WOW
The formation and evolution of the downtown area now known as Walk On Wilshire has been well documented here and has recently seen more activity. Supporters contacted us to keep that section of Wilshire closed to traffic and use it for other purposes; as we saw on the past two Thursdays, Fullerton Market expanded its area in WOW. Here are their comments and some further info:
Save Walk on Wilshire is a group of local residents fighting for the pedestrian area of Wilshire west of Harbor, near the Villa del Sol. They are working to convince the City Council to retain vehicle closure in their October 15th vote. They have also been participating in the Thursday Night Farmer’s Market and other events, spreading the word, selling locally printed tee shirts, and gathering petition signatures.
Future programming includes Chalk on Wilshire on September 8th from 2 to 6pm. Please join them and add your chalk drawings to the street for this fun, free, all-ages event. For more information, or to help the cause, email Savewalkonwilshire@gmail.com.
Sign the petition using the QR above or at tinyurl.com/savewalkonwilshire.
Other ways you can support WoW:
• Buy a Save WoW shirt
• Volunteer to table at events
• Attend City Council meetings and speak during public comments, especially on October 15th.
•Lend your talents to future programming in the space if you are able!
New In Town
Sad to see Monkeys go, but Cat O Comb barber shop is coming to their former location on North Harbor, ready to tidy up your hair and beard, too, we would imagine.
Tacos El Russi is coming into the space formerly occupied by Pour Vida at 100 West Commonwealth. We can’t get enough Mexican cuisine, so welcome to our downtown.
Cooperstown?
Riddle us this: who landed a stolen airplane in Fullerton and is still mystifying thousands of amateur sleuths who have spent decades trying to unravel his case? The case is the longest unsolved crime of its kind in FBI history. Was he a combination of Billy The Kid and Robin Hood? Throw in some James Bond or Don Draper. Or was he a former Army helicopter pilot who had been awarded a Silver Star for valor, a guy by the name of Robert Rackstraw? If you have never heard that name until now, you are not alone; yet, he may be the most intriguing pilot ever to enter our airspace.
We have known for some time that our readers are attached to our ‘berg’ in ways that other Orange County residents may not be so much. People come and go all the time, but many have called Fullerton home for decades and even entire lifetimes, so some of you long-timers may know something about the Fullerton connection to Rackstraw. Most of us think of Fullerton as a town that began with agriculture. We know about the farms, the goats, the walnuts, the oranges, even the ostriches, but maybe not so much about pig ranches or D.B. suspects. Are you out there still?
Our municipal airport has been in operation since 1927. Back in 1972, a man named Rackstraw arrived in Fullerton in a stolen Cessna 172, where he repainted it. If Robert Rackstraw was indeed the infamous D.B. Cooper, then Mr. Cooper made Fullerton his town after the well-known caper.
The Cessna in the picture is featured in the documentary “D.B. Cooper: Where Are You?!” on Netflix. The plane was made in 1966 and was previously owned by a Garden Grove resident before being deregistered for “Expiration.”
D.B. Cooper hijacked Northwest Orient Flight 305 in 1971 and got away with $200,000 in cash after he jumped out at 10,000 feet over southwest Washington. Any other facts regarding him before and after that night are almost non-existent, but many believe he was the man who landed in Fullerton, changed the numbers on the stolen plane, and got a job here. Other suspects (over 800) have been eliminated, but for many of those obsessed with the case, Rackshaw is their man.
And so, here is the ruse. We have joined the Cooperites and are hoping for clues from any of you who were here saw him, worked with Rackstraw, know where he worked, or have any other info about his presence. How about it? Come on, spill the beans. Reach out and flesh out this story. Props to friend and aviation fan Charlie for the tip on this caper.
Photo Quiz
Send an answer to Mike at AllMedia@sbcglobal.net
This time: This business took over from one that went on to become known worldwide. Name that business.
Last time: Yeah, you readers are paying attention. You noted that the fire escape is on the west side of Villa del Sol, in plain view but largely unnoticed, except by our exceptional readers.
Share this:
Discover more from Fullerton Observer
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Downtown, Local News
Expanding the Thursday night market to the Walk on Wilshire is a clear example of city employees colluding with resident activists to help determine a specific outcome of a future council decision. The Walk on Wilshire is supposed be an outdoor dining area for participating restaurants—-and that is all. To arbitrarily decide that the traffic closure is now justified by city sponsored events is a biased decision on the part of city staff to influence the council’s ultimate decision to either maintain the street closure or reopen the street to vehicular traffic.
