Archives for category: 2018 Elections
Goldberg Library Variations

By staff consultant Rube Goldberg

Matthew Leslie

The Fullerton City Council is having another go at the Library Board appointment process Tuesday night, October 2. “Based on community input on September 18, 2018, the Mayor requests that the City Council discuss, and members of the public to provide input, into an alternate process for appointing members of the Library Board of Trustees“ reads the Staff Report accompanying the Agenda (reproduced below).

While it is true that the community criticized the City Council for not asking the volunteer library support groups Friends of the Library or the Fullerton Library Foundation for their respective opinions on the idea of needlessly changing the Trustee appointment process, as far as we know, nobody ever asked for an alternative process in the first place, other than City Councilmemeber Jennifer Fitzgerald. On May 1 she unilaterally suggested that the City Council appoint themselves as Trustees and create what would essentially be a subservient and powerless Library Advisory Board. What the community did two weeks ago at the last City Council meeting was to roundly reject this idea the Council making themselves the Trustees when we said to just leave the Library Board alone. The community did not say to try to solve a problem that doesn’t exist by terminating a perfectly clear and functional process by which members of the City Council each appoint a Trustee from the community to serve as Trustees.

Like the last agenda two weeks ago, this one does not specify anywhere why any change at all to the Library Board appointment process is needed. As far as we can tell, it is just another solution–and probably a bad one–looking for a problem.

The Staff Report continues…“Such a process could include stakeholders in the Library to include the Friends of the Library, the Library Foundation, and local school districts. A panel of stakeholders could then make a recommendation to the City Council for appointment as Library Board of Trustee appointments become available.” One would hope that members of the City Council were already consulting with these groups when considering appointments to the Library Board, but if it must be codified that people who know a thing or two about the library ought to be listened to, then such an action  seems harmless enough…

…unless, the whole thing is just cover for a majority of the City Council to control the Library Board outright. As it now stands, each Councilmember appoints a single Trustee to a five member Board. This arrangement ensures that the balance of the Library Board reflects the balance on the Council, which is as balanced as the electorate collectively sees fit to make it. If another process is adopted whereby the entire council must approve appointees recommended by the Library Foundation or Friends of the Library, a bare majority will be able to make all five appointments. This is not a strategy for making the Library Board more “independent,” as Mayor Doug Chaffee suggested during his attempted damage control at the last meeting.*

One possible method of adding informed voices to the Library Board would be to allow the Library Foundation and the Friends of the Library each an ex-officio seat on the Board, but allowing them to directly appoint members with voting power changes the way the library is governed, and any such change should be justified somewhere in an agenda report, but isn’t at this time. It’s still a mystery why this entire issue is being bought forth in the first place.

*And since when does Doug Chaffee care so much about a more independent Library Board? He objected to any member of the current Library Board serving on the 2018 Library Ad Hoc Committee, claiming they were too “biased” about what to do with the Hunt Branch. The 2012 Library Ad Hoc Committee included all five Trustees as members.

100218 ADM Library Board Appointment Process Agenda Report

100218 ADM Library Board Appointment Process Agenda Report2

Matthew Leslie

For years running up to her current run for City Council, Fullerton Mayor Doug Chaffee’s wife Paulette Marshall Chaffee has been turning up at every sort of public meeting and reception imaginable, but it’s a rare occasion when she takes to the mic to say anything. During an August 8 meeting of the Fullerton City Council she actually spoke about Pathways of Hope‘s contentious plan to build permanent supportive housing for single homeless people at 1600 W. Commonwealth Ave., on land currently owned by the city itself, next to a compressed natural gas fueling facility near the City Yard at Commonwealth and Basque.

Over a dozen and a half people, mostly residents who live near the proposed development, spoke out in opposition to it during the meeting’s public comment period (the project wasn’t on the council agenda that night). They were concerned about possible dangers associated with living near a complex meant to house people they perceived to be ill-behaved or even potentially violent. At least one resident was worried that his property value would drop. Other speakers tried to ameliorate the residents’ concerns, explaining that calling it a “homeless shelter” was inaccurate and that the whole purpose of the enterprise was to take people off the streets and get them housed. There was even an offer by an entrepreneur to purchase the property and build some sort of biotech company on the land instead. He promised the business would employ Fullerton residents. And then, nearly* at the end of the long line, came Paulette Marshall Chaffee, who recently moved into the 5th District to run for Fullerton City Council in November.

Referencing a similar development proposal from recent past, Ms. Marshall Chaffee explained that over three years ago the Community of Friends held a series of public meetings where residents and a developer could share ideas, and decided not to build a supportive housing complex on their original preferred site at 1501 W. Commonwealth (not far, across the street, from the proposed Pathways project), and eventually decided to locate it on West Orangethorpe. Referring to Fullerton Heights, now located just east of Raymond, she said it took quite a bit of time to work out the complex layers of financing to finally build what she called a “beautiful building next to the ARCO on Orangethorpe Ave.” that will open in October. She said she thought “all of us were really happy at the way this progressed,” referring to the multi-storey structure, which is now located next to a gas station instead of near residential neighborhoods. Rag readers will recall that the site had to have its zoning changed by the City Council from “industrial” to accommodate the project.

