You searched for budget deficit - Page 3 of 4 - Friends For Fullerton's Future

March 21, 2026March 21, 2026Behind Closed Doors

Don’t Worry, Be Happy!

The City of Fullerton has issued a press release to address the recent revelation that $10,000,000 was erroneously counted in general reserves when it really belonged in special restricted categories. Peruse this soporific and condescending verbiage and see if you can read a single reference to City employees having made a mistake, honest or otherwise.

Alternatively, take an Ambien and relax. Everything’s gonna be fine.

City of Fullerton Budget Update

At the March 17, 2026, City Council meeting, City staff presented an agenda item titled “Second Quarter Financial Report for Fiscal Year (FY) 2025–26 and Mid-Year Budget Adjustments.” The purpose of this item was to provide an overview of the City’s financial position through mid-year FY 2025–26, report on revenues and expenditures from July 1, 2025, through December 31, 2025, and present the updated financial position based on the finalized FY 2024–25 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR). Following this presentation, the City would like to provide additional context and clarification to support a clear and shared understanding of the information discussed.

The City Council adopted the Fiscal Year 2024–25 budget on June 4, 2024, which included a planned structural deficit of approximately $9.4 million. As part of that budget, it was understood that the City would utilize a portion of its reserves—similar to drawing from savings—to balance the difference between revenues and expenditures. This approach was discussed publicly during the budget adoption process.

Throughout FY 2024–25, the City took steps to manage costs, including holding vacant positions and limiting expenditures where feasible. As a result of these efforts, the City reduced the actual year-end operating deficit to approximately $5.7 million, reflecting ongoing attention to fiscal responsibility.

At the close of Fiscal Year 2024–25, the City’s General Fund—the primary operating fund used to provide essential services such as police, fire, parks, and infrastructure—reported a total fund balance of $30.0 million. A fund balance can be thought of as the City’s overall savings. Of this amount, $19.8 million is held in the City’s contingency reserve, which serves as the City’s emergency fund to maintain services during economic uncertainty or unexpected events.

A portion of the City’s fund balance—approximately $10.2 million—is categorized as restricted, committed, or assigned for specific purposes. During the fiscal year, approximately $2.7 million was more clearly designated within these categories, increasing the allocated portion of the City’s savings from approximately $7.5 million to $10.2 million. These funds support important community priorities such as capital improvements, General Plan updates, Downtown parking, and street and infrastructure improvements, including road repairs. These funds remain part of the City’s overall financial resources but are set aside for their intended purposes.

Additionally, a $2.9 million prior-period adjustment identified through the City’s independent audit was related to the proper classification of assets between the General Fund and the Successor Agency. This adjustment ensures that funds are reflected in the appropriate account in accordance with accounting standards. The funds were not lost or misspent, but rather properly reallocated.

At the end of FY 2024–25, the City’s contingency reserve was approximately 14% of annual General Fund expenditures, which is above the City’s minimum policy requirement of 10%, though below the long-term goal of 17%. Based on current projections, the City is anticipated to end FY 2025–26 with approximately 12% in reserves, which remains within policy guidelines.

There has also been discussion regarding a potential 2% reserve level. It is important to clarify that this figure represents a baseline, starting position in the City’s long-term financial forecast, assuming no changes to current revenues or expenditures. It is neither the City’s current condition nor its expected outcome. As part of the upcoming budget process, the City Manager will present options during public budget study sessions to reduce the funding gap and improve reserve levels over time, ensuring the City remains on a path toward long-term financial stability.

The City’s financial outlook reflects broader trends impacting many communities, including rising costs for labor, materials, and services. At the same time, revenues remain stable, with property tax revenues increasing by 6.23% due to growth in assessed property values.

To help illustrate, the City’s finances can be compared to a household budget. Revenues function like a paycheck, expenses represent the cost of essential services, and the fund balance serves as savings. Over the past year, the City used a portion of its savings to support planned expenditures, while continuing to maintain an emergency reserve. Moving forward, the City is focused on aligning ongoing revenues and expenses to support long-term financial sustainability.

The Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) referenced above is the City’s official year-end financial report and is independently audited. In simple terms, it is similar to a household’s year-end financial statement—it shows how much money came in, how much was spent, and how much remains in savings, along with how those funds are designated.

