Search posts by category
SUBSCRIBETo receive notification of every new post, CLICK HERE.
City of Fullerton’s pay and pension data
PAY DETAILS for Fullerton's 936 city employees (2017).
PENSIONS of Fullerton's 707 retired city employees (2017).
THE AVERAGE annual pension and benefit package for full-career retired city employees in 2017 was $84,778.51.
FULLERTON'S RETIRED city employees received pensions and benefits in 2017 totaling $35,261,604.03.
SEARCH FOR FULLERTON EMPLOYEES' salaries or pensions by name.
Fullerton Elementary School District’s pay and pensions
PAY AND BENEFITS for the school district's 2,174 teachers, administrators and other employees (2015).
How many millionaires does California send to Congress?To find out, CLICK HERE.
- Jane Rands on The California gas tax and the outrageous tactics to keep it
- Jane Rands on Non-elected California Energy Commission’s vote could add up to $30,000 to the cost of new houses
- George Clemens on Time to terminate Townsend
- Josh Ferguson on Time to terminate Townsend
- Sean Paden on Council votes not to take a stance on Department of Justice lawsuit
Today in the ASSEMBLYTODAY'S EVENTS CALENDAR Includes links to audio and video.
Today in the SENATE
RESEARCH A BILL in the LegislatureTo find out the status of a bill in either the Senate or the Assembly, CLICK HERE.
To read or download tonight’s detailed council meeting agenda, please click here (pdf).
The public participation portion of the meeting begins at 6:30 with presentations and awards. Actual city business normally doesn’t start until 7:00 or thereafter.
And you can also watch it on cable Channel 3 (Spectrum — formerly Time Warner Cable).
By Jon Coupal | A few weeks ago this column addressed the issue of polling and how it can be manipulated and, even when it is not manipulated, how wrong it can be. Still, candidates, consultants and the media do a lot of polling to test the viability of whatever it is they support or oppose.
Sen. Josh Newman’s recall election was a bitter fight. While polling suggested he was in trouble, those supporting the recall were well aware that polls can be wrong. But even recall proponents were surprised that the recall would prevail by a 59-41 percent margin. That wasn’t just a loss for Newman. It was a trouncing.
This past week, in his political swan song, Newman vented against the recall effort on the floor of Senate. Incredibly, Newman stated, “I can’t imagine wanting to win so badly that I would ever do, in the pursuit of partisan advantage, what has been done here.” In light of how Democrats skewed the political process during the recall effort, Newman’s complaint is laughable. Let’s review.
Not once, but twice, Democrats jammed through new laws changing the recall process specifically for the purpose of throwing Newman a political lifeline. These were enacted as so-called “trailer bills,” last-minute, supposedly budget-related bills that are passed without any public hearings. These were designed to delay what otherwise would have been a special election for the recall last November or December, a ploy that succeeded in delaying the issue to June. Because the purpose of the 100-year-old right to recall is to get a rapid resolution of whether a politician should continue in office, the claim that the new laws were “improving” the process was ridiculous.
To read the entire column, please click here.
January –1*, 12, 26
February – 9, 19*, 23
March – 9, 23
April – 6, 20
May – 4, 18, 28*
June – 1, 15, 29
July – 4*, 13, 27
August – 10, 24
September – 3*, 7, 21
October – 5, 19
November – 2, 11*, 16, 22*, 23*,30
December – 14, 24*, 25*, 26^,27^, 28, 31*
By Jon Coupal | Forty years ago this week, California voters began the modern tax revolt movement that spread across America like wildfire. The idea that citizens could take back control from an overreaching government helped to propel Ronald Reagan to the presidency. Reagan, who had a close friendship with Howard Jarvis, took his message of limited government to Washington and his message of freedom to the world.
Proposition 13 cut property taxes, put limits on their rise, and toughened the requirements for passing other tax increases. It passed overwhelmingly in June 1978, and ever since, liberals have failed to acknowledge how wrong they were about it — both in terms of politics and policy.
Two months before the vote, California’s then Gov. Jerry Brown (version 1.0), was quoted in the New York Times as saying “I don’t think there is one credible observer who thinks Proposition 13 will endure over the long period.” Forty years later, it’s Brown who is heading into the political sunset while Proposition 13 continues to protect grateful California taxpayers.
To read the entire column, please click here.
By Joel Fox| The Proposition 13 tax revolt was more than an uprising against out-of-control property taxes. Passed by voters 40 years ago Wednesday, Proposition 13 survives in deep-blue California because it stands as a strong symbol not only about controlling taxation but also about voters’ power to command the government.
After 40 years, the measure still has overwhelming public support. In a Public Policy Institute of California poll released in March, 65 percent of likely voters said Proposition 13 turned out to be a good thing, while only 23 percent said it was a bad thing. Prop. 13 has majority support across party, gender, education levels and ethnic, age and economic groups.
But over the past 40 years, spending interests have tried to destabilize Proposition 13, and it remains a target for those who want to tax more. Ending it would send notice nationally that the tax cutting fire is out.
Taxes haven’t exactly disappeared under Proposition 13. Property tax revenue is up 1,000% since 1978 and is growing faster than personal income. However, individual taxpayers are protected by Prop. 13, locking in property taxes when they buy their home and limiting future increases.
To read the entire commentary, please click here.
Among all the mind-numbing political ads on television over the past few weeks, one 10-second spot stood out for its comic relief:
State Senator Josh Newman was recalled yesterday by a vote of 55,539 to 37,850 (50.5% to 40.5%).
Winner of the replacement election was Ling Ling Chang with a commanding 34.2% of the vote. Here are the results (minus some mail ballots), in order:
|Ling Ling Chang (R)||30,503||34.2%|
|Bruce Whitaker (R)||17,514||19.6%|
|Josh Ferguson (D)||10,690||12.0%|
|Kevin Carr (D)||7,953||8.9%|
|George C. Shen (R)||4,561||5.1%|
A breakdown of the official results by county can be found here on the Secretary of State’s website.