She sagely continued, “It takes give and take, it takes meetings. I was in attendance at a lot of those meetings. I’m in attendance now at the meetings of the Ad Hoc Committee as to potential uses of the Hunt Branch, and a lot of give and take, and there are nine people that are giving of their time, a lot of public comments, and they’re looking at funding sources and I think this is part of what Fullerton is all about, and I want to see this continue”

And then she gave a “shout out” for the Annual Taco Festival on August 18 and “kudos” (twice) to Parks and Rec for holding a Health and Wellness meeting at the Community Center.

Listening to the recording above, one finds that nowhere in her somewhat rambling comments does she manage to take a position on the issue of whether or not a housing complex for people in need should be built where it has been proposed to be built. Are nearby residents being callous toward those in need of housing and unduly concerned about the potential for dangerous interactions with them? Or are they just being protective of their children, and objecting to a multi-storey development near their neighborhood of single family homes? You won’t hear Paulette Marshall Chaffee offering any opinion. Candidates for City Council can “attend” as many meetings as they want to, but not taking a stand on an important issue is not a way to convince anyone that they deserve to wield executive power, and telling people that they can work out their differences is a sure sign of a politician afraid to alienate voters in election season.

*The delusional, sanctimonious leader of Fullerton’s paranoid Grand Conspiracy contingent generally tries to get in the final wacky word on any random issue before the Fullerton City Council by lurking on the sidelines (often with a camera) until everyone else has spoken, in this instance spoiling Ms. Marshall Chaffee’s efforts to sum it all up by saying nothing at all..

Carpetbagging Fullerton Map

“To be, or not to be…actually living where you claim to be?”

Matthew Leslie

O.C. Supervisor Todd Spitzer, candidate for O.C. District Attorney, is promising to do something incumbent D.A. Tony Ruckaukas has failed to for years–investigate whether or not candidates are falsely claiming to live somewhere in order to qualify to run for office. Opportunistic politicians file to run for city councils and state legislative offices representing municipalities where they have not previously resided with depressing regularity. Sometimes they actually move into a new domicile in time to legally claim residence there, but often their new addresses are just fronts, pretexts for claiming to live in a new city or Assembly or Senate district when they are really still rooted in their old home outside of the new district or city’s boundaries.

Remember Linda Ackerman claiming to live in the granny flat of a prominent supporter while trying to carpetbag into Fullerton to run for State Assembly back in 2009? Former Irvine Mayor Suh Kee Kang migrating north to Fullerton to run for State Senate in 2016? Or Joe Kerr hauling himself up from Coto de Caza this year to run for 4th District O.C. Supervisor? How do we know that Paulette Marshall Chaffee is really living in her new condo in Fullerton’s 5th District instead of her longtime family home in the hills of Fullerton’s 2nd District? One thing we’ve always been able to count on is D.A. Tony Ruckaukus doing next to nothing about any of it. His challenger in November, Todd Spitzer, seems to have noticed, and is promising to take the issue seriously if he is elected to replace the complacent or complicit Ruckaukus.

This week Spitzer’s campaign sent out the following press release:

‘SPITZER ANNOUNCES PRIORITY TO ELIMINATE CAMPAIGN RESIDENCY FRAUD
With So Many Cities Heading Toward District Driven Elections, Spitzer Vows To Protect Integrity Of Elections

Orange County August 15 –Today, Orange County District Attorney candidate Todd Spitzer announced an additional policy priority to crack down on politicians who abuse the district voting laws by creating phony addresses in order to run for office.

Supervisor Spitzer stated, “Our elections must be protected. As so many cities in Orange County begin having district based voting it is critical that their candidates and representatives are in fact from the district.”

Spitzer continued, “We have seen up and down the state far too many abuses of local elected officials faking their residency in order to run for office. This is wrong and will end on my watch as DA.”

“The point of district based representation is to ensure every community is represented, equally. We must protect that system to ensure the diversity of our elected representation is protected and honors the will of the people,” said Spitzer.

“For far too long Tony Rackauckas has turned a blind eye to this growing abuse,” continued Spitzer. “With the advent of new municipal voting districts in many cities, this problem is only going to get worse, if not dealt with,” Spitzer added.”‘

Should we take him at his word? Does he have any incentive to actually do anything about candidates falsely claiming to live somewhere they don’t to get elected to office? Where’s the harm in believing him, or anyone else, at this point? Just acknowledging the problem is a solid leap over the low bar Tony Ruckaukus has set for so many years.

%d bloggers like this: