Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

you do do

Okay, it's time. Madam Clerk, roll call, please.

Sue Iser Chavez.

Here.

Sue Iser Magsig. Here. Sue Iser Mendez. Here. Sue Iser Pacheco. Chairman Bredefield.

Here. Good morning. Welcome to the Tuesday, August 25th, 26th, Meeting of the Fresno County Board of Supervisors. We're going to begin today with the invocation and a flag salute. The invocation will be led by District 5 after the invocation. Please remain standing for the flag salute.

All right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Here with us today is Pastor Gilbert Montelongo. He's a seasoned faith leader and community builder based in Sanger, California. He serves as senior pastor of Tabernacle of Praise Christian Center with over 30 years of pastoral experience. 27 as a lead pastor. Pastor Montelongo has been married to his wife, Lydia, for 47 years, and they have three children, Chris, Mark, and Amanda. All three children have full-time jobs, serve under their father's ministry, and advocate for the Central Valley. Pastor Montelongo contributes to community initiatives through the Sanger Fresno Community Task Force and participates in the Sanger Pastors Fellowship Committee, creating an opportunity for grassroots engagement on local, regional, and national issues. Pastor, the floor is yours.

Thank you, and God bless you. Good morning, each and every one of you. Thank you for the invite, and it is an honor to pray this morning for you and everyone that is present to bless you with the prayer. So let's pray. Heavenly Father, we thank you this beautiful morning. We thank you for this great county of Fresno and the great supervisors you have placed in the seats of government to government this great county, Lord God. for their service, their hard work, their efforts, and their sacrifice, Lord, for the welfare and the care of the people of Fresno County. We know the work is much. The task is great. We know, Lord God, that in your word, you said that much is given, much is required, but you've given them all that they need. If their hearts and minds are open to your spirit, God, then, Lord, we believe that you provide wisdom, divine wisdom and intellect, Father God, to govern according, Lord God, to your word. We believe, Lord God, that you're with them at all times. If they believe this and stand upon it, Lord God, to help guide them and direct them. Lord, for we feel that with their efforts and their sacrifice and their trust in you, that they can build a better Fresno County, and we believe this. We pray for those that are present here today, Lord God, those that have come to just be informed, and those also, Lord God, that are here to present their concerns. We pray that everything would be addressed in reverence to you and also respect to the Board of Supervisors. We know, Lord, that life is about agreeing and disagreeing, but we know that we can agree and come into a common ground that we want Fresno County to be better, to be stronger, to be inviting, Lord, and welcoming, Lord, others that would want to come to this county, this region, and be blessed, Lord God, because the people that lead us, Lord God, know your heartbeat. And so, Lord, we pray for them. We pray for their families as well. We pray for divine protection because we live, Lord God, in a world today that is cynical and it is evil, Lord God, and, Lord, rebellious toward authority. And so, Lord, we as spiritual leaders and others join together in praying for them, as your word says, to pray for those in authority. Because, Lord, again, the work is great. We're not in their shoes. We know that even our personal responsibilities at work and elsewhere at home and family are much. So we can imagine their duties and their responsibilities. So, Lord, we want to thank you this morning. So we pray divine protection. We pray, Father, for their children, their grandchildren. We pray, Heavenly Father, that you would protect them, Father God, again. That the angel of the Lord would encamp around them. Lord Jesus, and again, we thank you this very moment for this opportunity, this beautiful morning, and more importantly, your presence, Lord Jesus. We pray this in the wonderful name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen and amen.

Please salute.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, individual, with liberty and justice for all. God bless you.

Thank you very much for those wonderful words.

Mr. Chairman, members of the board, and members of the audience, the agenda was originally published stating that Suresh Chavez would be teleconferencing into the meeting from a location in Whittier. He was able to be present in person today. Therefore, the notice teleconferencing location is no longer necessary, and it has been canceled.

Okay, thank you. Agendas are on the back table for anyone wanting to follow along. Madam Clerk, first item please.

Approve agenda.

Okay, is there a motion and a second to approve the agenda? All those in favor say aye. Passes unanimously.

We now move to item number two, approved consent agenda item numbers 23 through 44.

Okay, these matters are routine in nature, usually are approved by a single vote. Would any board members like an item removed from consent for discussion? Seeing none, would any members of the public like an item removed from consent for discussion? Okay, seeing none, is there a motion and a second to approve the rest of the consent? All those in favor say aye. Approved unanimously.

Now move to item number three, under Board of Supervisors, presentation of retirement plaque to Laura Lambright, Department of Behavioral Health, 17 years of service.

And Behavioral Health is here to present. Come on up.

Good morning. On behalf of Director Holtz, she's unable to attend today. My name is Emma Rasmussen, Deputy Director for the Department of Behavioral Health. And we are really excited to be here today to honor a longtime employee of the department in the capacity of a peer support. Peer support does... invaluable work for our community and to tell you a little bit more about Laura and the work that she's done these past many, many years, I want to invite her last supervisor, Jessica Acosta, to tell us a little bit more.

Thank you and good morning. Laura worked for Fresno County Department of Behavioral Health for over 17 years. As a peer support specialist, for any of our teams, peer support specialists are integral members providing support for those who continue to struggle with their mental health. They offer hope and assistance with goals when many may not see this as a possibility for themselves. A peer support specialist's lived experience offer those we serve the perspective that through empowerment, healing, and self-advocacy are possible. Laura embodies all of that a support specialist can be. She enthusiastically participated in required trainings, departmental or team activities, and facilitated peer-to-peer groups offering support to our persons served. Her peers and colleagues admire her diligence, self-advocacy, dependability, compassion, courage, friendliness, and willingness to collaborate with others. I was honored to have been Laura's supervisor for the last one and a half years with the Department of Behavioral Health. And during the time with the two LPS conservatorship teams, she demonstrated a great work ethic and was always willing to help out not only her peers when asked, to assist in offering support to our persons served, but also without hesitation offered to support persons served to individuals struggling while under conservatorship. She facilitated two separate groups, one of them on Crestwood, the bridge program, and another at Valley Comfort. a community-based board and care facility. She also assisted individuals in getting acclimated to being on conservatorship, as well as offer them independent living and coping skills, with the goal of successfully being dismissed from conservatorship. Throughout her career in Fresno County, Laura exemplified what a caring and compassionate person can be while guiding our vulnerable individuals in achieving mental health wellness. And it is my pleasure to introduce Laura Lambright.

I thank Fresno County for the opportunity it gave me for the past 17 years as a peer support specialist. It was fulfilling, enriching, and it helped me grow. Thank you.

That's all right. Thank you very much. Any comments from the board? Any comments from the public? Okay. Good comment. Come on. Why don't you come on up? We'll have a picture with the board.

700 bucks. I tell you.

All right, on three. One, two, three.

We now move to item number four, under Supervisor Mendez and Assessor Recorder, conduct first hearing on an ordinance adding chapter 10.33 to title 10 of the Fresno County Ordinance Code relating to real property fraud prevention notices, waive reading of the ordinance in its entirety, and set the second hearing for September 8th, 2026. Designate county council to prepare a fair and adequate summary of the proposed ordinance and direct the clerk of the board to post and publish the required summary in accordance with government code section 25124B1.

Okay, and I'll turn this over to Supervisor Mendez.

Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Good morning, board members. It's a good day to be alive. Mr. Chairman, I respectfully request your approval of an ordinance that will give property owners a new voluntary tool to help prevent real estate fraud. The current Property Owners Protection Alert, which we are just getting, is a card. I call it POPA. POPA stands for Property Owners Protection Alert. Over 4,500 people already signed. They gave us their email. Anything that happens to the property, they get their automatic email. So the current Property Owners Protection Alert notifies owners only after the document has been recorded. By that time, Damage may already be done, and it is too costly to undo it. It takes about $143,000 illegal fees to undo one of those illegally placed mortgages on your property. And if the property and if the mortgage sells in the secondary market, forget it. So this ordinance that you are about to approve takes the next step by creating a low-cost prevention tool. It puts on notice the title companies, escrow holders, lenders, notaries, buyers, and other parties before fraud can take place. It does not stop legitimate sales or loans. It provides an added type of protection against fraud. And most importantly, it helps protect the property rights of our residents. For these reasons, I respectfully ask that you approve this ordinance. And I'm open for questions. Thank you, Mr. Ditko.

This is like, you know, you got different services out there, LifeLock and stuff like that. This is like going beyond that and actually have the county actually put something on your deed where you can voluntarily take it off or you just, if you sell the property, then you sign it off. But you will know, you know, immediately if somebody's trying to do something on your property because the county will have to

This will be the first in the state of California.

Yeah.

And I would like to turn this presentation over to our consultant, David Fleck, Esquire of Manning and Cass. He helped us draft the proposed notice of restriction to prevent fraud and indebtedness to theft. And here he is, Mr. Fleck. He will come by.