If the so called Walk on Wilshire needs not only organizing and petitions by supporters but also a helping hand from city staff to stay open, then it obviously isn’t drawing enough diners to justify continuing the street closure. That block of West Wilshire has been closed for dining for FOUR YEARS. Only one restaurant even bothered to install something like what the city required for seating outside. If the outdoor dining area was ever going to draw enough people to justify continuing its existence it would have happened by now without civic supporters or the supposedly neutral city staff having to urge people to patronize it. No amount of chalk drawings on the street will alter that fact.
Business owners were asked for feedback about WoW and some had specific recommendations for what would make it more workable and appealing for them.
So it could have been forty years, you don’t know what the support is with issues addressed.
More restaurants will spend the money required to join the outdoor dining feature. They have said they don’t want to spend the money before the city makes it permanent. Perfectly reasonable. Features like WoW make a city special and fun. In fact without resident spearheading the downtown plaza and park and even the museum center – all those would be high rise office buildings now which was the original city plan. Happily residents did get together – then as now – to lobby for a more creative idea. I hope council listens.
Why should the city make it permanent if the restaurants aren’t willing to spend the money up front? And why should taxpayers subsidize what is now, evidently, another plaza when, as you point out, there is already one just down the street, one that sits empty most of the time?
Why should restaurants spend the money to set up a permanent structure that will just have to be removed at more expense on whim of council decision?
It makes business sense to wait before investing.
I live here and want more features not fewer.
And though I don’t personally – for instance – play at the park across from the museum center – I am always happy to see those who do.
Same with all features – some will use and others will go elsewhere.
Cities with wonderful features are more successful for everyone – business and residents.
“The whim of a council decision?” Are you kidding? This entire escapade originated from the “whim” of a city manager four years ago who decided by fiat to close a section of West Wilshire for dining with absolutely no official sanction by, or reported input from, the city council, the public, or anyone else. It’s no wonder his “contract wasn’t renewed,” as they say.
The issue isn’t whether or not you or I play in a park, it’s that we already have a giant plaza for the downtown market that sits empty most of the time and now the city decides that it needs another part of Wilshire, on the other side of Harbor Blvd (!), for the Thursday night market because not enough people go there on their own to eat to justify continuing the outdoor dining program that’s supposed to be the justification for closing that block to traffic—required seating infrastructure or not. This is mission creep: keep a money losing government sponsored program going at all costs even if it doesn’t serve the purpose for which it was (unilaterally) founded.
I can tell you don’t live downtown Matt. When restaurants were allowed to put tables up without creating a costly permanent structure they did that and it was well-attended. When the new permanent requirement started without assurance that the area would stay an outdoor plaza most decided to wait for that assurance before spending the money to construct and then be faced with future cost of removing construction.
Even despite the ugly orange barriers at beginning it was a fun place.
If it becomes permanent it will be well-used again and adds to the draw, walk ability, and charm we are somewhat lacking downtown.
I know Jane is working for Jung who is against it because of Bushala being against it and so understandable that you have a different point of view.
So you just kinda proved everyone’s point about your inability to make an argument based on facts by making up your own, like Trump.
I do not and never have worked for Fred Jung. I am a volunteer treasurer who has accepted nothing more than some delectable Asian pears at Christmas.
Get your facts right or sit down.
Didn’t realize that would be an insult to you. Working on a campaign is working.
Not an insult. Just a lie.
Work is something a person gets paid for. You don’t get paid when you volunteer. Therefore, not work.
Sharon, since you have no problem publicly (and falsely) ascribing my motives for opposing the West Wilshire street closure to some vague and fanciful chain of influence beginning with property owner Tony Bushala, who has a legitimate concern about WoW because his small business tenants say they are negatively affected by the street closure, to Mayor Pro Tem Fred Jung, who has quite effectively raised campaign funds without Tony’s help, to Jane Rands, who acts as a volunteer treasurer for Fred Jung’s campaign just because she likes doing it (and for other candidates, by the way), and then to me, I await your equally public explanation of how my opinions are dependent on any of these relationships.
If you want to know why I oppose the continuation of the West Wilshire street closure you can read my comments here or listen to them during council meetings, and then consider the merits of my arguments without any need to make up extraneous reasons for my positions on the issue.
I really dislike people beating up on staff for trying to make fun things happen and for coming up with compromises like they did for the UP trail – which you, Jane, Zenger, Bushala also opposed even though the neighborhoods want it. Also don’t like the mean things said to Amy who always has interesting and helpful comments.
