Residents who oppose new sales tax measures in Fullerton often raise three broad concerns: the cost burden on shoppers, skepticism about whether new taxes will solve structural budget issues, and concern about government credibility and accountability.
Sales taxes are paid by everyone who shops in Fullerton, regardless of income. Economists widely describe sales taxes as regressive because they take a larger share of income from lower-income households. If one or both proposed half-cent measures were approved, residents and visitors would pay more on every taxable purchase made in the city.
Opponents argue that raising the combined sales tax rate above 7.75% could also make Fullerton businesses less competitive compared to neighboring cities with lower rates, potentially driving shoppers and sales activity to other communities.
One of the most common questions about any local tax measure is whether it includes a sunset clause—a built-in expiration date that would require voters to renew the tax after a set period. A tax with no sunset remains in effect indefinitely once approved.
As of this writing, official city materials show that staff were directed to prepare sales tax measure options, but final ballot language has not been publicly confirmed. Residents may want to ask whether the proposed measures would include sunset provisions and, if so, how long they would last.
Special taxes, unlike general taxes, are legally required to be spent on specific purposes and require a two-thirds vote for approval. Official city materials indicate the proposed measures are being prepared as special taxes—one for infrastructure and one for public safety.
However, opponents note that even with special tax restrictions, the specific spending commitments, oversight mechanisms, and accountability measures matter. Residents may want to ask: What specific projects or services would be funded? Who would oversee spending? Would independent audits be required? What happens if priorities change after the tax is approved?
Some residents worry that raising new revenue could reduce urgency to address underlying fiscal challenges. Local reporting has described projected deficits, a disclosed accounting error, and pressure on city reserves.
The concern, as expressed by some commentators and residents, is that new tax revenue might allow the city to continue current spending patterns rather than making structural changes to its budget. Others counter that some level of new revenue may be necessary regardless of reforms.
Recent reporting has raised questions about budget transparency and management. A reported $2.9 million accounting error disclosed in spring 2026, combined with shifting deficit projections, has led some residents to question whether the city has earned the public trust necessary to ask for additional tax revenue.
Opponents suggest that before asking voters for more money, the city should demonstrate improved financial management, transparent reporting, and a clear plan for addressing existing budget challenges. They point to the pattern of past tax proposals—including the defeated 2020 Measure S—as evidence that residents want accountability before additional taxation.