This guy can definitely explain it better than Paul.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Diktos. And thank you to Mr. Sloan for your office's help with this. And good morning, Chairman. Good morning, Supervisors. Good morning, Mr. Nerland. Next slide. Thank you. Why me? Why am I here? Well, I didn't go to law school to become an expert on deed fraud. But as with everybody, your career takes twists and turns you don't expect. And I remember the day. The day I was handed my first deed fraud case when I was a deputy district attorney in LA County. It was in 2003. And by 2008, I was actually standing in front of this state assembly committee. moving forward some legislation to help prevent deed fraud. I have spent my career focused on this issue. And I probably have represented more victims of deed fraud than any attorney in the country. There's no way to verify that. But I pretty much know everybody involved. And I definitely have spent more years thinking about this problem than anybody out there. So that's why I'm here today to talk. We can move to the next slide. What is deed fraud? Well, deed fraud is identity theft. It's just a certain kind of identity theft. Identity theft is impersonating somebody else to get something you're not entitled to. In this case, people are trying to steal money using the real estate system. So they impersonate somebody else, a homeowner, a property owner. They might impersonate a notary. And they get control of that property with a forged deed. Then with that, they may take out a mortgage against the property. and then disappear into the wind. They might sell the property to an unsuspecting third party. Some of them even will put tenants in there and collect the rents until somebody figures out what's going on. I know of one character in the Antelope Valley who has been doing that for at least eight years, just collecting the rents on five properties that were taken through fraud. So that's what deed fraud is. Next slide. The typical victims are owners of vacant property, owners of second homes where nobody's paying attention on a day-to-day or even monthly basis. Nobody's watching the property on a regular basis. And also elderly folks. Some elderly folks, not everybody, but some, they kind of, life gets a little bit hectic and hard for them to manage, and so they're easy to take advantage in some cases. And so the targets are properties that are easy to do this. That's the key. They want to focus on a property where they can get in and get out quickly. Typically, there's a two-week escrow, get in, get out, and move on. And so that's the trick they're looking for here. So this proposal, the Real Property Fraud Prevention Notice, It is a notice that a property owner can record, would be if you pass it, that they can record that requests that certain things be done. Before the property is sold, mortgaged, or otherwise encumbered, they are requesting that certain things be done. It's not an order. It's not a mandate. It's a request. They're requesting that their identity be validated, be verified by a notary who has been vetted by a qualified title company. And a qualified title company is defined in the ordinance just as a title company that's authorized to do business in California, basically. And that a thumbprint be taken in the notary journal when they do this. The second thing that it requests is that any proceeds that come out of the transaction, whether it's a mortgage or a sale, that it be dispersed only through an account independently verified by that qualified title company, that all the documents are handled by the qualified title company, and that, once again, a second verification is made before closing using the the information that that person, that homeowner has provided previously to verify that they are who they are. And so how does that work? In practice, what they would do is a homeowner would say, okay, I'm worried about deed fraud. So they would select a title company or a lawyer or some other trusted person to deposit their contact information with. They would then fill out this form, and on it, they only put on there the name of the company or lawyer or person or other entity that is holding their contact information. So that's the contact information. That's separate and apart that anything that happens in the transaction, because if the transaction documents are fraudulent, well, then the contact information is fraudulent. So this is putting their contact information with a trusted third party that has to be verified. They have to be verified during the transaction. So this is a, we call it a trip wire. In this situation, what would happen is in a transaction is before a fraudster could record a fraudulent deed, the qualified title company would then have to verify the identity, contact the true owner through that third person to verify that this is something that they want to do. Go ahead, next slide. It says very specifically in the proposed ordinance and in the notice itself that this is not a lien. It's not an encumbrance. It's not any clout on title. It's not a restraint on alienation. It is a request. And that's all it is. It's a request by the true owner to follow these steps if something's going to happen to title of that house. It doesn't add any new costs of any kind other than the standard recording costs authorized by law. Next slide. Let me just say, before I wrap up, because I'm interested in deed fraud, because I've been living for over 20 years, I pay attention to what's going on around the country, what types of ordinances and laws are being implemented around the country. And honestly, most of them are window dressing. Most of them are not that effective. And when I first heard about this, I thought, hmm, is this another one of those things that's just window dressing? but it is definitely not. This adds another layer of protection, because as I told you, these fraudsters are looking for the easy job, the easy fraud. This adds a layer of protection that makes it very difficult to overcome. This will protect elderly homeowners from predators. It will protect owners of vacant properties from overseas fraudsters. It will protect title insurance companies fraud-based claims. I think that this particular notice will be adopted across the country. It's powerful. It's a way for homeowners and property owners to inoculate themselves against deed fraud. Thank you.

Any comments, questions?

Well, I think people need to realize your property and what's recorded is a public document. So, I mean, anybody can go to the recorder's office and look it up and see exactly what the encumbrances are on it. And like he's pointing out, this makes it a little harder because when they do a do a preliminary title report, it will come up that this is on it. So they know it's not going to be that easy to just start filing fraudulent papers to put a mortgage on it or actually try to steal it.

Exactly.

Yeah. So, I mean, it's pretty simple. And I don't know why other counties haven't done this. You know, we've talked about it, but, you know, I think everybody's waiting for somebody to jump first. And I think this is a... I think we need to do this, and I think there'll be other counties that, once they see how we did it, will copy how we did it. And like he was talking about, too, it's basically against people that their mortgages paid off. or they have very little mortgage, they have a second house, could be up at Shaver or Huntington, whatever, and they'll do a title report and find that there's no encumbrance against it. And if you don't have some kind of protection, which is a protection, then they can go through the process of actually borrowing money against it.

It's the easiest way for a fraudster to steal hundreds of thousands of dollars. Yeah.

And this is a voluntary program?

Voluntary.

Right. Any other questions? Any comments from the public, questions from the public? Okay, well, I appreciate you bringing this forward. I appreciate you bringing this forward. And, Assessor Dictos, you being here today, is there a motion and a second?

Yeah, I'll make a motion. I'll second.

All those in favor say aye. Aye. Passes unanimously. Thank you. Thank you.

We now move to item number five in the administrative office. Received presentation from AP Triton regarding the findings and recommendations of its community risk assessment and standards of covered deployment analysis for the Fresno County Fire Protection District.

Good morning Chairman, members of the board, Paul Nerland, your CAO. I'll just say a few introductory comments before we begin this presentation. I remember well a number of years ago when I was still fairly new in this role that I had a conversation with our Fresno County Fire Chief, Dustin Hale, who's in the audience and was also fairly new in his role, and he asked me a question. And the question was, what level of fire protection do we want to see in Fresno County? And that is a question that every resident our community who is threatened by wildfire in any way would have an easy answer to but when we're looking at our community in the end how fire protection works we realized we need to look at this question on a broader scale it asked that really is it position not just now but into the future uh to serve us and i think as you read this report you'll say the answer is both encouraging uh with the partnerships that we have with our partners in not just our fire district but our volunteer departments and so forth but also there's some challenges and uh appreciate what has been put into this report but before we go forward I will turn it over to Amy Riles, who is the analyst in our office, who worked with the team on this project, and go from there. So I'll turn it over to you, Amy.

Thank you, Mr. Nerland. Chairman, board members, Amy Riles with the administrative office. I'm joined today by Mike Despain, CEO of AP Triton, who conducted the standards of cover and community risk assessment of the Fire Protection District. I do want to make a note that Kevin Taylor was the original project manager who was supposed to present today, but due to some travel issues, he wasn't able to make it. So Mr. Despain is taking his place. As Mr. Nerland mentioned, there are a lot of details in that almost 300-page report that you have. But Mr. Despain is just going to cover the findings and recommendations today. And following his presentation, we'll be available for any questions your board may have.

Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chair, members of the board, appreciate the opportunity to come present today. As you said, Kevin couldn't make it, but you get me, and I live down the street, so it's a pretty easy gravel. My name is Mike Despain, again, with AP Trident, about 40 years in the fire service, fire chief and chief fire officer for many agencies in California. Washington and Nebraska, but most notably city of Fresno and city of Clovis. So this is kind of my backyard So I was watching this report throughout as it went through and so I'm pleased with be able to present this today So I'm gonna rush through it pretty quick, but we can always stop for questions if we need So I have to start off with a special thanks to Amy Riles, your principal administrative analyst from the CEO's office, and Fire Chief Dustin Hale and Deputy Fire Chief Ryan Michaels for their effort. If we don't have good partnership, it's hard to get good data and get the collection together for this study. And so we will jump right into it. So AP Trident was commissioned to conduct this community risk assessment standard of cover and deployment analysis for Fresno County Fire Protection District. In addition to your normal CRA SOC that we would do, they also asked for a look at operational performance and an independent look at the independent volunteer fire department system, county contracts, and alternative fire service delivery models. The purpose of the study is to evaluate current system performance, identify operational and organizational challenges, assess community risk, and provide strategic recommendations for moving forward. Fresno County is one of the more complex, operationally one of the more complex organizations we've seen. In California, it's probably the second most complex one I've seen in my years. And the county includes just such diverse areas such as urban fringe areas, rural agricultural communities, mountain communities, remote region, limited infrastructure, significant wild land, and this is stuff that you guys all know as the supervisors. That service is delivered through a complex set of, whereas most counties might have a unified system here, you have just this plethora of agencies, including the combination of Fresno County Fire Protection District, volunteer fire departments, CAL FIRE resources, county contracts, automatic aid systems, regional and mutual aid systems, and partnerships, and all of this together is how you've formed the organization so far. So as we go into our recommendations here, let me make sure I got the right one here. So as we look at the recommended response and standards, this one has to do with, just as Mr. Nerland had said, everybody asks, what level of service do you want? And we would say that the fire service is like a menu. It depends on what the community wants. Some people want higher level service. Some are fine. And it's a balance. Everybody wants the highest level. But you have to pay for it. And so the goal is to get the best service possible for the community with the money that's available. So part of that is to look at the community's desired level of service. And again, that's a policy decision. So even though we're going to cite some national standards, I default to the community. It's a local decision on what that service level looks like. And that has to do with local expectations, risk tolerance, available financial resources, and local community conditions. And so part of the process that we look at is some national standards and recommendations to look at, but the requirement is not to necessarily meet them. It's just to use them as kind of the North Star, if you will. and the direction. So our performance goals, these are just broken down into what we think is initial and short-term, mid-term, or longer-term. And so one of the first recommendations we have is to establish some benchmark performance standards. And these are just examples of how we would break out that, different elements of that, because the reality is the only time that matters is You notice an emergency, you dial 911, and when somebody shows up to say, I'm here to help. The community only cares about that. But we have to break it up into smaller segments to see where we can put effort to make improvements. So these are just examples that we would look at. And these are not necessarily benchmarks you have to keep forever. They might change over time. And a good example, turnout time, the time from when you get an alarm to you have your gear on and you're responding. That has a lot to do with station design and how it's configured, how far away are you from, say, the living quarters and the fire apparatus. New stations, remodels can change that and improve that over time. So those numbers can get improved over time, but we have to have a baseline to start measuring. So our recommended short-term strategies, there's a couple of them here. One is consider formally including the fire chief and the county's executive team. Fresno County should consider establishing a county fire emergency services chief's position that reports directly to the county administrator office. This position would provide central executive oversight for countywide fire protection, emergency medical service coordination, emergency management, disaster preparedness, volunteer fire system support, interagency coordination, and strategic public safety planning. This role would function as a senior level advisor to the county leadership while improving alignment between the emergency service operations, county priorities, budget development, and long-term risk reduction strategies. The position would not necessarily replace existing operational leadership within Fresno County Fire Protection or our independent agencies rather would serve as a coordinating authority focused on countywide policy, regional collaboration, standards implementation, emergency management integration, and system-wide performance improvement. Responsibilities could include oversight of emergency preparedness initiatives, coordination with volunteers and special district fire agencies, grant administration, standards development, mutual aid, and the list goes on. And the outcome of that would be just improve coordination, especially with your volunteer fire departments, special districts, and your partner agencies. enhanced oversight of emergency management disaster planning and billion initiatives also improve the opportunity for let's say economic or efficiencies grants those kind of things this so the cost of this is none the system is already in place it's more of a recommendation that formalizes that position within your your structure for reporting And again, no cost for that one. Number two is consider the development of a consolidated county fire and emergency services agreement under centralized executive leadership. Right now you have multiple agreements. Sometimes they can get a little bit in confliction or there's some confusion. They have different timing on when they expire, when they need to be renegotiated. And by having a centralized coordinated agreement, then all of the items can be discussed at once. continuity with the other agreements that may be in conflict so you avoid that definitely a would speed up things in terms of time and limit some liability it would also improve things like community risk reduction allow for better prevention public education requirements staffing expectations data reporting performance measurement capital planning such as apparatus and facility maintenance The primary cost to this would just be staff time associated with policy development and stakeholder coordination, legal review, and some training implementation. And then three is develop countywide volunteer fire service standards and performance guidelines. Fresno County, in coordination with Fresno County Fire Protection District and volunteer agencies, should develop standardized emergency countywide operational guidelines, establishing minimum expectations for training, incident command, documentation, apparatus readiness, reporting, mutual aid participation, and firefighter safety practices. The standards should be scalable to the capabilities of rural fire agencies while improving system-wide consistency and interoperability. And this would establish a common operational expectation that would improve coordination between all the agencies, enhance firefighter safety, reduce variability in service delivery, and strengthen accountability across that volunteer system. The primary cost to this would be primarily staff time associated with policy development, stakeholder coordination, legal review, training and implementation. And there may be some minor ongoing administrative costs depending on tracking and policy updates. We would say that if you look at instances of firefighter injury and death, the vast majority of them are within the volunteer community. And so we have a little bit of an obligation to make sure we're kind of keeping an eye on that. Next recommendation is expand volunteer recruitment and retention programs There's a number of ways that that could be done it There's a number of practices that the agency could look at so we're not recommending any particular one But as an example the program could evaluate incentives such as stipends training reimbursement tuition resistance assistance tax incentives flexibility in the training delivery models, housing partnerships, and expanded outreach campaigns. And again, volunteers is a dying breed. It's a little hard to recruit and especially retain. Establish the next recommendation to establish a regional volunteer training and compliance program, and that is where the Fresno County Fire Protection District would establish a central regional training and compliance support program for those volunteer agencies. The program would include coordinated training delivery, records management assistance, annual compliance tracking, respiratory protection support, apparatus testing and coordination, and standardized documentation practice. ALIGNED WITH CAL OSHA NATIONAL WILDFIRE COORDINATION GROUP AND NATIONAL FIRE PROTECTION. AND AGAIN, THIS COST IS MODERATE COST ASSOCIATED WITH TRAINING, COORDINATION, SOFTWARE SYSTEM, INSTRUCTOR STAFFING, RECORDS MANAGEMENT AND COMPLIANCE AND ADMINISTRATION AND GRANT FUNDING BY COORDINATING THIS, THERE IS OBVIOUSLY SOME GRANT FUNDING THAT MAY BE ABLE TO OFFSET SOME OF THOSE COSTS. And then recommendation A6 is adopt applicable operational deployment standards from NFPA 1750. And again, NFPA 1750 outlines kind of like best practice for fire agencies, and that addresses rural agencies and urban settings also. Our recommendation is that the agency use that as a benchmark to look at, but refine that actual performance to meet the needs of the community. Part of the reason why establishing those benchmarks are important is because if I move into the community, I may have a certain expectation that that service level and that zone is not gonna meet. By having it documented, then everybody knows what the rules are when you move into the community. Estimated cost implement is moderate ongoing costs associated with policy development training, operational assessment and compliance tracking, data collection, staffing evaluations, and again this could be phased in. This is not an overnight change. Next one is minimum administrative and reporting standards for volunteer agencies. So Fresno County and Fresno County Fire Protection District should establish minimum administrative reporting requirements. for volunteer agencies receiving funding or operational support from the county. And reporting standards should include annual financial reporting, training records, apparatus maintenance documentation, incident reporting compliance, and insurance verification. And then the cost of this is low to moderate administrative costs associated with the reporting system, training, oversight, and compliance and monitoring. And ongoing, this is number eight, conduct a countywide risk management review of the volunteer fire department insurance coverage and liability. Fresno County should direct county risk management in coordination with county council and applicable fire service stakeholders to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of insurance coverage, liability protection, and risk exposure associated with volunteer fire departments. operating within or supporting emergency response in Fresno County. And this is to ensure there's a bit of a forgive the term the firewall between what we're allowing an agency to do that may not be properly insured. And then if something goes wrong, that life could come to the county. AND THIS MODEL SHOULD INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO GENERAL LIABILITY COVERAGE, WORKER'S COMPENSATION OR EQUIVALENT VOLUNTEER INJURY PROTECTIONS, VEHICLE AND APPARATUS INSURANCE, PROPERTY EQUIPMENT COVERAGE, DIRECTOR AND OFFICER'S LIABILITY INSURANCE WHERE APPLICABLE, ACCIDENT AND INJURY COVERAGE FOR VOLUNTEER PERSONNEL. and coverage for training activities, emergency response operations, mutual aid, automatic aid liability implications, and then coverage gaps associated with the informal volunteer organizations. Then we're going down to strengthen the regional system of coordination, interagency performance accountability, so Fresno County, Fresno County Fire Protection District, CAL FIRE, and participating volunteer agencies should formalize a countywide regional coordination framework, establishing consistent operational expectations, performance measures, reporting standards, automatic aid protocols, and government's coordination processes. The framework should include regular interagency review meetings, system performance monitoring, standardized reporting metrics, and periodic evaluation of mutual aid and contract service agreements. And the outcomes of this is just a more enhanced regional coordination and accountability for the whole county and better efficiency, better safety. And the data systems would also allow you to understand better when changes are occurring out in the deployment environment. And then. Recommendation number 10, the last one for this one, is transfer emergency management functions to the Fresno County Fire Protection District. Fresno County should evaluate transitioning the county's emergency manager position and primary emergency management coordination responsibilities from public health department to the Fresno County Fire Protection District. The transition should include organizational alignment of emergency preparedness, response coordination, the Emergency Operations Center, or the EOC, support disaster planning, training exercises, and interagency coordination function under the county's primary emergency response agency. The transition plan should include defined roles, responsibilities, reporting relationships, and coordination expectations with public health and other county departments to maintain continuity of public health emergency planning and disaster coordination activities. And by aligning this management within Fresno County could improve integration between emergency preparedness and operational response functions, strengthen incident management coordination, enhance EOC activation capabilities, and improve continuity between day-to-day emergency response operations and large-scale disaster management. It would also help better align emergency management oversight with county's primary fire rescue EMS hazardous materials and all hazard response agencies, improving operational coordination during emergencies and disasters. The cost to this, primarily administrative and organizational transitional cost associated with personnel reassignment, policy updates, budget transfers, and technology integration.

And, Mike, I may stop you there. I know our board has had an opportunity to read this report in detail. I know they may have some questions. So what I suggest is maybe at this point we allow some time for the board to ask questions. They've had the chance to review this in detail. So with that, Chairman, perhaps just some questions.

Yeah, thank you. Board, any? Yes, Supervisor Magnuson.

