Measure I: I – City of Orange, City of Orange Public Safety/Essential Services Measure
City of Orange · Orange County · November 3, 2026
The question on your ballot
To maintain City of Orange's quality of life, such as 9-1-1 response; maintaining police/fire protection; preventing crimes/thefts; retaining/attracting well-trained police officers/firefighters; keeping public parks safe/clean; addressing homelessness; wildfire protection/prevention; repairing streets/potholes; critical infrastructure improvements; shall a measure establishing a 1¢ sales tax, providing approximately $37,000,000 annually for general revenue/government purposes, expiring after 13 years, with independent oversight committee, all funds benefiting Orange residents, be adopted?
In plain language
Measure I would add a 1% local sales tax in the City of Orange. The tax would apply to most retail sales. It would not apply to items that are free from state sales tax, such as most groceries and prescription medicines. The money would go into the city's general fund. It could be used for any lawful city purpose. Examples include police, fire, 911 response, streets, parks, libraries, and homelessness services. The tax would last 13 years unless voters end, change, or extend it sooner. An independent oversight committee would review the money. An independent audit would be done each year. A YES vote approves the 1% tax for 13 years. A NO vote means the city does not add the tax.
Fiscal impact
A 1% local sales tax for 13 years. The city estimates it would raise about $37 million a year; actual revenue depends on taxable sales.
Impartial analysis
City of Orange Measure I The City Council of the City of Orange is submitting Measure I to the voters for consideration at the November 3, 2026 General Municipal Election. If approved by a majority of the voters, Measure I would add Chapter 3.23 to the Orange Municipal Code to establish a one percent (1.0%) general transactions and use tax, commonly referred to as a local sales tax, to generate general revenues for the City. The tax would be administered and collected by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration in accordance with California law. The proposed tax generally would apply to taxable retail sales and purchases, as provided under California law. The tax generally would not apply to purchases exempt from state sales and use taxes, including most groceries, prescription medicines, medical services, and certain other exempt transactions. The tax would be collected at the same time and in the same manner as existing state and local sales and use taxes. Revenue generated by the measure would be deposited into the City’s General Fund and may be used for any lawful municipal purpose. The ordinance does not dedicate revenues to any specific purpose or program. Revenues may be used for City services and other lawful governmental purposes, including public safety, 9-1-1 emergency response, street and infrastructure maintenance, parks, libraries, and homelessness services. The ordinance establishes an Independent Oversight Committee and requires an annual independent audit of tax revenues and expenditures. The audit must be presented to the City Council at a public meeting and posted on the City’s website. The committee reviews revenues generated by the tax and expenditures of those revenues, reviews the annual audit, makes recommendations to the City Council regarding expenditures of tax revenues, and submits an annual written report. Committee meetings are subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act. The City estimates that the measure would generate approximately $37 million annually, although actual revenues will depend on taxable sales. If approved, the tax would remain in effect for thirteen (13) years from its operative date unless earlier repealed, amended, or extended by the voters. A “Yes” vote on Measure I authorizes the City to establish the one percent (1.0%) general transactions and use tax for thirteen (13) years. A “No” vote on Measure I does not authorize the City to establish the one percent (1.0%) general transactions and use tax. Nathalie Adourian City Attorney
Official ballot arguments
Filed for the official voter guide by each side, printed as submitted.
Argument in favor
REBUILD ORANGE: STRONGER FINANCES. SAFER NEIGHBORHOODS. A BETTER FUTURE. Orange is one of the best places to live, but what kind of city do we want to be tomorrow? Do we want safer neighborhoods, cleaner parks, better maintained streets, faster emergency response, and a financially strong city prepared for the future? Do we want to pay down debt, maintain healthy emergency reserves, and leave an even stronger community for the next generation? Those priorities require responsible leadership, dedicated public servants, modern equipment, and long-term investment. Before asking taxpayers for additional revenue, City Hall made tough choices first: cut more than $37.5 million from the budget, eliminated 10% of staff, improved efficiency, strengthened financial planning, and committed to accountability. Today, Orange operates with one of its leanest workforces in decades. Measure I is about building a better Orange — not expanding government. Vote Yes on Measure I to help: Protect fast, reliable 911 emergency response Recruit and retain highly trained police officers, firefighters, paramedics, and other essential employees Repair aging streets, sidewalks, parks, playgrounds, storm drains, and critical infrastructure Keep neighborhoods, parks, and public spaces clean, safe, and well maintained Reduce homelessness and protect Orange's quality of life Strengthen Orange's long-term financial future Nearly 2/3 of Orange’s existing sales taxes are paid by people who live outside Orange. Taxpayer money belongs to the people of Orange. Measure I: • Keeps every dollar in Orange • Provides independent citizen oversight • Requires annual independent financial audits and public reporting • Automatically expires after 13 years Measure I is not a tax on your home. Measure I does not tax groceries, prescription medicine, rent, mortgage payments, medical care, or insurance. Together, let’s Rebuild Orange and leave the next generation an even safer, stronger, and more financially secure city. Vote YES on Measure I. s/ Dan Slater Mayor of Orange s/ Pattie Cordova Orange Small Business Owner s/ Sean deMetropolis Orange Fire Chief (ret.), Orange City Firefighters s/ Tom Kisela Orange Police Chief (ret.) s/ Garrett Smith Orange City Treasurer
