It just goes to show the depth of denial that some people have when it comes to failed leadership.

It also is a prime example of deflecting responsibility.  Instead of defending themselves and showing that, somehow, Tony Bushala is wrong, they chose to just cross their arms and pout about how mean Tony is for calling them out as poor leaders.

So, while many might think the Fullerton Recall is about Tony Bushala, the fact remains that it was Don Bankhead, Pat McKinley, and Dick Jones who saddled Fullerton taxpayers and water ratepayers with $27 million in illegal overcharges (they're still over charging us!) for the last 15 years, cultivated and protected the culture of corruption that lead to the beating death of Kelly Thomas, gave hundreds of millions of your tax dollars to out of town developers to build low-income apartments around Downtown Fullerton, dozens and dozens of bars in Downtown Fullerton, and MORE THAN $1.2 BILLION OF DEBT!!!!!

Blaming Tony Bushala for these huge failures in leadership by the City Council majority is wrong.  Larry Bennett, the Recall No manager, is more culpable as a Fullerton Planning Commissioner than Tony Bushala, a private citizen.  Yet Bennett's own campaign continues to ignore the failed leadership and has actively campaigned to maintain the status quo by blaming Tony Bushala.

Today, I ask that you weigh the City's future, our massive debts, the culture of corruption, and the overwhelming failure to lead by the council majority and vote YES ON THE FULLERTON RECALL!

June Money Bomb - Support Reform

With just one week left to get out the vote and share my message with voters, I need you help!

This is your last pre-election opportunity to support reform that makes sense.

Please donate today!

OC Register Columnist Avoids the Obvious

OC Register columnist David Whiting shows the same trait as the Fullerton City Council members being recalled- denial.

Whiting gives his impression of the Fullerton recall election and the reaction of the public since the video was released.

While Whiting is entitled to express his opinion, he chose to use his creative writing skills over his journalist skills to express his support of the three doomed council members Jones, Bankhead, and McKinley.

I suppose when the facts are present, one need only close their eyes and the facts go away.  I'm sure my toddler would agree.

Unfortunately, sticking one's head in the sand doesn't resolve anything.  It only drags out the inevitable demise that is certain to follow.

Whiting gives the before and after impressions of the soon-to-be ex-councilmen and uses some mild quotes. He ignores, as city council candidate Matt Rowe pointed out, numerous tasteless, insensitive, and demeaning comments made by McKinley.  Bankhead and Jones also made plenty of similar remarks that have reflected poorly on our city.

From Matt's Facebook post at the OC Register on-line:

Here's some better quotes for Councilman McKinley.
---
Theme: Compassion
On sexual assault and the FPD (Rincon).
"Those ladies weren't people like this." 
This is not compassion. This is judgement. Does Pat McKinley side with the victims here or with the officer? You decide, then read the next one.
"It was just inappropriate touching. Not a good thing, but it ain't a dangerous thing."
This is not compassion. Pat McKinley actively dismissed what it feels like to be sexually assaulted and defended the officer's actions. Need more, read below. 