Mr. Despain.

Okay.

It's good to see you. Good to see you too, sir. You know, it's interesting because I think 26 years ago when we were meeting together. We were looking for response times, five minutes or less, I want to say 90% of the time. And staffing standards were different, of course, in a city jurisdiction. And some of the benefits of getting fire departments to providing higher levels of service was lowering insurance. So a question I have looking at some of these recommendations that you have for us, I know some of the short-term recommendations about just getting apparatus out to calls sooner. By doing any of that, do you see opportunities for fire insurance that people have on their homes being reduced a little bit? And if there is, can you talk just briefly about that?

Yeah. Yeah. That's a complex issue, so I'll make it very simple. The answer is yes, it could, but it depends. So right now there's a change in the industry. The industry is going away from kind of a locked and loaded readiness model to what is your outcome. So how often did you stop a fire at room of origin? What was the actual fire loss? What are you doing in terms of prevention? to help prevent the fire so that there's not one to happen to begin with. And again, every fire insurance policy has their own rules and where their jurisdiction is, where their boundaries are. Some of them match zip codes, some of them don't. So that's why number one is you have to shop around to find out what the best option is for you. But in this case, absolutely. Many of the items that are in here, including these last few where we talked about community risk reduction is putting a little less emphasis on the operational response and a little bit more on the prevent the fire or the emergency from happening to begin with. That's the biggest way, it's actually the cheapest way to provide the service and the biggest move in insurance because the fire that you don't have and you don't have a claim, that helps you and your policy, but it's also a regional one. So you can think, my house is safe, all the fires are on another area of the jurisdiction, you're still gonna pay that depending on where that geography counts you into that.

Basically reduce risk. Okay, thank you.

Any other, oh, Supervisor Chavez.

Just really briefly, thank you for the presentation. And our CEO is right, we did read the presentation. Really appreciate the work that you and your partner did. I think you met with Supervisor Bredefeld and myself a while back. And I also appreciated Chief Hale's kind of just crash course on just the complexities of fire protection. We have such a big geographical area. I've seen it myself up in the mountains when there's people that experience a medical emergency or a broken, you know, foot or people that think they could get up to Pincushion Trail very easily and find out they can't. I've seen our folks respond. So thank you for that. And then also our Fire Station 87 and the great work that they do in Cali. So I guess, Chief, I just have a quick question for you, if that's okay. So we've got large presentation, a couple of low-hanging fruits. What would you like to see implemented kind of short-term and long-term?

Thank you, Supervisor. I think the best method working in the COO's office is looking through the report and the recommendations. We can do like a tiered or a phased-in approach. I think building the foundational piece of the training components, the compliance, insurance regulations, making sure that we have the ability to work within the budgets. It's always an easy say, oh, we need more firefighters, we need more fire engines. But if we can build in that as a long-term planning tool, but I think the foundational piece, and we can work with the supervisors individually and the CEO staff to come up with some key takeaways from the recommendations. But I think that there are several opportunities that we have to almost... maintain what our current level of funding is just to reorganize it within the budget structure to allow us to hire the bodies to maintain the training, maintain the efficiencies. There's lots of little things that we can do working collectively between the district, the county, CAL FIRE, our neighboring agencies that will still be able to provide a higher level of service. More operational depth with putting safety and looking at reducing the liability I think is the first step.

Thank you, Chief. I appreciate it. The last thing I'll say is I think you introduced me to a lot of people don't know this, but when your phone falls out there, it sends a distress call and you've had your folks respond. I am ready. If I ever need that, I'm going to throw my phone and hopefully respond out there.

Thank you. I got another question for Dustin. Sorry about that. And thank you for the great job and great report. You know, I see this more of a, there's so many facets of this, but coordinating, if we can, between all units, meaning some of the volunteer units that are still out there, and hopefully getting them to the point where you actually, you can have them come to some of your, like the mutual aid isn't just you going into their jurisdiction to fight a fire. Because I don't know if you have any that can go into your jurisdiction and help you. You follow me?

Yeah.

Okay.

There is some, but there are some that don't have liability insurance. And so I think it comes back to now that the report has been generated, who is absorbing that liability? Is it us?

And don't have the advanced training.

Yeah. And so we can reach out and kind of turn the table to where we can provide the training, give them the benefits that they need to have insurance to help minimize their impacts to be able to come and support the system.

And the farther you get from the metropolitan area, the more important that becomes.

Yep, we see it daily.

And then I got Paul to ask him a question. Some of these deals, could we do it administratively, or does this have to be, we actually have to...

The answer is yes. There's something, and I want to, again, just thank Kevin Taylor and Mike for his presentation. But also I could say that these are things that Dust and I, it confirms a lot of things that we've been talking about for several years that now we see it in a document. As you've heard it said, if you have no clear goals, you hit them every time. This has some goals for us to move forward. I do think for us the next step is coming back with an updated agreement with the fire district, the consolidation that was referred to. So there is some board action where we could take that into effect and then look at the speed in which we implement some of these. So there's some we can do, but some we would need to come back to your board to formally implement, and some we We've already started kind of prepping for pending any direction or input from your board.

Thank you. Any other comments? Yes, Supervisor Michael.

And Dustin, correct me if I'm wrong, but was it 2019? That's when this board entered into an agreement with CAL FIRE to provide some protection in white areas. And what we're looking for now is kind of a substitute to that, even though I think that was a 20-year agreement. There's additional resources that are needed to provide additional coverage. So if you want to talk about that a little bit, that'd be helpful.

Yeah, so in 2018, before you was an agreement, there's roughly 980,000 acres of unprotected land in Fresno County that do not have fire protection. And whether it's the state responsibility or the federal responsibility, there needs to be some level of local control for infrastructure, structures, the normal day-to-day medical aids, those don't fall to the wildland agencies. CAL FIRE being an all-risk agency, we are able to do that. We had the Amador agreement that basically had an agreement between the county, which would be the local agency, and CAL FIRE. 2018, of that almost roughly a million acres that was under contract with the fire district to be able to provide adequate level response for those. Subsequently we had the Creek Fire. Several fires in the last eight years from that instance have occurred within the unprotected lands where between the district and CAL FIRE we were able to mitigate that reducing the fiscal impacts across the board. So as we continue to grow, costs have increased since then. We've had an outbreak of COVID, skyrocketing infrastructure costs of station builds, repairs, apparatus replacement. And so as all those costs continue to increase, we look at how do we better and more efficiently provide a higher level of service while maintaining fiscal responsibility and accountability. And so this time, we have MOU 2.0, which was the bridge to get where we needed to be with the increased work week, or the reduction of the work week. MOU 1.0, and then we have the amateur program that's going away because the CAL FIRE piece is going to have year-round staffing. So we have the opportunity now that we can redirect some of those amateur possibilities into one wholesale agreement that would provide an adequate level of funding to look at a long-term strategic plan that would allow us to look at growth whether it's fire station locations increased in fire stations but because of the way that we're situated there might be opportunities if budgets uh align that you know we could do increased level of staffing within the cal fire station with with other resources that could help minimize the community risk reduction could help having uh bigger larger pump capacities which increase your fire protection lowers your ISOs in those rural underserved areas to go to your point to potentially reduce insurance premiums so all of that starts but I think the best way is rather than having several different agreements out there we consolidate into one where we have one master agreement that provides level protection county-wide

Okay. I just wanna say I appreciate all the work that you and the firefighters do throughout the county. Got a chance to be at your training center and see what you all do and it's amazing work and it's dangerous work and you, like our sheriffs and police officers, do everything you can to make our community safe. So I greatly appreciate what you do every single day. I just wanna say it. Yes, sir.

One more thing. This is, I think, a receive and file item. But when it's time, if the board is supportive, I'd like to direct staff, Paul Nerland specifically, to work with the fire chief and, of course, Mike Despain to begin to put together an item that this board can act upon to begin to move in the direction to implement some of these things that are in the plan and also what the chief talked about as well.

Can we just do that for direction? Do you need a motion?

You can give general direction to come back with something later.

Yeah, that's very needed. Yeah. Any, go ahead, I'm sorry. We need to do something other than sit on our hands.

Any comments from the public? Okay, I will bring this back. So this is, you have direction, and we will move forward then. Okay, thank you very much, Chief.

Next item, please.

Mr. Chairman, I apologize. I was just informed from the Business Journal that we may have a publication issue on item six. So, if we could move to seven to get clarification and discuss with Public Works and Planning and come back to six. So, we'll move to seven first. Okay. Go to number seven. We'll move to item number seven under Public Works and Planning. Consider appeal of Planning Commission's denial of initial study number 8517, unclassified conditional use permit number 3778 and variance application number 4158, which proposed to allow operation of a special event facility and grant a variance to allow a mapping procedure to create two substandard sized parcels from existing 10.39 acre subject parcel.

Before we start, do any board members need to report any ex parte communications they've had on the matter? Seeing none, okay.

