Supporting local entrepreneurs is essential for the economic vitality of Fullerton. Small businesses play a significant role in driving community engagement, creating jobs, and fostering a sense of belonging among residents.
At the city council meeting on July 15, 2025, concerns were raised about the challenges facing small businesses, particularly regarding the city’s outdoor dining policies. Outdoor dining is not only important for leisure but also enhances community interaction and stimulates the local economy. By increasing foot traffic and sales, outdoor dining contributes to tax revenue that benefits the entire city.
Many small businesses are currently encountering serious financial difficulties due to skyrocketing lease fees for outdoor spaces. Recently, the city tripled the fees for patio usage, placing a heavy burden on these establishments, especially as they attempt to recover from the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. For instance, the patio fee for Les Amis increased from $1,200 to $3,500 per month, while the patio at the train station pays no fee at all. Does that seem fair, considering that both patios are surrounded by railings?
This increase in fees could discourage investment in storefronts and outdoor areas, making it hard for businesses that enhance their spaces to thrive. In contrast, businesses that merely set out chairs and tables with minimal investment in beautifying the area face no similar consequences. This disparity raises concerns about fairness in supporting local businesses.
To effectively support the small business community, a reevaluation of outdoor dining policies is necessary. This includes reconsidering patio fees to create an environment where small businesses can thrive and contribute positively to the economy.
Focusing on creating vibrant public spaces can help local entrepreneurs succeed, which, in turn, strengthens the local economy. Supporting small businesses goes beyond financial considerations; it is also about fostering an attractive community where people want to spend time and money.
Advocating for fair policies will help preserve the unique character of Fullerton and enable local businesses to grow, enhancing the quality of life in the city. The future economic health of Fullerton is closely linked to the well-being of its small business sector. Please call and email your City Council members to advocate for the small businesses that make Fullerton memorable and appealing to both visitors and residents alike.
- District 1: Mayor Fred Jung (714) 738-6311 fred.jung @cityoffullerton.com
- District 2: Nicholas Dunlap (714) 738-6311 nicholas.dunlap@cityoffullerton.com
- District 3:Mayor Pro Tem Dr, Shana Charles (714) 738-6311 shana.charles @cityoffullerton.com
- District 4: Jamie Valencia (714) 738-6311 jamie.valencia@cityoffullerton.com
- District 5: Dr. Ahmad Zahra (714) 738-6311 ahmadz@cityoffullerton.com
On behalf of all small businesses in Fullerton, we are request the following:
1. Stop the lease fee increases immediately, so businesses can continue operating without losing their outdoor spaces.
2. Transition to a reasonable annual permit-based system.
3. Stop penalizing businesses that are invested in the future of this city. They are not part of the problem; they are part of the solution.
Different cities within Orange County have varying regulations and fees regarding restaurant patios and parklets in 2025. It’s important to remember that these are just examples that could be found, and specific regulations and fees may vary depending on the exact location and the nature of the outdoor dining or parklet space. Here’s a summary of the information available:
Brea:
Brea has extended its outdoor dining and parklet program. Outdoor Dining and Outdoor Seating shall be permitted as accessory uses to restaurants in all zones where restaurants are permitted or conditionally permitted (ABC).
Laguna Beach:
Laguna Beach has extended its outdoor dining and parklet program through 2025. Businesses using public parking spaces for parklets face a monthly fee of approximately $1,200. This fee is based on total square footage and market rate value, in addition to a maintenance fee. There are no fees for businesses utilizing private parking or sidewalk areas for outdoor dining.
Anaheim:
Temporary outdoor dining permits expired on July 15, 2022. A city ordinance allows for the permanent conversion of up to three parking spaces in large commercial shopping centers for outdoor dining, subject to specific requirements. The administrative fee for an Outdoor Dining Parklet Permit is $808.
Costa Mesa:
Costa Mesa has streamlined the approval process for outdoor dining areas, as outlined in Ordinance 2024-01, passed on January 16, 2024. Different approval processes apply depending on the location and size of the outdoor dining area (courtyard, setback, or parking areas) and their relationship to the restaurant’s indoor public area or required parking spaces.