Yes Fred is doing very well raising money from outside of town interests. (Does make me want to make a rule that all contributions must come from within the district). He has been thoroughly supported by local developer Bushala in both direct contributions and in independent expenditures against his opponent from Tony’s PAC which may have helped him get elected in the first place ($65,000 spent in that 2020 election just in opposing challengers to Jung and Whitaker and personal contributions to the limit in 2022 even though Fred wasn’t running). Fred calls Tony his friend but that friendship may end if he can’t be directed to do things Tony wants.
I don’t have anything against a person standing up for what they believe in. I don’t like dirty campaigning or when a person’s motives for opposing improvements are not for the greater good.
Shutting down that tiny bit of street hurts no one – especially since most parking is in the back. Of the three businesses that said it was hurting their business only one actually fronts the street (and there may be other reasons they are having problems). All the non-Bushala-connected businesses are for it.
Same old bickering. Can you just stand down on whatever your beef is with Tony?
And all of what you write above has exactly what to do with my supposed motivations for my opinions about the West Wilshire closure?
The Walk on Wilshire can be whatever the public wants it to be. That’s the beauty of a pedestrianized space. It can be an outdoor dining area, an outdoor market, a meeting space for locals, a venue for public events, a quiet area to stroll around. Recently we’ve even seen a dance group use it to film a music video. We should embrace such a creative evolution of a versatile space. It is stupid to say, ‘Well, that wasn’t the original narrow vision, so let’s shut it down.’
Any public area needs organizational support to host events. Arguing that that is a reason to shut down WoW is also stupid. Do you think public events just fall out of the sky? The Thursday downtown market, one of the city’s most-visited, successful, and beloved events, needs city support to happen. Would you advocate for pulling the plug on the Thursday downtown market?
The only reason more businesses haven’t built parklets is because COUNCIL have not directed staff to look into making the space permanent. Few business owners are willing or able to invest tens of thousands of dollars into a space that Council can, on a whim, decide to close. That goes double when the Council majority is weak enough to be swayed by the capricious desires of a single, greedy, selfish, and monomaniacal real estate developer-cum-campaign donor. How are small business owners suppost to compete with that?
Meanwhile, the city derives significant revenue from WoW as it is. It would be even more financially beneficial to make WoW permanent and encourage more restaurants to participate in the parklet program, but it would be financially irresponsible to dismantle WoW entirely.
The vast majority of the public and businesses support keeping and improving WoW. Only Bushala supporters like you want it closed, probably just to support his own selfish desires. I don’t see why one arrogant jerk’s personal whims should supersede the ardent wishes of the general public and small business owners.
As an aside, Matt, I used to look up to you and Jane, but nowadays I am so disapppointed in what you have become.
“The Walk on Wilshire can be whatever the public wants it to be…” Amy, where is the plan for “whatever the public wants it to be?” The street closure had a stated purpose—to keep restaurants in business during the worst of COVID. The government can’t just decide that a public street can be used for whatever it wants to do with it at any time it wants to do so. If you and other members of the public have another plan for it, present it to the city government and get it officially adopted. Meanwhile, the government shouldn’t be taking sides on the issue.
As for your aside, I don’t even know who you are since you can’t be bothered to include your last name and take responsibility for your public comments, so I’m not really concerned about what you think about me or anyone else. I suggest you keep your personal disappointments to yourself. We’re discussing issues here, not people.
PS, my motivations for reopening the 100 block of West Wilshire have zero to do with Tony Bushala or anyone else you choose to insult and misrepresent with ad hominem character attacks.
And my opposition to the closure of W Wilshire initially, was because we had worked so hard to get the first bike Blvd in all of Orange County, right here in little old Fullerton. Now that’s a “WOW!”
(Not to mention the 3 miles of new pavement through a long-neglected historical neighborhood.)
Then on a Thursday night during CoVID, we saw “No Bicycle” signs as we traveled down our street. WTF! A quick call to city hall identified the culprit. Ken Domer.
Post CoVID and following unsafe bike detours, a years worth of being ignored by staff while serving on the Active Transportation Committee (ATC), ugly orange barriers erected by the traffic engineer (for which I received nasty complaints as the chair of ATC), there was finally a plan for a trial opening of the bike Blvd that might actually work.
But then that gets botched too. The restaurants that wanted to continue serving food in the street were supposed to build parklettes to meet ADA standards and demarcate the dining from the bike Blvd. This didn’t happen as planned, approved, and agreed to.