You have Public Works and Planning here to present. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. I'm Jeremy Shaw with the Department of Public Works and Planning. This item comes to your board on appeal of the Planning Commission's June 18th denial five to zero with three commissioners absent and one abstaining of unclassified conditional use permit application number 3778 and variance application number 4158. The project proposes to allow the operation of an event facility with a concurrent variance to create two substandard sized parcels from an existing 10.39 acre parcel. The project site is located adjacent to the northwest corner of the intersection of Fowler and Manning Avenues, outside the City of Fowler's sphere of influence. At the Planning Commission's June 18th hearing, the Commission heard testimony from the project applicant and applicant's representatives. Code enforcement staff provided information on the violation and on-site inspections, and testimony was received from individuals both in favor of and in opposition to the proposal. Those in opposition cited concerns with excessively loud music and bright lights during events. Following the Planning Commission's denial, an appeal was filed by the applicant and appellant on June 24th, 2026. In conclusion, if your board is able to make able to determine that the required findings for granting approval of CEP number 3778 and variance number 4158 can be made, your Board may adopt the draft resolution on file with the Clerk to grant the appeal and approve unclassified conditional use permit application number 3778 and variance number 4158 and adopt the mitigated negative declaration based on initial study number 8517, subject to the proposed mitigation measures, conditions of approval and project notes, with the additional conditions for indemnification and public water system requirements. If your board is unable to make the required findings for granting CEP number 3778, the board may make a motion to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's denial of unclassified conditional use permit application number 3778 and variance application number 4158. Thank you. I'm available should you have any questions.

Any questions from the Board?

None? Okay. We will now open the hearing to receive public testimony. If the appellant is here, they have five minutes to present. Are they here? Okay.

Good morning, Honorable Supervisors. My name is John Kinsey with Wanger Jones Helsley. And I'm here with Mr. Gurjan Khosa, who is here on behalf of the Sunset Acres. I want to thank you for your consideration of this project today. As the county grows, there's a real need for top-tier event spaces, and the Sunset Acres provides that type of space where members of the community county residents can convene and gather with their friends, colleagues, and loved ones. This is a professionally designed venue that really is kind of a state of the art amenity that the county can be proud of. I want to reiterate that the Sunset Acres and the Coases are members of this community. They live here, they work here, and it's important for them to be a good neighbor. To that end, they've taken the community feedback that they've received at public meetings and otherwise, and have responded to that feedback in tangible, meaningful ways. With respect to lighting and glare, the lighting or this facility will be faced downward and shielded. With respect to noise management, the speakers are faced inward, and there's continuing monitoring during events at the boundary to make sure there's no leakage. Events must stop by 10 p.m. With respect to traffic and those concerns, the traffic's been evaluated by a professional, John Roland, who you're familiar with, and to ensure that the traffic impacts won't affect the surrounding community. They also believe in responsible hospitality. They take safety very seriously, especially when it comes to alcohol. They only authorize the use of licensed, trained vendors and bartenders who are trained how to spot fake IDs, for example, and to make sure that nobody gets over-served. They also shut down the bar completely at 9.30, so everyone has plenty of time to wind down and to head home safely. We have our transportation and noise consultants here with us if you have any questions. But I did want to thank you for your time and your consideration of this appeal. And with that, I'd like to turn it over to Gajan Khosa.

Good morning. First of all, I'd like to thank the Board of Supervisors And my name is Gurjan Khosa. I live at 421 East South Avenue in Fowler, California. And I wanted to thank you for your consideration of the CUP of the Sunset Acres. And I also like to thank the staff of Prisoner County Planning Department. We live here and we work here. We strive to be the best neighbors we can be. Our family is very proud of this venue. It is a special place for us. members of our community to celebrate the most important events of their lives. We truly appreciate your time today and all you do for the Fresno County and the rural community out there. I am a farmer, so I do appreciate what you all do for us out there in the rural area. I'll be happy to answer any questions that you might have. Okay.

All right, any other comments in favor of the appeal? Anybody who would like to? Yes, please come forward.

Good morning, Fresno County supervisors. My name is Benta Fromm-Friesen. Prior to my recent move to Clovis, I have lived in two homes, the first at 8745 South Fowler Avenue, Fowler, immediately adjacent to the property being discussed today. I lived there from 1962 until I married in 1979. My parents lived there until my mom's passing in 2009. and my dad until 2019, when he was 91 years old. The second home I have lived in is at 6596 East Parlier Avenue Fowler, about a quarter mile from the Kosas property. I owned and occupied that residence from 1982 until just about a year ago. My comments today are to share my experiences with the Cosa family as exceptional and thoughtful neighbors. Having lived in such close proximity to the proposed Sunset Acres, I have firsthand experience of its impact. Our families never experienced inconvenience from this venture. It has not created undesired noise or light. It had not created undesirable or impactful changes in traffic patterns. What has been impactful is the beautification of the property itself and the properties surrounding it. The property had not been used for any agricultural purposes for many, many years. The owners, Gurjant and Preet, removed an eyesore deteriorating barn, adding trees, roses, and grass to create an aesthetically pleasing property, a home anyone would welcome as a neighbor. My family home and property adjacent to the Kosas property was sold in 2019. The buyers severely neglected the property, killing 2 and 1 half acres of walnuts, half an acre of oranges, and the amazing gardens my dad had nurtured for over 60 years.

Yeah, please just finish up.

Thank you. When the Kosas bought the home in 2023, they cleared away the acres of dead trees, pole weeds, tumbleweeds, and a shed that it was often tagged with graffiti. They repaired the house and made a lovely residence again. The zoning changes in and around the property have been significant in recent years. Our own property and my parents' property were at one time restricted from building additions because of Ag 20 regulations.

Okay, ma'am, could you close it?

I have one very brief paragraph.

OK. Go ahead.

Thank you. I appreciate it. Ultimately, the county supported requested changes, and we were able to improve our properties for purposeful use. The Fresno County Planning Commission personnel have assisted the COSAs in addressing the requests and suggestions of the commission, as well as concerns of a few neighbors. They desire to offer a diverse community in and around Fowler the greatly needed venue where families can honor and celebrate life events. In addition to the venue, the Kosas seek to establish their primary residence next to the venue, a testimony to their commitment to the property. This is a unique, lovely, and timely opportunity for our community. Thank you for your time and favorable consideration. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am. Any other comments in favor of the appeal? YES, SIR. WELCOME.

THANK YOU. MY NAME IS JOEL RIVERA. I'M A BUSINESS OWNER OUT OF THE CITY OF FOWLER, BUSINESS OWNER FOR 39 YEARS, R&R, AUTO REPAIR, U-HAUL FOWLER, AND RED CAT TOWING. I want to thank you for the opportunity to come up here and speak. Gurjant has invested a tremendous amount of time, money, and hard work into building this business. Sunset Acres is not simply a property, it's someone's livelihood and a business that provides a place for families and communities to come together for weddings and special events. Grijal has made every effort to operate Sunset Acres responsibly and to address the concerns of the county and the surrounding community. Environmental studies have been completed along with traffic and noise studies. These studies were specifically done to evaluate the potential impacts of the business. The venue also operates primarily on weekends and events generally can conclude no later than 10 o'clock p.m. Gurjan is not only trying to create a not trying to create a problem for his neighbors. He is trying to operate a legit business while being a responsible member of the community. A lot has already been invested in making Sunset Acres comply with the county's requirements. Closing the business or placing restrictions on it that make it impossible to operate would have a serious financial impact on Gurjan and his family as well as the Many employees, vendors, caterers, wedding professionals, and other local businesses that benefit from the event held there. I'm asking the county to please consider the studies that have been already completed, the efforts Grijal has made to comply, and the reasonable way this venue operates. We are not asking for special treatment. We're asking for a fair opportunity for Sunset Acres to continue operating as a responsible business in Fresno County. Please do not take away someone's livelihood when he has made a genuine effort to follow the process, address the county's concerns, and be a good neighbor. Thank you for your time and for considering your job and Sunset Acres and everyone whose livelihood depends on this business. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else to speak in favor?

Hello. Good morning, everybody. My name is Ajit Singh Gill. I know Mr. Khosa and their family since 1977. Everybody is very, very responsible. Mr. Khosa is very responsible. He turned that junkie place into the very, very nice place and a community needed. of the wedding and everything. He's a very responsible person. And so I think we should give him opportunity and think about it. Thank you, everybody. Thank you.

Good morning, supervisors. My name is Don Talija. I live at 5699 Manning Avenue, which is catty corner across from the venue. It's less than a tenth of a mile away. Anything between it is just vineyards. So, I mean, if I'm going to hear a noise or whatever, it's going to be there. I'm almost 80 years old. If anybody's going to complain, I'm the guy that should be complaining. But I'm not. I enjoy the venue. I enjoy when they're having fun over there, when it's a wedding, a quinceanera, or whatever. Fowler needs a place like this. They've done a heck of a job with developing the property. It was, I know for a fact, it was not a great property. And they made it into a wonderful place. My ex, the house I'm in, my ex-grandparents built. It's been there forever. She was there for a long time, too, before she passed away. So I would just like to say, if you could please pass this ordinance for them. It's going to be good for them. It's going to be pretty good for the county, as well as good as for Fowler, California. Thank you very much.

Thank you, sir. Anyone else to speak in favor of the appeal?

Hi, good morning, supervisors. Welcome. My name is and I was basically born and raised in Fowler my whole life. I live on 5431 East Parlier Avenue in Fowler, California, which is within the quarter mile radius of Sunset Acres. I am in favor and support of the event hall. I think the property event hall are all aesthetically pleasing. I drive by there every day, and he's always making improvements, and he's a very hard worker. Mr. Cosa is a very respectful and nice person, and he's always willing to work with you. And from what I've been hearing, he's been trying his best and putting all his effort hard-earned money and sweat. And he's a farmer. He's always hardworking. He's always been working. Anytime I pass by, he's there. And he always greets you with respect and love. And I also believe it's a great, valuable place for weddings, celebrations, and other community events. We've never really had anything like that in our Fowler community. So I think it's a good addition. And as far as the noise and living nearby, I don't have any concerns with the venue. And as far as the noise, I don't really hear much noise. I think our coyotes are louder than the event center. I just wanted to make it real short because I know you guys don't have much time. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anyone else want to speak in favor of the appeal? Hi, welcome.

