City Councilmember Fred Jung revealed in a podcast that he has cancer. The ChamberTalk with North Orange County Chamber podcast episode was released in August of this year, and the news of his illness started making the rounds in the Fullerton community soon thereafter, as his treatment showed its physical effects and slowed down his in-person involvement in meetings.
“I have stage 3 cancer. I’ve been through eight rounds of chemo for four months, and this is my second month doing both chemo and radiation five days a week,” said Jung in a phone interview with the Observer on September 27. “There are symptoms that those who have struggled with cancer or who have seen family members struggle with cancer can notice right away.” Chemotherapy causes hair loss, fatigue, irritability and skin changes that Jung says are noticeable.
When asked about his campaign, Jung said, “I can’t campaign in the traditional manner because I’m immunocompromised.” This means no canvassing or shaking hands with voters. Jung is continuing his campaign through mail and digital outreach. He participated in the last two candidate forums hosted by the Fullerton Collaborative and the League of Women Voters.
Share this:
Discover more from Fullerton Observer
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Health, Local Government, Local News
Cancer invariably sucks. Wishing him a speedy recovery and wishing him and his family strength.
So sad to learn. My heart goes out to him and his family.
I am sorry to learn about Mr. Jung’s cancer, and I pray he will be okay. I was asked if I would have gone after Mr. Jung for the misuse of ratepayer funds as he sits on the board of the Orange County Power Authority if I had known that he is battling cancer? And my answer to that is yes, I would have to. Misusing customer funds, deceiving the public about a 100% renewable energy program where the businesses and residents are not even getting 100% but are paying a premium for it, is corruption. I cannot, nor should I, turn a blind eye to this. After all, it was his choice, and his actions that led us down this road. As far as his relationship with Tammy Kim, that has already been made public by the person, or group who took the photo. I will talk about that as well because it causes a lot of concerns as they both sit on a lot of the same boards and can be a conflict of interest. (…)
Dee Ann, would you please explain these charges of corruption you are leveling at Fred Jung? Do you mean to suggest that the energy purported to be 100% renewable generated is, in fact, not?
Matt – the basic rate customers are getting a slightly reduced rate but it is coming from nuclear energy. That disturbs me. The 100% customer rate which is clean is not cheaper – but I think SCE still has a waiting list on 100%.
Also disturbing to me is that OCPA is wasting money on PR when the best PR would be cheap clean non nuclear energy. Of course going with Supervisor Do’s recommendation for an unqualified person to head the agency was a big mistake along with the board’s other bad decisions in the early days. But those errors have now been fixed.
Sharon, as I recall the Fullerton City Council voted for the partial renewable energy option because it was cheaper for residents. I believe Fred voted for the 100% renewable option, and I remember Jesus Silva supporting the cheaper partial option because he thought 100% would be too expensive for some ratepayers in the city. I don’t know if it is this is what you or the suddenly silent Dee Ann, above, are referring to, but I certainly wouldn’t characterize it as corruption on anyone’s part, and I’m surprised that The Observer allows a commenter to use that word in reference to a council candidate without explaining herself. Is this an example of the paper’s new policy on comments?
Matt – I agree with you about not understanding what the “corruption “ comment is about and would also like to hear Dee Ann Roseberry’s explanation of that.
I see OCPA as a good and hopeful step despite its difficult beginnings which Jung, along with the board majority, did have something to do with. Not sure if that was due to corruption or just simply having no clue about what they were doing. Hiring the unqualified unemployed friend to head the agency did seem fishy – maybe that’s what she’s talking about.
Also I would like to see OCPA drop nuclear as a source since we still haven’t figured out what to do with the waste or dangers of it.
Nuclear produces no CO2 so it helps address the crisis at hand. We can get rid of nuclear plants if we want and we probably will but the state has decided we need to extend it for the moment to meet clean air and co2 goals. Further the federal government is putting new money into nuclear as well seeing it as part of the solution.
As to ocpa I think they are doing it right since for the first time we all have a choice to go fully renewable on an individual basis regardless of what the state or SCE does. Or pick a plan with nuclear if we want.