On Kelly Thomas.
"You can't get six people around one guy."
This is not compassion. This is attacking witnesses to the crime. As the video demonstrates, you can certainly get six officers on one guy. They piled on and crushed Kelly to death. Again, this is not compassion, this is Pat McKinley defending the FPD on national television. Need more?
"I've had my eyes bloused a few times myself... facial injuries are not life threatening."
This is not compassion. This is Pat McKinley minimizing the injuries that Kelly Thomas received. He's making a foray into medicine and is not acting appropriately for a councilman. No eye blousing every received by Pat McKinley should EVER be compared to Kelly Thomas's injuries. Need more?
"I can guarantee neither of these officers intended for Kelly Thomas to die. They had no intention of murdering him."
THIS IS NOT COMPASSION. This is Pat McKinley, again, sticking his nose where it doesn't belong. He has no idea what the officers' intent was. Here he is AGAIN advocating for the FPD and not advocating for a citizen of Fullerton, a victim of the FPD. Still need more?
"This should be an interesting trial and Mr Barnett is an extremely competent lawyer, and he has said that he has other information."
This is not compassion. This is Pat McKinley alluding to evidence held by the defense that may exonerate the officers. He has no business stating this, true or untrue. He's supposed to be advocating for citizens, for Fullerton, and for victims of crime inside the city limits. Making a statement about how good the defense attorney is and how interesting he's going to make the trial is not compassion. If it is, it's only for the FPD.
---
Theme: Police Discipline:
"I probably hired them all."
Yup. You probably trained them, too. Not exactly who I want ensuring my rights aren't violated.
"We changed the entire culture of the department."
I have no doubt you did.
"We put Rincon on administrative leave, immediately."
Really? This is a lie. Pat McKinley left Rincon on the job after receiving multiple complaints. He assaulted many many women. What did Pat McKinley do about it? He left him on the street, retired, then blamed the incoming police chief. View it yourself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mg3uCUnivlU&feature=youtu.be
---
I have no idea why the person writing this article wrote what they did. What I can tell you is that we're not all on the same page. The quotes presented by the author, at best, occurred weeks and months after Kelly was killed. What the author should be presenting is what the council members said before the press got a hold of the case. That's the justification for the recall.
I guess this really sums up the reporter's journalistic ability: "As one speaker in council chambers put it, 'The world is watching this meeting.' I'm not so sure about the world."
The speaker was Ron Thomas. The world is most definitely watching. 10 million views and counting.
YES ON RECALL.

Well said Matt!  

Sticking our head in the sands of Fullerton have left us with over $1-BILLION of debt, no less than a dozen law suits, several former police employees incarcerated or on trial, accounting gimmicks and misappropriation of public funds, illegal taxes, and a blood on our streets.  \

The only cure for Fullerton's failed leadership is to replace the council with competent and caring leaders who will not look the other way while Rome is burning.

CAUSE: head in sand, EFFECT: (see images below)

A DUI crash mock-up. Unlike many

other Fullerton images, no one died

or was injured in this picture.

Water Rate Study Ad Hoc Committee Meeting Canceled

The Water Rate Study Ad Hoc Committee meeting has been canceled with no reason given.

The meeting was scheduled for this Wednesday but City manager Joe Felz canceled the meeting.  No reason was given.

The meeting would have been held to review the City Manager's list of "costs" associated with operating the City's Water Department and determine how much should be billed to the Water Fund.

Meanwhile, Fullerton Water Department customers are still being overcharged 10% on their water bills.  

Precinct Walk Today!

Today at 2PM we will be walking precincts throughout Fullerton. 

If you would like to help, please click HERE to RSVP and for more details!

Attempted Kidnapping...8 days ago!

Below is a notice I received from the Fullerton PD's iWatch Alert System that sends subscribers  emails or text messages about criminal activity in your neighborhood.  I signed up for all of the neighborhoods so I could understand how much crime there is in Fullerton.

What troubles me is that a kidnapping is among the worst crimes a community will face and the fact that one was attempted and the public not notified has me asking why.

Why didn't the Fullerton Police department send out a press release on this attempted kidnapping?  Was the department too distracted by other events?  Which events?  

Anyway, in the interest of protecting the public from crazed murderous kidnappers, here is the alert, albeit 8 days old:

There was an attempted kidnapping of a woman on May 8 at approximately 10:50 AM in the 400 block of S. Lemon St.  As the woman was walking to school a large white truck containing 2 occupants drove past her. One of the occupants yelled at her and said “hey” out of the window. The truck passed her a second time and nothing was said. When the victim saw the truck for the third time it was parked. A suspect walked up from behind her and grabbed her arm. The victim hit the suspect and walked away from him very fast. When the suspect caught up to the victim again he put his hand underneath her jacket and said "if you run or if you scream I am going to shoot you." The victim was able to run away safely.

I am glad the victim was able to get away on her own.  Perhaps if the FPD would have released this IMMEDIATELY, the public could have helped be the eyes and ears for the officers.  The crime should have been on the news that afternoon.  Radio stations should have been reporting it.  But instead the FPD keeps the event quiet until a week has passed.  