First, I want to thank you for this opportunity to speak in front of you. I was kind of afraid to speak at the last meeting, and so I kind of regretted that. So I wanted to make sure I spoke today. My family resides at 5616 East Manning Avenue, which is about 0.28 miles from the venue itself. I'm usually outside from late afternoon to the late evening working in the yard trying to keep up the property I've witnessed events I Could barely hear any noise coming from the events. There's probably only been one time but I mean other than that it's to a minimum. The lights are nice to have out there. They're kind of comforting, because without them, it is pitch black. And they're not always on. So it's not like it's a big distraction. There's been moments where I'll go in the house and tell my mom, hey, you know the lights are on tonight. She doesn't even notice. Doesn't notice that music is playing from inside the house. We have one pane windows. We can hear diesel trucks passing our house, shaking our house. So I mean, we would hear noise. especially Hirsch. So I think it's a benefit to the community. There's not much that we have in Fowler in terms of venues. It would be nice to have something local for the younger generation to go to and utilize, especially for the schools. It would be a little bit more comforting, I'm pretty sure, for parents knowing that their children are closer to the community rather than going out to Clovis or Fresno areas. Even members from Selma could probably utilize that as well. So I think it would be a great benefit. He's put a lot of work into it. And from the reports, it seems that he's been very responsible as well. Thank you. Thank you again.

Thank you very much. Anyone else wish to speak in favor of it, the appeal? Okay, anybody wish to speak against the appeal? Seeing none, okay. Yes? Okay.

Thank you. My name is Caris Campbell, and I live at 9403 South Claremont. And I oppose giving a conditional use permit to the COSAs operating in Sunset Acres. Their facility is very inappropriate for a quiet country location due to the frequent high level of noise, light, and traffic congestion, which has all now, for almost 3 and 1 half years, very negatively impacted our quality of life. The first few homes on our block are less than half a mile from the venue as the crow flies and are subject to the intense glare from their yard lights during events. They have finally, within the last two weeks, moved only three of the lights that were particularly bright and intrusive. But had they wanted to be good neighbors, they would have done this much sooner instead of waiting for two and a half years since they knew that it was a problem and coincidentally just before this hearing. They also have very tall palm trees, which are circled with lights. And the palm trees are probably close to 80 to 100 feet tall. You can see them from a very long distance. Loud noise and music, including profane lyrics, words that I would not repeat, are heard by the children on our block and by us. We've called the Fresno County Sheriff's Office over 60 times. We don't want to keep calling the police. and the police report that they're treated very rudely by the COSAs. Sunset Acres is constantly disturbing the peace. I hate to have to call the police because of Sunset Acres' refusal to follow the rules that apply to all of us. The COSAs have stated that their nearest neighbor to the north is not opposed to their events, but that property is owned by the COSAs, and beyond that is a cemetery. We want our lives back without intrusion every weekend of noise, lewd lyrics, traffic congestion, extra dust, and excessive lights. Water use in this area is also a problem when you have that many people. Third, the city of Fowler opposes Sunset Acres due to having annexed property less than half a mile away from where there will be construction of 179 new homes in the near future. These would consist of families with many more children being subjected to these same issues. And the city of Fowler has also fielded numerous complaints about Sunset Acres. Lastly, everyone should have to follow the rules and regulations. The COSAs have not done this. When purchased, the property had a single family home and a barn. The Kosas, without any permits, made all the changes to convert the property into an event center. and began operating without a permit. All this time, almost over three years, they have been operating without a permit. They knew this. They were reported by a neighbor adversely affected by their operation. Fresno County Code enforcement issued a cease and desist order to them, and they ignored it. They went on continuing. We have video evidence that they were continuing to operate. The COSAs have a proven record of ignoring legitimate concerns of their neighbors and threatening those who oppose them. At least two neighbors report being chased in a vehicle by someone associated with the COSAs. They have no regard for their neighbors or the regulations, and I hope the board will not reward three years of illegal operation and will not give them a conditional use permit. Thank you for hearing me.

Thank you, ma'am. Anyone else?

I'm Radley Reap. Good morning, Provisors. I will not have time to read everything in the letter, but I'll leave that to you to do. Sure. With regard to the request to subdivide the property through a variance, there is simply no merit or legal basis for the request. The applicant claims that there are four exceptional, extraordinary, or unique circumstances or conditions that apply to the land. One, The property is substandard in size. Two, the parcel is non-productive farmland. Three, proximity to the Fowler Cemetery makes parcel less than ideal for farming. And four, an irrigation pipeline easement traverses a portion of the property. In truth, substandard sized parcels are abundant in the county. This is in no way an extraordinary circumstance. There's no credible evidence that the parcel is not suitable for agriculture or that proximity to the cemetery makes farming suboptimal. And if truth be known, the buried pipeline does not traverse the property as claimed by the applicant. The applicant also claims the need to preserve two property rights. First, the right to split the parcel to bring it into consistency with other similar sized residential properties in the vicinity. Two, the right to create a residential parcel because farming is not a viable option. Farming would put unnecessary strain on the area's water supply. And because farming, the parcel would detract from the efficiency and sustainability of neighboring farms. Your board knows that owning a subsidized parcel does not afford the property owner the right to divide property. You also know that there's no credible evidence in the record that the parcel is unproductive farmland. Furthermore, you have no proof that farming the parcel would place a strain in the area's limited water resources or would detract from the efficiency or susceptibility of the surrounding farms. Thank you. In conclusion, one sentence, please.

Go ahead.

There is no credible evidence in the record to support the need to support a substantial property right. It just doesn't exist. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello, I'm Evelyn Beisel, and I have a letter from a person who wants to remain anonymous, so I'll read it quickly. Dear Fresno Board of Supervisors, the Sunset Acres event venue opened in June 2022 and has hosted 100 plus events Since opening without a conditional use permit, they are serving alcohol and law enforcement has been called an estimated 50% of the events for various noise complaints and physical altercations, as well as them continuing to be untruthful to the numerous County of Fresno departments that they have communicated with neighbors and law enforcement personnel. I'm not sure how this continues to happen. There are multiple signed petitions by the neighbors, photographic evidence, video evidence, logs of the calls to emergency response agencies, and also a denial by the County of Fresno Board of Supervisors of their application. In most cases, an event facility that continues to operate in this manner would either be locked by Sheriff's Department or the owner arrested for continued violations, lies, and disregarding direct orders. Where do we go from here? Do the residents of Fowler and Fresno County need to take legal action to get this issue resolved? Who is paying for each time the law enforcement is being called out for repeated violations at the Advanced Center? Has the owner agreed to pay for this? Will the county super enforcement department need to work overtime to be called at 11 PM on Saturday nights to see that the parties are taking place? They've had events all nights of the week and even on Saturday nights. Events have lasted until 10 PM or later. Who is in charge here? Where does it end? Will they actually stick to the event days that are allowed and the hours from 4 to 10 PM? Is there adequate fire protection for the storage barn that has numerous commercial air conditioning units attached to it? In an area zone for agriculture, how would the neighbors feel when their water table levels drop from the venue? hosting one to three events every weekend for 40 weeks out of the year. Between the hundreds, if not thousands, of shrubs, roses, bushes, trees planted on the property in the last four years, how much water is being used to keep them alive? Do the property taxes paid in the last four years in operation reflect all the improvements made? How do the portable restrooms or sective systems on the property handle 400 plus people? per weekend. Do they have permits for ag burning that has taken place? And now that you can see the concerns of the residents of Fowler and Fresno County have sensed that acres will need to follow the rules, be honest and have general concern for the quality of life we now enjoy in Fowler and Fresno County. The people have spoken. Thank you. Thank you. Lifelong Fowler resident. Thank you. Thank you.

Anyone else?

Good morning.

My name is Barbara Bray. I live at 9403 South Claremont Avenue in Fowler. I'll be brief. At the previous meeting of the Planning Commission, Sunset Acres was told to cease and desist their events. They never did until the last meeting when the 5-0 vote was against them. Last year, we were encouraged to film and document the steady stream of loud and illegal events. When my friend and I pulled off the road to take pictures one evening, a big white pickup pulled around, and a man said, do you need help? I said, no, thank you, but we're fine. He then said, no, you're not fine. I know who you are. Well, he didn't know me from a hill of beans. I had never been there to take pictures and I'd never seen him before. He proceeded to spin around and pull up to us within inches and shine his bright lights in our faces. These two items were the beginning of his harassment as he followed us super close for about two miles south on Fowler Avenue until we pulled over and then he followed us back. We finally pulled over at the interstate and called 911. He circled, rolled his window down and yelled, damn bitches. We ended at the Fowler police station. One officer followed him out of downtown and pulled him over just to hear him say that he was just going home. When I told the officer I didn't know who it was, the officer said, it's him, the owner of Sunset Acres. We showed the officer photos of his license plate, and they transferred our videos documenting that event. Despite the good things they say and you've heard, this is the way they treat their neighbors, with anger, harassment, and threats. The Coases bought that property from Donnie and Kelly Wiggins, who are good friends of ours, 15 years or so. We both raised beautiful alpacas in our pastures and barns, and we played pickleball with them on the weekends. In conclusion, as the Coases have claimed, they were not an existing event center, but zoned for agriculture. The Coases said it was agriculturally vacant. No. Thanks for this opportunity to speak truth, hoping that you will honor the importance of following the rules and regulations of running a business in Fresno County. Thank you. I have copies, if I could share with them.