Looking ahead, the City will continue to evaluate cost containment strategies, operational efficiencies, and potential revenue opportunities, which will be discussed during upcoming public budget study sessions along with updates to the City’s multi-year financial forecast.

In summary, the City of Fullerton’s financial position reflects a planned and publicly approved use of savings to address a budget gap, along with standard accounting updates to ensure funds are properly tracked. No money was lost, missing, or improperly spent. Approximately $2.7 million was reclassified to reflect funds set aside for specific purposes—such as road repairs and capital projects—and a $2.9 million adjustment was made to the appropriate account for those funds. The City ended FY 2024–25 with 14% in reserves and is projected to have about 12% this year, both above the City’s minimum requirement. The 2% figure referenced in recent discussions reflects the City’s baseline financial outlook if no changes are made to current spending or revenue levels, underscoring the importance of taking action. The City is actively working to reduce the budget gap and strengthen its financial position moving forward.

The City of Fullerton remains committed to transparency and keeping the community informed. Residents are encouraged to review financial documents available on the City’s website and participate in the budget process.

June 13, 2024June 13, 2024Ahmad Zahra

Revenue Enhancement Time. Plus Lies and More Lies

by Joe Sipowicz8 Comments

Last Tuesday the Fullerton City Council voted 4-1 to approve the ’24-’25 city budget. Whitaker, as usual voted no. The budget projects big deficits as we’ve already heard.

After that the Council was presented with “revenue enhancement” ideas – the same old nonsense that we’ve already talked about, here. At first these ideas were simply floated to make it look like somebody had given some thought to find other ways, however silly, to address the tsunami of red ink; but in reality the point was to push a general sales tax, a movement that had been subtly going on for many months.

However the proposals agendized last Tuesday did not include a sales tax this fall, a sure indicator that the City Manager has polled the Council and knows he doesn’t have the votes to put it on the ballot. But that didn’t stop Councilmembers Charles and Zahra from pitching and pitching and pitching the idea; and finally supporting each other to get the issue of a sales tax on the an agenda, pronto, in time to schedule it for the November election.

But before that happened the public was treated to some of the most blatant and self serving re-writing of Fullerton history I have ever heard.

If I knew what I was talking about this wouldn’t be Fullerton!

Shana Charles started off with long-winded blabbering that was irrelevant, self-contradictory, confusing, and erroneous. Of course – “decimated” staff, the ill-effects of right-sizing,” reduced response times – the usual liberal litany of problems were simply meant as an introduction to the sales tax proposal. Her complaint was that previous councils had made mistakes, not by exercising fiscal restraint, but by “cutting to the bone.”

Charles then lauded the wonderful benefits that the City of Placentia derived from it’s Measure U sales tax that saved it, having declared bankruptcy – a statement completely false. She failed to mention the fact that Placentia has saved millions by getting their “fire fighters” out of the paramedic business, an idea of which her Fullerton fire fighter union pals are terrified.

While patting herself on the back for very recent staff and service level increases, she failed to see the rich irony of her own incompetence on the edge of a precipice: a situation well-understood when she voted for last year’s budget.

More economic development, better wardrobe…

If Charles blathered nonsense, Zahra just lied about Fullerton’s recent fiscal history, most likely because he has been on the City Council for 6 years, and has his greasy fingerprints all over the budgetary disaster.

According to Zahra, our problem reaches back decades and only now is the Council addressing the problem. Of course our City Councils have made bad decisions over the years, but the current disaster is of very recent vintage and has also occurred while he has been on the City Council.

For several years in the mid and late teens Fullerton was dipping into reserve funds to pay the freight, even as Zahra’s allies Jan Flory and Jennifer Fitzgerald and Jesus Quirk- Silva were lying to the public about the budget being balanced. It wasn’t. In fact the City continued in its cavalier way until Fred Jung and Nick Dunlap joined Bruce Whitaker on the council in 2020.

Measure S Covid Lie — Let me count the ways…

Zahra related how he, as a precinct-walking candidate, noted how people wanted better roads and how his predecessors had promised them, too, but that they failed. He didn’t note the fact that Fullerton’s public safety employees were hogging up bigger and bigger shares of the budget – as they still do.