Why? You got me. But now we have a rather elaborate set of bollards in street and only partial parklets.
My recommendation at this point is to remove the Ballard in the center, build the parklets in the parking lanes only, get the tables off of the sidewalk, and let the bike and cars use the street and the pedestrians use the sidewalk.
Put in 15 mph signage. With the street that narrow, few will choose it over Chapman or Commonwealth.
You can still block the whole street for special occasions if needed like the other side.
This is a reasonable compromise that supports all business needs on W Wilshire, reduces ped/bike conflicts, allows traffic and emergency vehicles access without the impediment of bollards to remove, and makes EVERYONE happy.
Except the haters. Word.
1) “reduces ped/bike conflicts,”
Seems like that’s better solved for WoW with::no cars
2) “allows traffic and emergency vehicles”
Fake problem already address by the removable bollards
3) makes EVERYONE happy
Are you serious with 3?
I disagree with the design you described because any car traffic would interfere with public enjoyment of the space.
The vision you describe would create avenues for walking, bicycling, driving, and dining. But any other activities would be precluded – strolling, sitting without dining, public events, markets, etc. I’ve even seen parents teaching their kids to ride bikes on WoW, specifically because it’s a safe, open, semi-shaded, car-free space. People already use the space for those activities, so restoring car access would prevent activities that people are already using the space for.
There is also the consideration that any car traffic instantly reduces public enjoyment of a space.
As for emergency vehicles, they already have ready access to WoW.
Re: traffic – in other comments, you implied tbat WoW was causing car traffic, but you also mention that a 15 MPH speed limit and narrow car ROW would not allow much traffic and most would choose to drive on Chapman and Commonwealth anyway. To this I say: 1) These statements seem contradictory. 2) Downtown has car traffic, period. The only way to improve, as with any car traffic issue, it is to reduce the need to drive to downtown, or encourage people to park further away and then walk downtown, which seems totally reasonable.
You mention cars idling in front of Made, but it cars were to return to this stretch of Wilshire, they would be idling through here as well due to general downtown traffic congestion, and those fumes would be harmful to a greater number people in the form of outdoor diners.
If all the parklets are built, then there will be no car parking on WoW. So all that will happen is a couple hundred cars will saunter through per day.
Re: 15 MPH speed limit, it’s unlikely car drivers will respect this. The area in front of the downtown plaza is 15 MPH but drivers routinely ignore this, speeding through at 25+ MPH.
Restoring car access to WoW won’t meaningfully impact downtown traffic congestion, but it will degrade the usability of the space. A lose-lose.
This is why I don’t view restoring car access as a compromise, but rather a lose-lose option – it fundamentally reduces the usability of the space simply to move a few cars through, which doesn’t benefit anyone. You said that everyone would be happy, but I disagree – the vast majority of the public and businessrs want it to remain car-free and would be unhappy with restoring car traffic.
I truly don’t understand the desire to get rid of WoW in its current form, especially as it’s the opinion of an extreme minority of people. Most want it to stay, the public love it, the businesses benefit from it, and it’s a popular spot. I really do not understand the desire to get rid of it.
If I’m the Jane you are referring to, 1) who are you please? (I know more than one Amy.) 2) don’t believe the hype and slander from Saskia and Sharon.
I’m really tired of it. I’m also tired of their biased reporting. That’s why I have been slandered. Because I didn’t get in line with their endorsement of Ahmad when he was running for my Council District and they would not even meet with the other candidates. They’re driven by hate and divisiveness.
Sharon and Tony have been battling FOREVER and Sharon takes the bait and ramps it up even more. Just stop if you’re a real news source. Give up your personal bickering for the sake of our town over your ego.
Matt, Jessie and I were moving the paper away from that when her daughter drove everyone away from the paper.
Now I’ve said it! It’s in the open. Let’s stop pretending it’s ok.
As you know that is not why you and Matt don’t “work” on the paper anymore. We do miss Jesse’s great contributions.
Also apparently you missed all the unbiased truthful informative coverage the Observer did for that election and does for each election year.
Sharon, I can’t speak for Jane or Jesse, but I had to stop contributing to the paper to care for a family member. When I did write for The Observer, covering water issues, the first stories on the Wilshire street closure, the police killing of Hector Hernandez, regular and detailed updates about the county’s response to the COVID, and many other subjects, I tried to do so with a journalistically professional and balanced approach to each story. I would hope you and other readers would read my comments in the same spirit of reasonably unbiased argument.