Is there anyone else that wishes to speak?

Thank you, members, for allowing me to speak. My name is . I live on Claremont in Fowler. I respectfully ask the board to deny the CPU for the Sunset Acres. My concerns are not personal, and they are based on firsthand observations. From 23 to May of 26, I observed approximately 100 events. The impact of increased traffic is noticeable. The road reflector has been removed and driveway added to accommodate large-scale events. The light pollution goes beyond the property line. Noise. Noise has been my primary concern. From my backyard, I've been able to hear amplified music and explicit lyrics. from events. For example, I've heard the song, What's Your Fantasy by Ludacris from my property. Event trash is often seen along the roadside or at the vineyard. The neighboring farmer may feel uncomfortable to or be hindered when disc inner sprain is required. Will this event soon adversely affect the desirability and property, the value, and the value of surrounding properties? Who is accountable for this? I wonder how events will be monitored in the future. As stated by Mrs. Cosa at the June 2025 commissioners meeting, the Sunset Acres is, quote, not our bread and butter, end quote. It sounds more like a hobby for them. It does not affect their livelihood. One interesting observation I've made is that the coasts have already leveled or prepared the land they would like to parcel. And that makes me feel very presumptuous of them. The CUSAs are also being sued by the county for not following the rules. Finally, approving the CUP teaches them that the rules don't really apply if you're able to withstand a slap on the wrist. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Anyone else? Good morning.

You're welcome, sir.

My name is Rod Beisel. I've lived there since 1983 at 9254 South Claremont. And in the past, one time, I got a petition or a notification that somebody wanted to do a variance on property. It was to the west. I looked at it. Didn't concern me. Didn't bother me. And I can't remember what it was about, but it was But I got the notification. We have never received a notification, ever. They've been there for four years. Kazimier, you've heard it all. We haven't received any information since about notification. Or nobody's come to talk to us about what can be done. They've heard it here. The lights, they don't shine down. They said they're going to put the lights shining down. And they shine out. And they're the LEDs, which are extremely bright. They're not like the mercury vapor or the high pressure sodium. But also, they built the building venue with a permit for storage. That's how they got it built. They talk about the antiquity of the houses there. But I've seen venues that use old barns. And they just tore the barn down. It would have been, I don't know for sure. It's gone now. But I don't know why they didn't renovate the barn that was there. It was a picturesque little barn, despite what somebody says. It was really cute. But the noise. OK, the noise is really bad, and the lights are worse, because they pointed south, and that they have indicated in other times is one of the reasons we see a lot of noise. I found out they aim, it's come out that they aim the speakers to the southwest. That's where we are. And I don't know why we should be subjected to this. Maybe the gentleman that lives catty corner from them, maybe they could aim the speakers at him, since he likes the noise. But since they never properly ever started in a proper manner, and they have lawyers in the family, they know what's proper. And they just went ahead and, you know, what is it, beg forgiveness? Well, I don't think we should forgive them for that. And it's not their livelihood.

OK. Thank you.

OK. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anyone else wish to speak?

Hello, my name is Laura, and I live at 9282 South Claremont. Thank you for the time to voice my concerns about the business of the Sunset Acres. The Sunset Acres were told to stop operating during the Planning Commission meeting on June 26, 2025, but they did not. During the Planning Commission meeting on June 18, 2026, They stated they only had one event in February 2026. This is not true. They had over a dozen events throughout that time frame. The last event was on May 31st, 2026. Like others said, previously mentioned, the lights are very, very bright. They have recently moved the parking lot lights from the north side to the south side. But again, I asked them to do that two to three years ago. Why now? Because they want their CUP. The noise, this business has to conduct a field study. It stated that the noise would not have an impact on their neighbors. It is disturbing my peace. I can hear DJ announcements. I can hear music that sometimes contains bad language. The Sunset Acres said that they monitor the music with noise meters. However, there is no one monitoring the Sunset Acres. Also, some events have lasted until 12 a.m. The Sunset Acres said that this was an existing event facility. This is not true. The Sunset Acres bought this property a few years ago, and they created this events facility before obtaining the proper permits. I've never owned a business before, and I even know I have to get a permit to do it. Even with simple research, I know that. The Sunset Acres have said that this property was agriculturally abandoned. This is not true. It was owned by people that lived in the home and had alpacas and kept the property maintained. This business should not be allowed to operate. When I tell people that they are operating without the proper permits, they do not feel it is right or fair. Some businesses in the community tell me they do not feel comfortable signing the petition in opposition because they fear retaliation on their livelihoods. This is not right. It appears that they don't have to follow the rules unless they are forced. Everyone must follow the rules and regulations which they have not been. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? OK, I'm going to bring it back. Comments, questions?

Yeah. Mr. Mata, now, what are some of the conditions that originally you told them they had to do, and what did they do? Like the lighting, for instance.

Well, our zoning ordinance requires hooded lighting that has to be directed away from surrounding properties. So that actually is a requirement in our zoning ordinance now. If either through complaints or inspection shows that's not the case, they would need to move that lighting around so it's not causing glare on the properties. There's noise mitigation. that's attached to this project that requires noise metering in the direction of the speakers. We've added conditions to require them to cease operation by 10 p.m. for outdoor events and then clean up ends by 12. And generally, we're looking at mostly the outdoor noise impacts, trying to deal with things that we've heard neighbors' concerns on. So timing, noise mitigation, Those are things that we've added as far as conditions of approval and, of course, the lighting is something.

So they basically did what you told them they had to do.

Our understanding as far as operating, continuing to operating, I can't speak to that, although we know that there's been calls to service out there and code enforcement has been involved with that. But we do have conditions to try to address these issues that have been raised.

Prior to the. Planning Commission, because this is basically, can you make the findings? I mean, I'm going to use finding one that the size of the proposed use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the use of all yard spaces, walls, fences, parking. Did they meet that? DAVID BURRAGE.

Staff was able to make those findings. There's overflow parking available on the site to deal with extra. folks that, you know, as long as they're not exceeding the total number in the op statement, but staff reviewed the site plan and there's adequate parking, there's adequate setbacks from adjacent properties, so staff has been able to make that finding.

Okay, finding two, it says the site for proposed use relates to streets, highways adequate in width and pavement type to carry quantity of the kind of traffic generated by this proposed use. Did they meet that?

Yes, they did. They did a traffic impact analysis. And then the only condition that came out of that is that they need to do a traffic management plan for events that they work with the Road Maintenance and Operations Division to submit those plans.

OK. The proposed use will not have any adverse impact on a budding property in the surrounding neighborhood or allowed use thereof?

The staff was able to make that finding based on the mitigation measures and conditions.

OK, and the last one is the proposed development is consistent with a general plan.

And staff was able to make that finding. Event centers are permitted with a conditional use permit now in agricultural zone districts, and there are a number of them in the county.

OK. Anybody else can ask questions. Oh, I have a question.

Mr. Motto, one of the residents said they didn't receive any notification. Do we send notifications out for this kind of thing or not?

We do, quarter mile. Quarter mile.

Everyone within a quarter mile should have received a notification. That's correct. Okay. Also on this agenda item, they want to split this property into two. Is that correct?

That's correct.

What is the need for that?

The applicant requested to do that so they could separate the event facility from the other part of the parcel so that if they want to build a house on there, they can do that and keep them separate. Staff was able to make the findings for the variance.

So staff made the file, OK. Did they build a significant portion of this without proper permits?

There was activity that occurred without permits. They do have permits in process. They aren't all final because it's pending this land use application, but there were barn activity and some other things that happened that were

been done so now they've been out and they've been inspected and then they've passed all of those we haven't completed all the inspections but they do have permits in process and there's other things such as the restroom finish that's a condition of this project my last question it's been stated several times that during the Planning Commission they were asked to stop but it seems other people said they kept going what do what do you know about that

Those complaints would have gone to code enforcement. We did check with the sheriff's office. There were calls to service, I think, from February to, and staff can check the most recent call, mostly related to noise. So our understanding is that there were events, I don't know how many, but there were calls to service out there.

OK. I have one of these in my district. We had similar concerns. We put several measures against that. I'm assuming this, too, is a conditional use permit?

That's correct.

What are the ramifications if they violate our conditions? What happens?

Revocation. We can bring it back to the decision-making body, to your board. For instance, revocation of the conditional use permit if they don't comply with their conditions.

And what sets the parameters for that?

Really, violation of any of the conditions. If we get complaints or code enforcement gets complaints, they don't. resolve the issue, then we can take it back to them.

OK, my question more specifically would be, how many complaints do we have to get before it comes back?

There isn't a number. There isn't a number. It could be one complaint. If they're not operating, they don't.

So if they're supposed to close down by 10 and they stay open until midnight and the neighbor files a complaint, what happens?

Code enforcement or? contacts them and we're contacted and it continues to happen, then we would send them a letter, say, we're going to revoke your use permit if it doesn't improve or if there's a pattern then we'll bring it back for revocation.