The subject of Zahra’s failed 2020 Measure S sales tax came up, a sore subject, apparently, since his underserved constituents in D5 voted for it. So let us not stop from revisiting it, and right now! Charles chimed in that well she people she spoke to voted against it because there was no sunset provision, and, get this – because there was no oversight committee!

As an aside, I have to share that Zahra made an hilarious little speech about he could not support an infrastructure improvement bond because voting for municipal debt would keep him awake at night!

Bruce Whitaker made just about the only insightful comment of the discussion, namely: that cities can control costs but they can’t control revenue, an observation that flies in the face of the revenue enhancement propaganda, but that is perfectly true. As has been stated here before: nobody even knows if an Economic Development Manager even pays for himself in terms of incremental tax increase.

I will wrap this up by acknowledging a Zoom caller who actually did make a good revenue enhancing and who identified a huge fiscal problem: downtown Fullerton, the annual sinkhole that makes millions for the scofflaw club owners and that leaves the taxpayers with a $1,500,000 bill. He suggested a special assessment on these eager party entrepreneurs to pay for the havoc their booze and their customers cause. Not surprisingly, none of the council members even mentioned the problem. They never do.

April 23, 2024April 23, 2024Ahmad Zahra

The Fiscal Cliff

by The Fullerton Harpoon33 Comments

The Fullerton City Council is holding a special meeting tonight – a 2024-25 Budget “workshop.” No work will get done but there will be shopping going on as staff begins its formal press to raise a sales tax.

There is a lot of self-serving verbiage about how well our City staff has performed its tasks up ’til now, but then the hard reality hits because budget numbers can’t pat themselves on the back.

There are some harrowing numbers in the proposed budget – including a $9,400,000 draw-down from strategic reserves. This means of course, that the budget is no where near balanced as City Hall apologists like Jennifer Fitzgerald and Jan Flory claimed when they ran the place into the red almost every year.

M. Eric Levitt. Will he save us from ourselves?

Let’s let our City Manager, Eric Levitt tell the tale:

“Financial Stability. The City has been able to over the last two years (for the first time in recent history of the City) to reach and maintain a 17% contingency reserve level. This budget maintains that reserve level; however due to an operating deficit, we will be utilizing one-time excess reserves this year and coming close to that 17% level in FY 2024-25 and below that in years beyond next year“

The overall picture gets even worse as the levels of reserves slowly dwindle away. After this year Fullerton continues to be upside from $7.5 to $8.8 million each year until the end of the dismal decade. We are not favored with the running reserve funds balances.

Infrastructure is supposedly a big deal. Which reminds me of a quotation attributed to Mark Twain: Everybody talks about the weather but nobody does anything about it. But this year we are told, we can push get going on our deteriorating infrastructure along by borrowing! Once again let’s heed the words of Mr. Levitt:

“I have also put together a strategy to increase that funding level to closer to $14 million over the next four years through the use of financing. However, there are both upsides and downsides to this approach which will be discussed with you in more detail at today’s presentation.“

Now this should be a red flag: borrowing to perform maintenance, a basic accounting no-no. And what form will the borrowing take? Not a municipal bond, you can be sure, It would likely be by selling certificates of participation or some other dodge to avoid municipal debt restrictions. Here’s the table that shows our Maintenance of Effort (MOE) shortfall without financing.

Now we all know that interest payments are made by somebody, somewhere, and that somebody is you and me. We get to pay the interest on debt incurred by years of municipal mismanagement by people like Joe Felz and Ken Domer and Jeff Collier who get to sail off to a glorious and massively pensioned retirement at 55 years of age.

And finally, to circle back to the story lead, here’s a distasteful nugget carefully slipped into the City Manager’s report:

“Staff recommends City Council review options over the next year to stabilize the budget and ensure the City remains financially sound.“

Jesus H. There it is. Not quite explicitly stated, but we know very well where this is going. Another general sales tax effort, just like the ill-fated Measure S of four years ago. The seeds for this have already been planted, of course, in a nasty little taxpayer-funded fishing expedition in the guise of a community survey. Last November I regaled the Friends with this slimy maneuver, here.

By the way, this is exactly the same process City Hall rolled out four years ago. And we will be told By Ahmad Zahra, Shana Charles and Vivian Jaramillo that if we don’t pony up we will be morally deficient.