The dangers of fission waste pale in comparison to climate change. Industry handles all manner of nasty stuff, waste management is a NIMBY political problem not really an engineering problem.
I would love to respond to your questions, but I don’t think this site wants me to. What I think I can say that won’t be admonished is, go to Ocpower.org and look at the Quarterly Treasury Reports. All these expenses are not brought before the board, as they should be, when this is a not for profit organization funded solely by its ratepayers.
How does this reply from Irvine resident Dee Fox meet civility? I can just say anything I want about Fred Jung because he is an elected official?
Civility, and the idea that nothing negative can be said about an elected official? So, if not the public, then who is responsible to hold our government leaders accountable? Your city should be outraged that you are put in the position of funding this organization, run by a bunch of City Council members that is another layer of government between you and SCE. How can OCPA supply you with more renewables than SCE? OCPA buys and sells power, that’s all they do. SCE is responsible for the transmission and delivery. Most CCE’s have a very thin profit margin, and only after years of establishing themselves, are they able to buy into renewable energy projects. But the OCPA has millions of dollars in reserves, gives over $90,000 every quarter to CalCCA, which does what for them? Gives non-profits, and organizations that support their campaigns, money from the ratepayers. Buys REC’s from SCE and other utilities to use for proof to the State that THEY purchased the renewables….and I could go on and on. How does the OCPA have so much money and are increasing salaries each year when the OC Board of Supervisors left, and the City of Huntington Beach left? The opt out rate in Irvine is 38%, the average CCE is between 4-6%. According to the Irvine Study that was done, the OCPA should be in default because of such a high opt out rate. But they are not. Why? Who is paying for all these costs? Business accounts is where the OCPA makes the most of their money from, for one of two reasons, or both. 1) They don’t realize that they have been switched over from SCE, 2) their bills get paid automatically through another department and don’t realize their utility bill has significantly increased.
Ocpa could absolutely fail. And the most likely reason will be the kind of FUD that you’re spreading.
It’s this simple: I can’t buy all clean energy from SCE. I can buy it from OCPA, and at a reasonable price. The fact that they aren’t connecting solar panels and windmills straight to my house is of no import to me whatsoever. They arrange contracts for clean generation, it goes on to the grid. If I didn’t sign up that means less ratepayer money going to less clean energy generation. it’s the opportunity to vote with your wallet.
I hope everyone is wise enough to stay opted in or opt back in given the controversial and fraught startup phase is over. They made some initial mistakes. That’s no reason to give up on the CCA model. And if you and your friends end up killing it, there won’t be another CCA to replace it.
Dee, Fullerton residents have benefited greatly from Mayor Pro Tem Jung being on the board. During the city council meeting you mentioned all the investments OCPA has made in Fullerton. You proved it’s doing what they are supposed to do by benefiting the community. No one cares about personal issues. Fullerton Observer should remove the comments to ensure they don’t become the enablers of disinformation and hate coming in from Irvine infecting our city
Oh please. What specific policy are you referring to? I don’t agree with Dee but it seems like political opinion not “disinformation” or “hate” or, uh, “infection”
Dee – I think your charge is incorrect. After looking at everything you suggested I see no corruption by the OCPA board or Mr Jung.
OCPA Basic customers rate is 3% less than SCE (though that does include nuclear). Both the OCPA 71% and 100% energy tiers come from renewables and no nuclear.
While I am not a fan of the Public Relations expenses OCPA is doing or costs of attending conferences I don’t agree those are evidence of corruption on anyone’s part.
Also – I think Director Kathleen Treseder – who, since her appointment on the board, has been the major figure in cleaning up OCPA from its early (possibly corrupt) errors and is an expert on clean energy and Community Choice organizations – would be speaking up if there were such problems.
Anyone can listen to the board meetings online or go in person and ask questions.
Seems like it is working as it should and is quite transparent.
Sharon, allow me to address each of your arguments.