Why did they wait?  

Was it fear of creating fear?  

Was it just not important?  

What reason could they have for not telling us about this?  

I thought the people, you know voters and taxpayers, were pretty pissed off at last night's council meeting.  Blunders like this won't help the public's perception of our police department or restore the lost trust.

Preview of Tonight's City Council Meeting - What's in it, what's not

Tonight's City Council Agenda is spectacularly huge.  There are 23 items on is and that doesn't include the study session for the Task Force On Homelessness and Mental Health Services or the Closed Session conferences with legal counsel.  One of the countless law suits alone could cost Fullerton taxpayers more than $10-million and no one was killed.  Indeed, it is a strange world we live in.

I'm not sure what to expect for the Task Force's study session and the agenda is void of information.

The Consent Calendar is where we often see expensive plans put quietly in motion and tonight is no different.  The 15 items consist of General Plan update, legal contracts, labor contracts, insurance report with recommendations from staff, November's general election, Successor Agency debt update (more on this in a moment), Measure M funding, custodial services contract, agreement with Brea for sewer replacement, rezoning, property acquisition, sewer lining, Chapman Ave (at Fox Fullerton) right-turn lane, and the Walnut/Lincoln sewer replacement.

All told, these represent $647,106,698 in spending.  Of that, $641,969,234 is from the Redevelopment Agency's debt courtesy of the City Council.  That leaves $5,137,464 in new expenditures/allocations.  And where is this buried?  The Consent Calendar.

There are Public Hearings on four items.  
Agenda item 16 is the OCTA Bike Share Pilot Project.  This is a 66-month trial run to see if people will use bikes dispensed from an automated bike rack like a vending machine.  The staff report claims huge success in major metropolitan cities like Boston, Chicago, and Mexico City.

Item 17 proposes the use of tax dollars to subsidize a low-income apartment building proposed for 345 East Commonwealth, dubbed the Alexander Senior Housing Project.  Besides the issue of using public funds for private housing, there remain discrepancies in the City's numbers.  The Joint Powers Authority that the City wants to partner with has approved $14,000,000 while the City seems to think they will get $14,500,000.  I have repeatedly brought this up and City staff just shrug.  I oppose the project for several reasons including substandard parking, zoning, and open space, as well as the use of public funds for private development.  Deals like this are bad for taxpayers and ultimately bad for the real estate market.  It gives one developer, The Richman Group or TRG, an unfair advantage by giving them $14,000,000 and numerous development concessions as noted above. And TRG has little to no risk.

Item 18 is the tow franchise and repeal of a chapter from the municipal code.  This is the by-product of the Fullerton Police Department's failed attempt last year to ramrod a contract through to Anaheim/Fullerton Towing and To' and Mo' Towing.  Last year you may recall that the FPD compiled and reported to the Council the nitty-gritty details of employees who worked for the other responding tow companies.  Most saw the report for what it was, cheap shots to justify keeping a 40-year contract in place.  The FPD then pushed through a commercial truck route law that punished tow operators on City streets.  Everything the FPD has had to do with towing seems to be under a dark cloud of cronyism and special favors.

Item 19 is the proposed revised budget that was continued from the last meeting.  City Staff were ordered to return with a balanced budget.  Although the balance sheet works, the premise behind the more than rosy numbers is questionable.  For example, the budget assumes the City will receive $20,000 in outdoor dining fees for restaurants with patios in the public right of way, like Florentine's bar on the northeast corner of Commonwealth and Harbor except Florentine's won't be paying a dime for their use of the sidewalk.  Ask the council members being recalled why.  The budget also shows a "potential revenue from citywide fee study" with $50,000 generated.  Since when does a study in and of itself generate tax revenue?  Then there are the so-called cuts or savings.  Staff assume that there will be a $260,000 reduction in contract costs for legal services, graffiti, animal control, and custodial service.  The proposed custodial contract is $16,430 less than the current contract which allocated $425,801 to cleaning City Hall.  Strange how we can get the contract workers to take a 4% cut but not our own employees.  There are several other glaring issues that should have been addressed but weren't.