Well, good luck Friends. This is going to be a long year and you can bet the farm that we will be asked to pick up the check – again.

May 16, 2023May 16, 2023Ahmad Zahra

Fullerton’s Fiscal Ship About to Take on Water. Nobody Has a Clue What to Do

by Joe Sipowicz22 Comments

A few weeks ago the Daily Titan published an article about how, in a few years, Fullerton is going to be running in the red. Deep red. City projections point to being upside down $19 million between 2024 and 2028. Now that’s not very good, is it?

Here’s the grim forecast:

Naturally, the article quickly devolved into a vehicle for advocating the hiring of more people and paying them more, replete with completely fraudulent comparative pay statistics. On hand were Ahmad Zahra and his helper Shana Charles to bleat about unfilled positions and service deficits, always the first opening salvo in a new tax proposal – like the one Zahra pushed hard in 2020.

The head and the hat were a perfect fit.

Doug Chaffee, the senile Fourth District Supervisor of Orange County and a former Fullerton mayor contributed this gem to the conversation: “I think I would have been a little heavier on keeping our staff because they are the lifeblood of the city. They do the work.” Uh, huh. He failed to mention his own inept culpability in mismanaging Fullerton’s budget for years.

Hilariously, Zahra seems to think the phrase “economic development” has some sort of talismanic quality, as if there were anything City Hall could do to produce it. It never worked during the heyday of Redevelopment and it won’t do anything now. It’s just a shiny distraction that can’t even pay for the bumblers who are paid, and paid very well, to pursue it.

What economic development really means is a focus on increasing tax revenue to pay for the salaries and benefits of public employees and their bloated, guaranteed pensions. It would be refreshing if just once elected folks thought about less about raising revenue and more about living within budgetary constraints.

Mayor Fred Jung calmly opined that Fullerton has adequate reserves to handle the tsunami of red ink coming his way, but this is not reassuring. Fullerton went through the same crimson bath during the Fitzgerald/Chaffee/Quirk-Silva/Flory/Zahra regime, and anybody who thinks Fullerton is better off for the deficit spending it is a damn fool.

September 19, 2019September 19, 2019Ahmad Zahra

The Taxman Cometh

by Mr. Peabody50 Comments

Folks here at FFFF have been prognosticating a new tax for several years. Even as councilcreatures Jennifer Fitzgerald and Jan Flory lied to the public by telling them the budget was balanced, we’ve been watching the strategic reserve fund dwindle away to almost nothing, leveling off last year only because so many positions were vacant.

The fact is that ever-escalating “public safety” pay and benefits, and a ruinous CalPERS pension debt have created what budget bean counters call a structural deficit; meaning, that the annual red-ink baths are a permanent condition that you can’t weasel your way out of selling marginal city-owned properties.

And so the harsh and inescapable reality has finally come home, like a wayward vulture, to roost. And harsh realities always trump the happy lies of politicians. It’s just a matter of time.

Silva 2018 Meddling

And that is why so many people have begun to hear stories that Councilcreature Jesus “Don’t Call Me Jeesis” Silva is sending up the trial balloon of a sales tax on the November 2020 general election ballot. The choice of that date is cynical since the General Election is will produce an electorate much more sympathetic to tax and spend policies of liberals like Silva, Ahmad Zahra, Flory and of course Fitzgerald. The seeds will be officially sown during the 2020-21 budget kabuki next spring. I am giving huge odds.

It’s going to happen. Zahra and Silva are not up for re-election so they must figure they’re safe; Flory is the lamest of lame ducks, a flightless bird, in fact, and thoughtful Friends have already suggested that she was put back on the council precisely for an automatic yes vote on a new tax. After all Flory’s first love has always been public emplyees.

And this leaves Fitzgerald, an erstwhile Republican free to oppose the vote putting the tax on the ballot in order to unburden herself of running for re-election with the tax monkey on her back – exactly where it belongs.

The pieces are now pretty much in place. The only question is how much the FPD Culture of Corruption and their buddies lounging in the “firehouse” are willing to invest in their shakedown.