1) I addressed the basic rate that is less than SCE’s basic rate already if it gets posted, but basically the OCPA makes up for that in the second and third tiers where customers are paying a premium, and for the same mix of energy that EVERYONE else receives from SCE. If SCE is unable to provide more renewable power, then how can OCPA? They don’t have their own grid that goes directly into your home, SCE’s grid is where we all get our energy mix from. The OCPA reports on what they have purchased, ONLY, not what they have sold off for profit. In California, since the sun shines the majority of the time, we have an over abundance of renewable energy, and it’s cheap. But California, at least here in the OC, has no way to store all that renewable energy, so the OCPA buys it up and sells it for a profit to places that need it. They keep the receipts for these renewables when they sell them off (known as REC’s), to prove to the State that they purchased renewables, and turn around and buy fossil fuels to give to SCE to load onto their grid. If SCE accepted the renewables that the OCPA sold off, we would all be sitting in the dark when the sun goes down. Think about it. And people started realizing what was going on when the OCPA refused to release their California Independent System Operating Settlement Statements (CAISO), that would show what they purchased, and how much, and what they sold off, and how much, leaving exactly what customers were paying for. Everything else on the reports could be redacted if they claimed confidentiality, which they did. And the OCPA still refused. As one city council member stated, if they did provide those reports it would take down their whole operation. This is the major reason the OCBOS got out, as well as, Huntington Beach. And the reason no other city has signed on since. So the OCPA can claim all day that you are getting 100% renewable energy, but where is the proof? I don’t know about you but when I have to pay a premium for something, I want to make sure I am getting the benefits from the extra money I am shelling out. I am not going to just take someone’s word for it.
2) Kathleen Treseder is not an expert in the energy field. Nor does she have experience in Community Choice Energy programs. If you knew her, or have watched the Irvine City Council meetings, you would be, well I don’t want this post to get deleted, so I will leave it up to you to Google her and her history at UCI. Treseder stated that if she was not able to get Ryan Baron removed from the OCPA in the first few months when she sat on this board, she would agree for Irvine to get out. She would have been the deciding vote. And she came back to our council and said he was gone. Just a few weeks ago, Ryan Baron stood before the last city that hasn’t said no yet to joining the OCPA, Fountain Valley, and answered questions about the OCPA. Treseder is also responsible for the OCPA CEO, Joe Mosca. Please google him and reference Sierra Madre and Encinitas. Have you watched the OCPA Board Meetings? Nothing ever gets disputed, no questions are raised, the meetings are short, nobody conments anymore, especially Climate Action Campaign, who use to hold them accountable. But, the leader of that organization is Treseder’s paid commissioner on the Irvine City Council. And there was another organization also, and that person now works for the OCPA. Not to mention the fact that the meetings are held, usually on a Tuesday at 10AM, when most people are at work.
3) You mentioned transparency …? Please give me some examples. Because the Check Register Log alone, is the opposite of transparency. Have you looked at all the entries? If I was an OCPA customer, I would be extremely upset that these expenditures have nothing to do with renewable energy projects, as I was promised where the funds would go. Not to mention, unable to voice my concerns because how would I even know about them? Upscale restaurants in Newport Beach for over $3,000, Christmas gifts for the entire staff, a salary bonus in May of 2023 of $178,000, as I mentioned before, a Hotel bill for over $14,000, and where I am still waiting on the Public Document Request for the details from this bill which has been over a month. This is an energy company dealing with BILLIONS of ratepayer funds, a not for profit organization, and who is holding them accountable for their spending?
And why should the OCPA ratepayers, who are also from Irvine and Buena Park want to give $5,000 to Tommy Lasorda Day in Fullerton? Or $5,000 to a Fullerton Football League? Why doesn’t the City of Fullerton sponsor their own events? And not to just pick on Fullerton, because Tammy Kim from Irvine has her share of expenditures also, and her selection of organizations are all very consistent. I’m sure Fullerton residents wouldn’t be too happy about supporting her organizations, especially those that are overseas. I mean where do you draw the line?