And finally, Regular Business...
Item 20 is All the Arts for All the Kids Heart Project.  This allows those big decorated hearts to be placed all around town without going through the permit process.

Item 21 tackles the skate park and its operations.  It asks that the Skate Park Ad Hoc Committee pick up the slack and help with cleaning and maintaining the park.  That's a first and not a bad suggestion if their are community members interested in taking on that role.  I'm glad to see it opening up again (pending approval by the Council).  there is an estimated $50,000 cost to make some much needed upgrades and maintenance.

Item 22 is the Boys & Girls Club lease agreement.  The deal looks a little shady.  The City asked the Club to lease the facility in exchange for a $1,000,000 contribution.  The Club will purchase their own furniture and computers ($300,000) and will pay the remaining $700,000 in monthly payments of $3,333.33.  At that rate, it will take the Club 17.5 years to make their "contribution" to the City.  In the mean time, Park Dwelling Funds will be used to backfill the shortfall.  I like the Boys & Girls Club but this creative financing is not good.

Outdoor dining is last on the list as item 23.  Aside from playing with the numbers, one of the proposed price lists uses type of beverage served.  No alcohol means you will pay $0.30/SQFT, beer and wine will cost you $0.60SQFT, and full liquor means you get saddled with a $0.90SQFT cost to use the public's right-of-way.  As noted above, Florentine's seems to be immune to these taxes despite his outrageous encroachment onto public property for the consumption of alcohol.

So what's missing?  WATER RATES!!!  Why aren't they being adjusted?  

There is a lot to cover tonight and I hope you come out and speak.  Speak from your heart and be heard.

League of Women Voters

The LWVNOC is sponsoring a Candidates Forum for all the Candidates that are running for Fullerton City Council in the Recall election this June.  Current city council members that are being recalled and potential candidates have been invited to participate.  It is being held May 10, 2012 in the Fullerton Main Library, Osborne Auditorium from 6PM-9PM.

FREE EVENT - Meet the Candidates

I will be at the Fullerton Public Library (353 W. Commonwealth Ave.) tonight from 6PM-8PM for NUF's (Neighbors United for Fullerton) meet-n-greet.

Other replacement candidates will be there as well for you to speak with and ask questions.  This is your opportunity to interview candidates.

I hope I see you there!

Community Forums - Hear the Candidates

There are several upcoming forums being presented by community, business, and political groups that will allow you to hear from the candidates in the Fullerton Recall Election.

May 2, 6PM-8PM

Atlas PAC hosts a forum for their endorsed candidates (including yours truly) Scott's Restaurant & Bar

3300 Bristol Ave. Costa Mesa ($15 for members, $20 for non-members, $4 valet)

May 7, 6PM-8:30PM

Neighbors United for Fullerton is hosting a meet-n-greet at Fullerton's Main Branch Library, 353 W. Commonwealth Ave. (free)

May 10, 6PM-8:30PM

The League of Women Voters  is hosting a forum at Fullerton's Main Branch Library, 353 W. Commonwealth Ave. (free)

May 14, 6:30

The Fullerton Chamber of Commerce is hosting a forum at Fullerton's Main Branch Library, 353 W. Commonwealth Ave. (free)

There may be other events, both private and public, yet to be scheduled.  Subscribe to this site to receive updates.  

Also, if you would like to host an event, please contact me at GregSebourn@yahoo.com or at (714) 292-5914.

Water Tax Repealed, Rate Decrease Anticipated

The City Council voted 5-0 to do the right thing: Rescind the 1970 City Council Resolution that granted an automatic transfer of 10% of gross water sales to the General Fund.  The money was then used to cover General Fund obligations, 80% of which is for salaries, benefits, and pensions.

The end of the water tax does not mean the automatic reduction of 10% of ratepayers water bills.

That will be explored by the Water Rate Ad Hoc Committee in the coming weeks.

For now, though, let's savor the moment.