September 17, 2019September 9, 2020Behind Closed Doors

Will Fullerton’s Pensions Eat the Library and More?

by Lonnie Machin13 Comments

Fullerton Hunt Library

You think we’re full of it when we warn you about the severity of the pension problem in Fullerton (and elsewhere). You think we’re joking about the pension crisis that threatens to eat our city budget whole.

You ignore when Fitzgerald laughs off structural deficits and joins our council in voting for every pay/benefits package our heroes demand.

Well it is a crisis. A crisis of math and a crisis of ethics.

How bad is it?

It’s so bad our City Manager is actively considering giving away property we can’t readily sell to pay what we owe on the pensions.

Here’s an except from an email forwarded by CM Ken Domer to now-former Administrative Services Director Michael B. O’Kelly, CPA asking for his feedback (emphasis added):

I wanted to share information about fairly new alternative funding concept in public pension – funding using “assets-in-kind”.

Followed by:

The concept of using assets-in-kind for pension and OPEB funding is currently being considered by the State of CT. Attached is one of the presentations made during the hearings of the CT Pension Sustainability Commission that explains the approach (PDF document). I thought it may be interesting for you to review. Of course, the approach is not specifically designed for the states, but can be implemented by the local government as well.

Essentially, the pension fund is ready to foreclose on Fullerton.

First we’ll lose worthless assets like the poisoned park, the bridge & stairs to nowhere, some undeveloped land. Then council will vote for some more hero benefits and CalPERS will change the discount rate again and we’ll move on the hunt branch library, the main branch library, the community center, Hillcrest and so forth. At some point we’ll sell City Hall and Council Chambers to the pension fund which would be fitting considering the heroes and their pensions already own our council and staff.

We’ll do all of this because, according to our council majority the budget is balanced.

And because we’re in excellent financial shape.

nothing to see here more along

April 23, 2019Behind Closed Doors

Community Stakeholder Survey Says

by Joshua12 Comments

Tonight the Fullerton city council will pretend to go over the results of the Community Stakeholder Survey that just recently wrapped up. Remember that survey? It’s where the city is going to, and I quote:

For the next strategic planning session, the City will conduct a community stakeholder survey prior to working with the City Council to develop Mission and Vision statements, and ultimately set goals to implement the Priority Policy Statements.

We don’t have nice roads but at least we’ll have mission and vision statements.

The whole reason for this dog and pony show is to pretend to do something productive while our roads literally crumble around us each day. We’re in a structural deficit and only balance our budgets by selling capital assets (city owned property) and by not filling vacant positions.

So when people complain that we’re understaffed the current and retired staff are entirely to blame for this problem because they’re eating all of our general fund.

As to the survey itself, how engaged were the people of Fullerton in regards to this important mission of vision questing?

Vision

Super engaged, so responsive. The whole city was interested in giving their two cents… Oh. No. Nevermind. Almost nobody even knew this things existed and fewer participated.

706 people responded and 9 sent in written statements via email. That’s it.

It was a truly terrible turnout.

But the city, using that whopping return of 706 survey responses and 9 written statements will march ahead ever ready as a city to talk about what our local government’s priorities should be going forward in an open and honest fashion.

(more…)

February 25, 2019February 25, 2019Curt Pringle & Associates

Did Jennifer Fitzgerald Just Admit to Illegal Lobbying on Behalf of Jamboree Housing?

by Sean Paden11 Comments

Recently Jennifer Fitzgerald circulated to her closest supporters- via her Curt Pringle & Associates email account – her opening salvo in the 2020 election, an email entitled “2019 – A Year of Resolution and Re-commitment”.

Plus a few people she thinks are her closest supporters. Whoops.

There’s a lot to digest here, and the amount of mendacity, outright falsehoods and terrible policy proposals would take multiple posts to unpack.

But one particular boast stands out above the others:

No, not the one about the budget (although it is absolutely galling how she can still claim she balanced the budget two years after the City admitted we have a serious structural deficit and four years after members of the public started noticing). Instead, look at her claim that “Looking back over my six years of service on the Fullerton City Council, I’m proud of newly constructed affordable housing communities with… Jamboree Housing.”

So what’s the problem? Well, as Curt Pringle & Associates admit on their facebook page , Jamboree Housing is one of their clients. Which means that Councilmember Fitzgerald just bragged about breaking the law.

