Correction: On the CA State business website, two non-profits operate from Jung’s home: Fullerton Jr All American and Garden Grove/Stanton Jr All American. Each is a kids’ sports organization that makes $50,000 or less per year, according to IRS filings. Both were founded and operated by Jung, but now show other people as agents, though still operating from his home. Maybe he is out of the uniform-selling business.
Search for “Why not fully disclosed” on the Observer search bar to see the income from the city and various boards by each councilmember. (Read the article here.)

If you live near the proposed 111 W. Hermosa Dr. project, do not be surprised if you hear the same kind of assurances residents near the Pines Project heard before everything changed. (Read the article here.)

Back then, Fred Jung reportedly told a group of roughly 35 to 50 people that he would fight the project. Later, he shifted course and pushed for it. That is why many residents are asking a simple question now: Will Jung do the same thing again at Hermosa and Harbor after he or someone close to him meets with the developer?

That is the problem with Fullerton politics under Jung. The explanation for a reversal always seems to arrive after the reversal is already underway. Maybe it is a conversation with the staff. Maybe it is a meeting with the developer. Maybe it is a new “concern” that conveniently appears just in time to justify a change of position. The public doesn’t need to guess anymore because we have seen this script before.

And let us be honest: Jung knows the city cannot simply stop this project if state law protects it. So what happens next? If the project goes to court, the city could spend months fighting a case it may well lose, and potentially cost the City up to $14 million. If that happens near election time, Jung could then step in, claim a shift in understanding, and say his vote changed because of “new information” or “state law.” That lets him save face with both sides while still looking flexible and reasonable.

That is the real concern. Not just what he says no to. It is how easily a “no” can turn into a “yes” once the right meeting happens, the right donation is made, the right donor is pleased, or the right narrative is available.

This is not a one-off concern. Residents have watched Jung move through city politics for years, and many still cannot answer a basic question: What exactly is his job?

If he is a businessman, where is the business? If he is a public servant, why does he seem to monopolize every well-paid board, even when it seems to be a conflict of interest, and Fullerton itself gets stuck with the consequences? How does one councilmember and mayor end up with so many paid or appointed roles, from the Orange County Power Authority to the Orange County Water District, LOSSAN, and OCTA, while ordinary residents are told to accept rising costs, limited transparency, and worsening service?

Critics have long pointed out that Jung appears to do very well for someone whose public life never seems to produce clear answers for the people he represents. Meanwhile, residents are left wondering whether his wife’s law practice, his public roles, or his network of political connections are what really sustain him. The point is not gossip. The point is that the public deserves clarity, and it keeps not getting it. His 700 filings say that he sold a business for $10,000 in 2014. He runs a nonprofit out of his home, the Fullerton Bears All-American Football, and another nonprofit that sells uniforms. And yet the disclosure to the city was that he makes no money despite having porches. That is right plural.

The pattern did not start with Hermosa. It did not start with the Pines Project. It goes back to the 2023 “Korean Garden” announcement near the Korean War Memorial, when Jung stood before residents and the Korean Federation members and presented what sounded like a done deal without first showing that he had the authority to do so. (Read the article here.) That moment should have raised alarms. Instead, it became one more example of a mayor making announcements first and sorting out the legal and procedural details later.

There was also the issue of political donors using the city seal on business cards. That should have been a straightforward matter of public ethics. Instead, it became another example of an administration that too often seems to treat rules as flexible depending on who is involved. Jung and the Fullerton Observer had a battle of words, where Jung said that it was a hit piece in the Korean Daily because of politics and racism, and the Fullerton Observer said that it was because Jung had voted not to let anyone, even commissioners whom he appointed, to use the seal and then allowed a bunch of donors and sycophants with made-up titles to use the seal. (Read the article here.)

Then came the city’s millions of dollars in financial problems, including a major accounting error and a budget swing that should have produced a full-throated demand for accountability. Instead, residents got confusion, defensiveness, and a leadership style that seems more interested in managing appearances than confronting failures.

That is the deeper issue in Fullerton. It is not just one project, one vote, or one mayor. It is the slow erosion of trust.

Residents see their concerns brushed aside, meetings handled in ways that feel opaque, and public comment treated as an inconvenience unless a donor speaks. They watch development decisions move forward while neighborhood safety requests languish. They hear promises of transparency, then watch public trust erode one meeting at a time.

Fullerton is still a city worth fighting for. The neighborhoods are strong. The people are engaged. The potential is there. But none of that matters if leadership keeps operating as if the public is unimportant unless they pay to play. Is that prostitution? Isn’t that illegal?

Residents do not need another convenient change of mind. They need honesty, consistency, and leadership that is not determined by who met with whom behind closed doors.

At Hermosa and Harbor, and across Fullerton, the question is no longer whether Jung can give a speech that sounds reassuring. The question is whether residents will finally get a leader who means what he says before the votes are counted.