One year ago I said that ending the water tax would allow for ratepayers' money to go where they had intended it to be spent, the water system.  "Oh no.  That would mean a $2.5 million cut to the General Fund" said the tax's supporters.  "We can't have that!"

The fact is, that money was not supposed to be going into the General Fund and reliance on those funds demonstrates a clear disregard of fiduciary responsibilities by our city officials.

The money was earmarked for water purposes and any other use is a clear misappropriation of public funds.  Suddenly with the water tax gone, the Water Fund has all the money necessary to begin replacing 4 to 6 miles of pipe per year instead of 1 mile per year.  This is a leap in the right direction.  However, there is much more work ahead.

You can expect another tax and spend plan to come forward to try to make up the $2.5 million annual cut in illegal funding.

Keep a wary eye out for gimmicks, games, and gambling with your money by city officials and vote June 5 to recall Bankhead, Jones, and McKinley.

How much overhead gets billed to the Water Fund?

Looking further into "costs" of service for our water, how many different ways is administrative overhead charged to the Water Fund?  This pie chart shows several.

1. "Administrative Services" (8% direct allocation from water bill)
2. "Other Expenses" (2% direct allocation from water bill to pay Community Development Department, Human Resources Department, Parks & Rec Department, the City Council, and the City Manager)
3. "Franchise Fee" (11% direct allocation from water bill to pay for the Finance department, City Administrator, City Attorney, and the City Clerk for their respective DIRECT SERVICES to the Municipal Utilities Department- see Resolution 5184 below) 

Resolution 5184, 1970

Good grief!  That's 21% of the Water Fund or $4,746,000.  If that number sounds familiar, it should.  That's the same amount being allocated to the Maintenance Services Department which are probably direct costs and not bloated overhead.

No wonder City Hall doesn't want the Water Fund audited!

The bottom line here is that everyone it seems has their hand in the Water Fund.  Adding additional taxes to current or future water rates is unacceptable and will not solve City Hall's spending problem.  

The Trench Tax

One of the attempted, and thus far rejected, justifications for a percentage-based franchise fee that was concocted by City staff was the Trench Tax.

The Trench Tax was created as a means to pay for the damage created by having wet utilities (water lines, sewers, etc.) buried in the street.

Keep in mind that the Trench Tax is part of the New & Improved Franchise Fee and does not include the cost of the Maintenance Services Department repairing the street each time their is a water leak or water line repair.

According to three licensed civil engineers that I have shown the transfer study to, trench settling occurs when the soil is not compacted appropriately.  Using the correct backfill material and compaction standards will create a base capable of supporting the road.  In lay terms, when done correctly, trench work does NOT accelerate deterioration of the street.  Also, when contractors want to dig in the street, a city inspector comes out to make sure that the street is constructed and restored correctly.  This is a double standard with no inspector verifying the City work.

Aside from the Trench Tax, Maintenance Services Department bills their time spent working on broken water lines to the City's General Fund, at least that is what Dave Schickling reported at the April 9, 2012 meeting.  I have found no evidence to support this claim but since there is no audit of the Water Fund, we cannot possibly know if money was paid to the General Fund to reimburse for the Maintenance Services Department's water-related work.  More importantly, this cannot be part of the Franchise Fee because that is suppose to cover certain administrative costs (which we were taxed twice for as well and is indicated in the pie chart - Franchise Fee vs. Other Expenses vs. Administrative Services).

And then there is this pesky but colorful pie chart which shows that the Maintenance Services Department accounted for 21% of the budgeted cost to maintain the Water System, or $4,746,000 in 2011.  

We are left contemplating just how many ways City staff will attempt to tax our water to fix the same piece of asphalt.  Here are at least two:

1. Trench Tax (a.k.a New & Improved Franchise Fee, less rent-back)
2. Allocation of Water Fund from water bill for Maintenance Services

But it gets worse.  How much bureaucratic overhead is paid for through your water bill and what does it actually cover?  Find out tomorrow.