Tustin:
The temporary relief from the City’s Special Event Permit requirements and outdoor dining standards ended on July 15, 2022. While no city review or approval fees are required for outdoor seating areas on private property (such as movable chairs and tables), outdoor dining areas that involve construction (like expanding patios or adding fencing) may require Design Review and associated costs. It is recommended to contact a city planner to determine applicable fees. A $1,000 bond or cash deposit may be necessary to ensure proper site restoration for any modifications to public surfaces.
San Clemente:
In San Clemente, restaurants using public spaces for outdoor dining must pay a monthly fee of $200 per parking space.
Encinitas:
As of July 1, 2024, restaurants in Encinitas will be charged a monthly right-of-way usage fee of $2.50 per square foot for outdoor dining parklets. This fee is subject to annual review and adjustment based on the Consumer Price Index.
Share this:
Discover more from Fullerton Observer
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Education, Food, Health, Local Business, Local Government, Local News
One requirement of any outdoor dining space on public property should be an absolute ban on smoking (if such a ban isn’t already in existence).
Also, this piece of advocacy appears to have been written by, or at least on behalf of, local businesses but is published under the name of the Observer’s editor.
Response from Editor Saskia Kennedy: I did write this based on the public comments at the city council meeting on July 15.
Why don’t we advocate for the residents of Fullerton for a change by not allowing business to run roughshod over our rights to quiet space. As it stands i can often hear music from business in downtown fullerton even though i live several blocks away, i cant imagine how it is for those living adjacent. Loosening sound ordinances does not have this resident’s support in the slightest, if anything they should be restricted further.
Response from Editor Saskia Kennedy: The sound ordinance was recently updated. Are you saying that downtown should be quiet? That no one should enjoy music with dinner and maybe a little dancing with their alcohol? What is it that you are proposing? A quiet downtown with quiet people and everything shuts down by 9pm? This is a bustling thriving downtown. There is going to be sound. Personally, I would prefer music to the sound of the traffic right outside my window, but that is not going to get people to stop driving.
No, and a request to have some quiet space is not the same as asking everything be shut down at 9 PM or that no sound be made at all, there is no need to resort to such hyperbole and such arguments are disingenuous at best. That said, the sound from downtown already travels and is disruptive, any notion to relax ordinances clearly is not made with the resident’s best interest in mind.
A reasonable approach balances the need of local residents against the interests of local business. Plenty of local business make it work and without issue. Thriving and bustling downtowns do not start and end with loud music late at night, they have a lot to offer from coffee shops to yoga studious to mixed use office space, to bars and restaurants. Many, if not most, of those establishments succeed just fine without the need to be disruptive to the community, why is it necessary to placate a few at the expense of many?
Response from Editor Saskia Kennedy: I don’t understand how you equate unfair patio fees with sound ordinances.
Jacob – I totally disagree. I live near downtown and love the music.
It is the least disruptive of the noises when living downtown – which include the loud trains, traffic, and even Disney fireworks.
Plus this article is about outdoor dining not loud music. I also love outdoor dining. I really miss Walk on Wilshire and what it could have been with a few improvements. And I love Les Amis – I thought the Montechristo’s message at the July 15 council meeting was heartbreaking. I think Fullerton should copy Brea’s annual permit idea – and that permit should be reasonable.
What is Fullerton trying to do – chase away great businesses we want here?
If anyone gets a petition started on this I want to sign it.
from what i understand, les amis hasnt paid for the space in years. why are we giving them use of city land for free?
Response from Editor Saskia Kennedy: Are you suggesting that Fullerton should not allow patios? Should they take back all City land? Close all patios and encroachments?
Curious to know where your understanding came from?
1. Although we’ve fallen behind on several occasions we’ve always ended up paying
2. Understand that as vital as patios are to the cities appeal, they are used about 30% of the time due to the elements and so charging a monthly lease per square foot is unreasonable
3. Understand that the patios placed are partially to protect the business from vandalism. Every window has been vandalized prior to the fence barrier
4. Understand that if there is no patio, it would just sit empty with 0 revenue to the city. Furthermore, it would look dull and uninviting
I could go on as there is a lot more to understand but I hope you get the gist.
my understanding comes from asking about the situation from council and submitting records requests. You go on social media to cry about it but dont tell the truth on how you VOLUNTARILY agreed to those rates but continue to not pay them. Also if you always pay then why is the city currently threatening to take away your patio space for?