Nope. Not seeing it. In fact you confused poor old Truxaw who thought that because you excluded the city of residence for donors living in Fullerton (in an attempt to justify your headline?), he thought that meant there was no city identified on Fred’s 460 filings. As candidate running in the same district as Fred, he wrote on his campaign Facebook feed that people should be concerned. But there isn’t need for any concern. Info is there. It was just a case of biased reporting.
By the way, your comparative headline makes no sense. Fred cannot have the most of any category of contribution if there is nothing to compare it to, due to Truxaw having no contributions to report at all.
Sharon, please tell me why we stopped volunteering after 15 years.
All I know is that over 100 people received an email from Saskia saying that Matt and I are “not to be trusted” after participating in a discussion with other volunteers, you and Saskia, in which we opposed Ahmad’s endorsement for myriad reasons.
Jane Rands,
I think you are the one doing the slandering and seriously distorting the story to make yourself the hero.
Your actions and words in public show who you really are.
The truth is that you are Fred Jungs treasurer and did not like an email where I stated my personal opinion on who I wanted to endorse and asked everyone else on the team who they endorsed to see if there was any individual candidate that we all agreed on that the paper as a whole could endorse. Because you disagreed with my opinion, you sent out a series of hateful emails that caused everyone on the team to email me individually to tell me their discomfort with your vicious and slanderous emails.
You and Matt stopped contributing to the paper even before that incident. Jesse La Tour left the paper on good terms as far as I know.
I do not hold any animosity against you or anyone for their opinions. I will always be civil to you, Matt, and Jesse even if I do not share the same opinion and even if you slander me and my family. –Saskia Kennedy
Please produce such emails, Saskia.
Question: Are the businesses against WOW or are the property owners against it? Or both? If the property owners are against it because of some ulterior motive, that’s one thing. But if the businesses themselves are against it, and purportedly losing business, they should be accommodated, and rapidly, RE the changes they want, or WOW — as charming as it is — ought to be scrapped, in my view. If it’s bad and impractical for businesses, it doesn’t matter how lovely it is for us residents. We’ll see attrition, won’t we? And it will be tough to attract other restaurants, cafes, etc.
Exactly. The residents who have come to council are overwhelmingly in support. The businesses on that tiny stretch are in support. Other businesses that aren’t on the WoW probably see no benefit. One wanted it expanded to include his business.
Maybe since there is no parking on Harbor we could close down all side streets except the ones that lead to the parking lots and turn downtown into kind of a mall where there would be comfortable seating areas near to all restaurants and cafes.
Brady, perhaps someone who runs a newspaper in Fullerton could go over and ask all of these business owners directly instead of relying on comments made at council meetings for reporting on the issue.
Hi Matt, I did talk to many of the business owners on and around WoW before any of the articles about WoW went to print. I did not rely solely on comments made at the council meetings. Please stop assuming you know everything about my conversations and movements. Saskia Kennedy
I spoke to many businesses owners on and off WoW. They said it has not hurt their business. It was the selling point for two new owners. The businesses that do not like it are Back Alley, Zings, Les Amis, and Pilgrims Coffee. Several businesses have said that they would like more events on WoW such as swap meet, farmers market, festivals and so on. It has been featured in the LAist as a destination in Fullerton. With the cities help it could be a proper promenade.
Les Amis, Back Alley, and Zings don’t front Wilshire and instead have access off the parking lot where everyone parks to go to those three. There may be other reasons for them coming forward. Pilgrims has parking right in front of their building down the street from WoW which they rent from Bushala. I can understand they might be jealous of coffee shops on WoW with outdoor space though they do have a table on the sidewalk.
One of the four was in favor of extending WoW farther down the street – though that would get in the way of the parking garage beneath the apartment complex.
Les Amis does front Wilshire. There are public doors facing Wilshire right next to the other restaurants on the south side of the street. The entrance is used for take out orders, but the entrance leads into the rest of the restaurant and the patio dining on the west side of the building.
Yeah – front door is on parking lot side. Love Les Ami’s. It is a great place. Observer used to have a rack there years ago until Bushala wanted it gone.
Again, mission drift. This is supposed to be an outdoor dining area, not an extension of the downtown plaza. If the business owners need special events to draw diners to WoW, then it is already failing. If the city wants to plan a promenade they should present a plan first, not just unilaterally hold public events in the street.
Yes! They blocked mine too.