Fullerton is a city with potential. It has history, stunning architecture, and a downtown full of unique small businesses adored by the community. But alongside these strengths are real problems: the roads are crumbling, the city faces a looming budget deficit, and public trust in the City Council is at an all-time low. So the question becomes: what can Fullerton actually do to address these issues?

These problems have real, far-reaching consequences. Poor road conditions burden residents with costly repairs. The budget deficit constrains what the city can offer, limiting public transit, parks, and infrastructure upkeep. And the lack of trust in City Hall creates a political environment where residents are treated like enemies, not constituents. Instead of focusing on solutions, people are stuck documenting the newest scandal in a never-ending list of failures.

But if dysfunction is the problem, what does a better Fullerton actually look like?

First, the City Council must focus on restoring transparency and trust. That starts with tightening rules around conflicts of interest. Right now, California’s Levine Act requires public officials to recuse themselves from decisions involving campaign contributors who gave more than $500 in the last year. Fullerton should go further, expanding that timeframe to four years and lowering the threshold to $250. We should also prohibit Councilmembers from appointing any individual to a board or commission if that person has donated above that same amount to them. Public appointments should be about qualifications, not campaign checks.

Second, Fullerton should launch a District Equity Report, an annual breakdown of where public works funds are going by Council district. At the very least, the city should publish a simple map with pins and dollar amounts. A digital dashboard could follow. We govern by district, and we should be budgeting that way, too. Transparency like this would go a long way in rebuilding public trust.

The city should also experiment with participatory budgeting. This would set aside a small portion of the budget, say $50,000 to $100,000, and let residents vote on how that money gets spent. Murals, shade structures, lighting, signage: small improvements that matter to neighborhoods. If the pilot works, it can grow. Cities like Oakland and Vallejo have done this already. It boosts civic engagement and gives people real ownership over their tax dollars.

And while road repairs are important, we need to talk about why our roads are constantly in disrepair. A major reason is that Fullerton’s infrastructure is serving far more people than the city actually collects revenue from. Cal State Fullerton has over 40,000 students, yet it offers only a fraction of the housing needed. Most live elsewhere and commute in, using our roads and services, but paying rent and sales tax in neighboring cities. That’s lost revenue we never get back.

And yet, we’ve made it illegal to build more than one unit in much of the city, including near campus and transit. Some argue that adding housing would ruin Fullerton’s charm. I disagree. This city has incredible architecture worth protecting, from the Spaghetti Factory building to Fullerton College to the beautiful Spanish-style homes that define so much of our identity. Preservation and progress aren’t enemies. In fact, many historic buildings can be refurbished or adaptively reused to honor our past while meeting modern needs.

There’s a housing crisis and the state is determined to solve it. Cities that lead will grow their tax base and economic vitality. Cities that dig in their heels will be left behind.

Finally, Fullerton should embrace its small businesses by reviving the pedestrian plaza known as Walk on Wilshire. Despite little city advertising, it was a hit, drawing visitors from across Orange County. With proper planning, lighting, and trees, it could become a vibrant promenade that anchors downtown Fullerton’s identity. We don’t need to build a new downtown; we just need to make it work for people again. A walkable hub filled with small businesses is good for revenue, good for residents, and good for the council members looking to leave a legacy. On October 15, 2024, Mayor Pro Tem Jung stated that Walk on Wilshire needed to be done right and that meant a full closure. However, when a full closure plan was presented on January 21, 2025, Jung voted against it, effectively killing the project. This wasn’t about doing it right. It was about not doing it at all.

Fullerton deserves to be a city that’s transparent, equitable, and forward-looking. We don’t need a charter to do any of this. What we need is leadership. Less fighting with residents. More vision. More action. Fullerton has the tools; now it’s time to use them. The status quo is costing us, in dollars, in trust, and in potential. The question isn’t whether change is possible. It’s whether our leaders are willing to deliver it.

Support our advertisers click an ad below.