Two important caveats. First, I know from attending most council meetings over the last four years that Fitzgerald has avoided voting on any agenda item involving Jamboree Housing’s low income housing development since obtaining residence at CP&A. However, Government Code Section 87100 doesn’t just prohibit an elected official from making or participating in making a decision in which he or she has a financial interest – any attempt by an elected official “to use his official position to influence a governmental decision” is also illegal.

Second, and probably more important, this is could be yet another example of Fitzgerald misleading her voters about her accomplishments (and possibly CP&A clients, given that this email was sent via jennifer@curtpringle.com) and taking credit for something she had no role in, or claiming she accomplished something she did not.

“Hey, it was balanced for a few seconds!” – Jennifer Fitzgerald, probably

So which is it? Did she break the law and influence a decision that she had a clear financial interest in or does she just have a chronic aversion to telling the truth and chose to brag about her influence and effectiveness to Fullerton voters as well as potentially CP&A’s clients?

A quick poll of FFFF staff seems to indicate that “both” is not entirely out of the question as a possible answer, but maliciousness is in the eye of the beholder.

January 18, 2019Behind Closed Doors

Fullerton’s Council Beauty Pageant

by Joshua11 Comments

Ike-Pageant

After some debate, a short delay and a little snapping by Jennifer Fitzgerald, a council majority opted to hold a beauty pageant to decide which crony will get to join them on the dais.

The city is accepting applications for contestants who are interested in the job of city council without the need to actually convince the citizenry to vote for them.

We won’t know who all is running until the application process ends but we’ve already heard some names and most of them are terrible if you care about the city budget or basic math skills.

In the ongoing process the council will pretend to view and vet the candidates in an “open and transparent” process which means closed door meetings and private wheeling and dealing with a dash of favors and/or threats for good measure.

There will be a “candidate forum” sponsored by the Neighbors United for Fullerton but really it doesn’t matter who you like or what they say to the public because the council is making this decision regardless of your thoughts or opinions. You have no real voice in this process despite empty promises to the contrary.

Let us not kid ourselves, despite applications being due by Wed, 23 January and the NUFF forum being on the 28th, this will be a done deal long before you get a chance to even know who’s all in the running and who can twirl a baton the best.

The meetings are already happening and the deals are already being struck – hence Fitzgerald, Flory and the Flor-Bots all shilling for Flory back in December before this process even started.

You can apply if you’re a masochist or you can just show up to the forum and council meeting to watch the slew of candidates take 8 boilerplate questions about the roads and zero about pension reform and overspending. Overall don’t expect the public face of this charade to matter much in the actual decision making process.

However if you want to pretend like you have a chance to be on city council and believe you have what it takes to beat back the leviathan and fix our structural deficit then all you have to do is fill out a few pieces of paper to apply. Apply Today. The more the merrier.

Cheerocracy

December 18, 2018Ahmad Zahra

Is the Flory Rumor True?

by Joshua15 Comments

FergusonDeadWrong-Flory — Except we do, and our own budgets prove it.

Rumor has it that former councilwoman Jan Flory is lobbying to become the appointee to our City Council tonight and has already secured both Jennifer Fitzgerald and Jesus Silva’s votes. This is the same Jan Flory who voted, with Jennifer Fitzgerald and Doug Chaffee, on multiple unbalanced budgets and who helped lead us into our structural deficit. The same Jan Flory who puts City Staff above the very citizens they’re supposed to work for and represent.

Want to know why our roads suck so bad? Blame Jan Flory and her cohorts who think bureaucracy is the true heart of Fullerton. Want to know why Downtown is such a train-wreck? Yeaup. Same cabal of incompetence.

If the council votes to appoint somebody the voting members will own every vote put forward by the new council member. In effect, if they vote for somebody like Jan Flory, who helped sink our budget for years, they will be responsible for both their own votes on the budget (and similar items) as well as hers.

Appointing somebody is bad. Letting Jesus Silva vote on an appointment to the very seat he himself vacated is worse. Having council vote to give themselves the bulletproof majority needed to walk all over the people of Fullerton is downright despicable.

The people should really have a say who in represents them and voting to appoint somebody, especially somebody who will raise our taxes, is the essence of being anti-democratic. Our republic was literally founded against the premise of taxation without representation.