You say that the city doubled your payment amount but leave out that you added a second patio. you cry about the new rates and leave out how you still owe money from when you were paying the lower rates.
If you cant afford the patio then dont have the patio, why should the city subsidize your personal business.
I think the city should just install outdoor seating for all businesses to use and not allow a single business to monopolize the space.
You also say that with no patio there is 0 revenue to the city BUT THERE ISNT ANY REVENUE NOW BECAUSE YOU DONT PAY. whats the difference then.
Wow Ron – that’s quite a harsh response to Les Amis. She is bringing up some very good questions as does this opinion piece. And there may be others in her same situation who are just not brave enough to ask those questions. What do we want to see in our downtown? I want outdoor dining spaces everywhere. I would like to reinstate WoW. I do agree that our city should see outdoor patios as a plus for businesses and a public good for residents. Why have a boring town when we can make it fun?
Oh and im not bringing up good points about the lies les amis is spreading about the situation?
1. why did she not pay her lease when the rate was lower?
2. why did she sign a new lease and add a patio knowing about higher rates?
Ron – Sounds like you misunderstood. Les Amis DOES pay for its patio space and they said they don’t mind paying a fair rate.
At the council meeting they objected to the city doubling their patio lease fee – which is disturbing – and for extra being added on as backpay for covid years (when no one was making money).
All restaurants in Fullerton suffered during covid – thus Walk on Wilshire was opened as a shared outdoor dining space with no fees for any business so diners could maintain the distancing rules. I don’t think it is fair to charge Les Amis for its use of public land during that time when other restaurants had no fees for using WoW. After covid those businesses that wanted to keep outdoor dining available to customers did pay a monthly charge – and constructing and maintaining that space on WoW was up to the business. (I still feel so bad about Mulberry Street which constructed a parklet at great expense but was then forced to shut down after Valencia and Jung voted NO on keeping the 200-foot WoW open.)
Currently if the city is charging fees – why should the Train Cafe’s enclosed patio not be charged at all? And – does the city maintain/clean the Train Cafe patio – at what expense? Les Amis completely maintains/cleans its patio space at their own expense – as they should – if it is for exclusive use.
Questions need to be answered and a more fair fee/lease structure devised. I want the vibrancy of outdoor dining downtown encouraged instead of discouraged. I think – with fair safety and access regulations- it is a great use of public space.
looking at the city website it seems like fullerton fees are actually lower than some of the cities you listed
https://www.cityoffullerton.com/home/showpublisheddocument/6221/637915649658670000
Dear Advocate, Really? What cities are you looking at that have higher fees? Please list them.
ED Response: The article lists several cities that charge a once a year fee less than Fullerton’s monthly charge plus one time fee and a couple that charge a monthly fee higher that Fullerton’s.
Thank you for the excellent op-ed, Saskia. Here’s what I have found in the public record:
The city’s Outdoor Dining Guidelines (2024) state that Engineering “determines the lease rate” at their discretion — there’s no fixed formula published.
The Master Fee Schedule lists only a one-time $612.18 encroachment fee. Nowhere does it include a per-square-foot or monthly patio rent.
So where is the $3,500/month figure coming from? If accurate, that fee isn’t just steep — it’s out of step with published city policy. That alone calls for immediate clarity.
I support the call for transparency and urge the Council to:
Suspend the fee immediately
Publish a consistent rate structure
Include small business owners in the review
Refund or adjust overcharges already paid
I also suggest someone formally interview Engineering about how these patio lease rates are calculated. If the process is fair and consistent, it should be explainable.
The difference between what the cities listed above and Fullerton is that the cities listed above are charging for parking spaces that are being used for outdoor dining. What Fullerton is charging for is space around buildings that would otherwise be vacant and unused. If these space were left vacant, it would give the downtown a much more empty appearance, making the area less vibrant and less attractive for visitors.
The loss of these spaces would also make visiting downtown less appealing.
An annual permit fee seems appropriate. Charging a rate per square foot for space that would be vacant otherwise seems ridiculous. Not to mention these businesses also have to maintain the area as well.