The same people spending your tax dollars are asking you to trust City Hall with an additional $37 million annually. This tax is NOT temporary - it is a permanent bail out of the last 6 years of uncontrolled employee raises, benefits and unfunded pension liabilities. This gives City Hall a blank check for 13 years to maintain their uncontrolled spending. (transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/2025/orange). Let’s not be fooled, they want you to believe this is a “Public Safety Measure” and went so far as to have former Police / Fire Chiefs as proponents. Read the fine print- it is for general revenue / government purposes. They know they could not get a 2/3 vote to approve a true Public Safety Tax. This Measure I does NOT offer actual solutions to pay off structural debt, retire unfunded pension liabilities or keep public spaces clean and safe. It will be used to increase salaries and benefits. The City’s Finance Director and independent consultants- “ The Grant -Thornton Study” explicitly warned the City Council if they don’t freeze their spending they will push this historic town into municipal bankruptcy. ( 7/2025 Council mtg.) They claim that the sales tax is mostly paid by non-residents. Not true, anything you buy in Orange, a toy or book for your children, clothing, or anytime you go out to eat in Orange, you will pay this tax. Vote No to Overspending- force City Hall to live within its means, demand true fiscal accountability. Vote No on Measure - I! www.NoMoreTaxesOrange.com s/ Fred M. Whitaker Fmr. Mayor Pro Tem s/ Michael Alvarez Fmr Mayor Pro Tem
Argument against
The City Council is at it again. A $507 Million general sales tax increase for any purpose! It averages out to $800 per household every single year! Don’t be fooled. It is NOT a public safety tax. This is a desperate scheme to cover City Hall’s overspending. This scare tactic claims your money goes straight to Fire and Police. It’s really a general fund bail-out with zero guarantees to benefit residents or improve neighborhoods. The state of California has: • The highest statewide sales tax • The highest gas tax • The highest graduated income tax and capital gains tax in the USA • And Orange wants to make it worse! We love Orange’s “small-town charm. ” Yet, cherished community events are being canceled, while the City Council hiked spending by a staggering $42 million between 2021 and 2026. Look at the facts: All employees, including Fire and Police, received four separate pay raises in just four years. By 2025, 135 city employees were paid over $250,000 annually in total compensation https://transparentcalifornia.com/salaries/2025/orange/. There were only 77 such employees in 2023 when the City asked for the Sales Tax increase in 2024. The City Council has learned nothing. During the Great Recession, the City had a similar problem and tightened its belt without raising taxes. From 2011–2014, the City cut and left positions vacant, the budget was balanced, and we were safe. Tell the City to stop overspending, stop excessive raises, and—like the Council in 2011—cut their own benefits and salaries before raising our taxes! The promised “independent oversight committee” has zero authority and is handpicked by the Mayor just like the budget committee. Locking in a new tax for 13 years is an insult to the hardworking families of Orange. NO to Overspending. NO More Taxes. Vote NO on Measure I! www.NoMoreTaxesOrange.com s/ Fred M. Whitaker Fmr. Mayor Pro Tem s/ Mike Alvarez Fmr. Mayor Pro Tem
The two opposition politicians claim Measure I will cost $800 per household: that’s an outrageous lie because that means you’re spending $80,000 in taxable purchases annually! That’s $80,000 in addition to food, taxes, healthcare, and rent/ mortgage. It’s not surprising those opposition politicians can’t do basic math. They want you to believe Orange can solve tomorrow’s challenges by repeating yesterday’s financial practices: for years, they “balanced” budgets by avoiding difficult decisions. They point to those old budgets but ignore what those budgets left behind: • Underfunded reserves • Growing long-term liabilities • Delayed infrastructure maintenance • No long-term financial plan Those opposition politicians created Orange’s financial challenges but offer no plan to rebuild reserves, reduce liabilities / debt, restore infrastructure, or prepare Orange for the future. Today’s City leaders are working to fix that mess, making tough decisions before asking voters to consider Measure I: • Reduced spending by $37.5 million • Cut City government workforce by 10% • Improved efficiency • Developed a long-term Orange financial rebuilding plan The reality’s simple: we can’t pay for today’s police officers, firefighters, streets, parks, and emergency services with 2011 dollars. Costs increased, infrastructure aged, and state mandates grow. The question isn’t what Orange was years ago: it’s what kind of city we want to be tomorrow. Every Measure I dollar stays in Orange, cannot be taken by Sacramento, is protected by citizen oversight, annual audits, public reporting, and automatically expires after 13 years. Rebuild Orange for our families, neighborhoods, and future generations: vote YES on Measure I. s/ Mike Spurgeon Mayor Pro Tem of Orange (ret.) s/ Rebecca Martinez El Modena High School Principal (ret.) s/ Chris Horton Orange Audit Advisory Committee Member s/ Rick Martinez First Vice President, Orange Public Library Foundation Police Sergeant (ret.) s/ Mike Short Director, Orange Community Master Chorale Orange High School Teacher (ret.)
What supporters and opponents say — outside sources (not official ballot arguments)
Statements by campaigns, officials and news coverage, quoted with attribution and linked to the original. VoterDecoder did not write them and does not endorse either side.
Supporters say
No public statements in favor were found.
Opponents say
No public statements against were found.