Join NOCCC To Meet Your Local Candidates

North Orange

County Conservative Coalition
  www.nocconservatives.org 

Local elected officials go on to become our State and National leaders. The important decisions we make at the Ballot Box on June 5 and in November effect our daily lives and our future. 

Join NOCCC To Meet Your Local Candidates 

Please invite your neighbors, friends and family
and especially NEW VOTERS!

Thursday, April 12, 2012
7:00 – 8:30 pm
Let's talk about how Orange County
and the media will cover the elections
with special guest speaker and emcee Brian Calle          

     Brian Calle is an Opinion Columnist for the Orange County Register and President of the Young Executives of America. He is also the Managing Director of Gambit Consulting Group, a Senior Fellow at the Claremont Institute, Editor of FreedomPolitics.com, a Distinguished Speaker in the Friedman Foundation School Choice Speaker's Bureau and a member of the Board of Governors for the University of Southern California.

     Please join us as Brian introduces many of our invited local candidates running for office including 3rd District Orange County Board of Supervisors;Anaheim, Brea, Fullerton, LaHabra, Orange, Placentia, Yorba Linda City Council; School Board and Orange County Republican Party Central Committee. 

**One hour from 8:00pm - 9:00pm will be set aside for
folks to meet and chat with candidates who wish to stay.
        ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The Foxfire Restaurant Conference Room, 5717 E. Santa Ana Canyon Road, Anaheim, 91 Freeway @ Imperial Highway 

Dessert & Coffee provided. $5 suggested donation to help cover costs.
Please RSVP to Desaré deseric@sbcglobal.net or Karla karladowning@aol.com 
Why not dine at the Foxfire Restaurant before the meeting?
Separate reservations required through the restaurant.

Please visit our website www.nocconservatives.com
for news, events and updated election information.

From Vallejo to Stockton, Is Fullerton Next?

A friend sent this to me and I thought it sounds a lot like Fullerton's future...

(from CaliforniaCityNews.org)

California's new municipal bankruptcy law could be put to the test in its first trial, as the rumor mill is churning that the city of Stockton is preparing to file for bankruptcy. You may recall that under AB 506, a city is now required to deal with a "neutral evaluator" for at least 60 days before seeking bankruptcy court protection. That being said, this mediation process can be avoided if a municipality declares a financial emergency.

It is being reported that Stockton will take the first steps toward seeking bankruptcy protection from its creditors at its next council meeting on Tuesday, February 28th. Mayor Ann Johnston reportedly commented, "Stay tuned." The Record reports that "While city administrators remained silent on any plans, it became an open secret Wednesday. The Downtown Stockton Alliance board of directors in a public meeting discussed the city's bankruptcy timetable."

 Notably, it was only last month that the city's mayor was quoted as saying Stockton wanted to avoid Vallejo's fate, with Johnston stating, "We're not moving in that direction whatsoever." In preparation for what's to come on Tuesday's meeting, City Manager Bob Deis is scheduled to provide a briefing tomorrow on the city's fiscal status.

Ultimately, talks of insolvency have been in the pipeline for quite awhile in the struggling city. Stockton's financial woes have been a persistent headline and severe cuts, especially to public safety, have made the city's dire budget position a sore point, as the city was ranked as having the eighth-highest violent crime rate in the country in 2010. Notably, a state of fiscal emergency has been declared twice since 2010 so that cuts could be imposed on city employees.

If bankruptcy talks proceed, Stockton would become the largest city in the nation to file for bankruptcy. Startlingly, it would be the biggest bankruptcy since Vallejo's in 2008. All eyes will be on Stockton in the next few days as key moves are debated and decided.

Fullerton Recall Collects 52,254 Signatures!

Moments ago the Fullerton Recall team turned in well over 50,000 signatures from Fullerton voters to initiate a recall election of councilmembers Don Bankhead, Dick Jones and Pat McKinley. The reason? Their simple failure to provide competent leadership for our city.
The individual totals are:

• Don Bankhead: 17,064 signatures
• F. Richard “Dick” Jones: 17,587 signatures
• Patrick McKinley: 17,603 signatures

Next, the city clerk will...CLICK HERE TO CONTINUE