Yeah, because I think the one speaker said they just kept going because there was no teeth or getting slapped on the risk. And I can appreciate that. So I'd like to have a little teeth. The one in my district seems to be operating fairly well. This is definitely more split. We have half in favor, half opposed. So it's a tough, tough call. But for those in opposition, If they are you know, and then for me my only concern I'm willing to give people a chance but it seems like they kind of push the outer envelope and even when they weren't supposed to they pushed anyway, and I don't really appreciate that quite frankly and Don't like that and think when you're asked to stop and you're under review you need to stop and if you think you're gonna push the envelope and keep going that's just not right and Not right. And so for me, Mr. Chairman, I'd like the applicant to come back forward and answer for that personally, if that'd be all right with you.

Yeah, would you like him to come up?

I would. Of course. Yeah, I want an answer to that.

So I did want to make sure, this is John Kinsey again, and I'm bringing up Mr. Costa. I did want to make sure that we were clear on the timelines. Yes. So after the Planning Commission meeting, my understanding is that the event ceased. There was actually an event that was scheduled, I believe it was for this month, for August. And that resulted in a very difficult conversation with a bride. where she had to be refunded, damages were paid to her, and she unfortunately had to look for a different location for her wedding. So that ceased pending, you know, the outcome of this hearing.

So you as an attorney, what is your justification for even scheduling such a thing when you're not fully permitted? Yeah, how do you justify that?

Yeah, oftentimes those are scheduled before these events arise to this level. So unfortunately that happens, but ultimately the COSA's made it right to the bride. And since the Planning Commission meeting, I just wanted to make sure we were clear on the timeline. Since the Planning Commission meeting, there haven't been any events.

You're going to state that for the record? Yes. So if I go and bring the sheriff's log in here, and they go out there and had events, you're going to state that didn't occur?

There were no events. I can't speak as far as calls for service, whether there were complaints, but there were no events. And Mr. Cochran can confirm.

Yes, Mr. Pacheco. There were no events, and there were no sheriff department ever called in or contacted us as a family about any situations after the planning commission meeting.

Well, let's be clear on that timeline because I think there was a planning commission meeting a couple months ago, but then there was one in 2025, and that was my understanding that in 2025 there was a statement saying that activity should cease and desist. So to your point, just to make sure we're talking about appropriate timelines, are you saying there haven't been any events since the summer of 2025 until today? No. Go ahead.

Yeah, no, when I was referring to the Planning Commission meeting, I was referring to the Planning Commission meeting a couple months ago. And since that time, there have been no events. Obviously, there were events prior or after mid-2025. That's something that the COSAs, obviously, have been working through with staff. And they understood. Obviously, after the second planning commission meeting, they needed to stop. And they did, until they ultimately got their land use approvals, if the Board of Supervisors does decide.

CHRIS JERRAM, I'm sure you're aware that us, the five up here, we have a balancing act. And I believe every one of us believes in personal property rights, and you should be allowed to do what you want with your property. However, those of us in ag also believe you shouldn't interfere with someone else's rights as well. So I hope your applicant, again, this is in Supervisor Mendez's district. So he will have the greatest say, just like we're giving all that courtesy in our districts. So whatever his recommendation is, I'm prepared to support that. if he is willing to give you the conditions to meet, as has happened in my district. If you violate that, I'd be the first one to make a motion to take it away from you. I don't care how much money you have invested, because you've been given a chance. You've been told. And if you violate that rule against the defiance of the members of this board, then you shouldn't be allowed to operate. And I want to make that perfectly clear if you're given the opportunity to go forward. Do you understand that? CHRIS JERRAMSEN. Yes, sir. OK. Then we're good.

Thank you, Supervisor Pacheco. Thank you.

Go ahead.

Just real briefly, I agree with what Supervisor Pacheco mentioned with regards to us trying to balance the property rights of individuals that are trying to make business in their community. What I'm trying to reconcile is, and I checked with our folks from the city of Fowler, there was a couple of references made that the city of Fowler was not supportive of this. I asked them, the city of Peller does not oppose this. I just want to make sure that folks recognize that into the record. And when I checked, they said they had no complaints about this property. I think I agree with what Supervisor Pacheco mentioned. I think you are trying to be a good neighbor. You're trying to rectify a lot of things that did not occur before. I think Supervisor Mendez did a great job of going through the checklist of what you satisfy, and I would be in agreement if Supervisor Mendez, you would like to give them an opportunity to do that with the expectation that they would follow the conditional use permit criteria and everything that's outlined on there. Thank you.

I have some questions. Okay. I'm so sorry.

Can I?

No, you can't. No, it's closed. The public portion is closed, but thank you. I share all of the concerns that Supervisor Pacheco said, and also concerns I have is that There have been coded violations, have there not, over three years where they've been operating without a conditional use permit? Is that correct?

That's correct. There is an open violation on the property for operating the event center without permits. Code enforcement's been actively involved in that, dealing with them and the operator

So how have they been, if they've been actively violating not having permits, how have we not shut them down for three years?

I can't speak to code enforcement's actions. Specifically, code enforcement's been invited today. There may be someone here that can speak to code enforcement's ongoing investigations and interactions with the property owner. But they are aware and we're aware of their activities. And code enforcement staff did speak at the planning commission regarding their investigations on the site.

Do you want to, anybody from code enforcement want to address it?

Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, Ed Hill, Chief Operating Officer. I'm here with Elisanya Harrison, who can speak to those items for code.

Sure.

Good morning. Thank you. Sure. We filed an injunction. We have an injunction in process for 8853 South Fowler, also known as Sunset Acres. It's in with County Council.

You filed an injunction to shut them down?

That is correct. That injunction was filed in August. Apologies, June 13th of 2024. And what happened? It is still in the process with county council. They are in mediation with the attorneys for Sunset Acres.

So why is this taking two years? June 2024?

I don't know why it's taking so long. I know the temporary restraining order was obtained last November. The preliminary injunction, which was just spoken of, and it's still in the court process.

I think we've got to do better than this. We have people here who said they've been complaining and I'm troubled by this, that it feels like we've allowed people to operate illegally And here we are, they're asking to now operate legally after operating illegally for several years. That's quite troubling to me. Feels like in some way we've let down people, and I think we need to own that. In terms of the conditional use permit, oh, let me ask you this question. It says in the staff report that when they went to the Planning Commission, a motion was made to deny the applications due to an inability to make any of the required findings for the UCUP, nor the required findings for the variants. So at that time, were the findings not there, but you're saying the findings are there today?

The planning commission disagreed with staff's recommendation on testimony that they received and they denied the permit. That's of course they, they can, ours is just a recommendation and they, they, chose to not be able to make those findings, and that's why the use permit was.

Okay, so the planning commission.

Yes, that's right. The DAS recommendation was to approve the planning commission.

I got it, I got that. On the conditional use permit, what limits are you imposing on them in terms of time, operation, noise, to address the concerns of the neighbors?

We're limiting outdoor operation to cease at 10 p.m., and then there's noise mitigation to address have on-site noise monitoring when other speakers are turned in in other other mitigation measures to try address those factors and based on the noise study that they that the applicants noise analysts prepared it did the operation did not violate our noise ordinance and we were agreeable to the analysis that was provided and i will say that your board can further limit operations they can They can say no outdoor events. Outdoor events can cease at 9 PM. Your board can also add it, because staff is recommending two additional conditions of approval. One's indemnification, and the other is the community water system. A third condition of approval could be that staff receives three validated complaints for not operating within compliance of the use permit, that we bring it back to the decision-making body for replication, or two, or whatever your board desires.

OK. I also share the same feeling with Supervisor Pacheco. I'm very supportive of my colleague and what he wants to do in his district. I'm wondering if some of these issues around the conditional use permit and the limitations and requirements of approving a conditional use permit there's some way to have neighbors meet with the property owner to come up with some agreed limitations on the conditional use permit I don't know if that creates a problem for you supervisor no okay well I am concerned about you know this this gentleman having operated for several years without legal permits. I do think we need to be sensitive to what the neighbors are requesting and the concerns that they have. And with that, I'm looking forward to hearing from my colleague.

Well, I kind of, you know, when I asked Supervisor Pacheco, you know, on that one that we were talking about before, what were the Because we put on extra limitations.

CHRIS RODGERS. Yeah, Mr. Hemming, I would ask, I don't recall everything. It was several years ago. But I would put on whatever we did to that, I would put on the same exact thing here to be, one, to be equal and to be fair. And it seems to be working well for me. I've not had one complaint since we've done that. There are neighbors that literally live next door across the street. And they have been great neighbors and have abided by the rules. I would like to put a similar whatever those were on this property based on what we heard today. Yeah. Are you familiar, or do you?

I am a supervisor, and we actually took that approach with the application. So initially, the applicant requested later times. And so working with, through this process, and we can't speak to how late they've been operating the date. But what we took the approach was 10 PM, all events have to cease, no more amplified music. We do allow them two hours for cleanup. And so that falls very similar to the situation you described. So we kind of anticipated that, given the amount of controversy and complaints we received. So we scaled back their operation from what they originally proposed.

And then they still have to follow the noise ordinance no matter what.

They do, and they're required to conduct sampling noise surveys while the activities are ongoing. So we have the ability to monitor what the noise levels are as these events occur. And to Chris's point, If we get validated complaints that they're not following their rules, their conditions, then I think they've heard pretty clearly that this board will not hesitate to rescind that permit. And I know the neighbors will be monitoring that.

I would imagine. I'm OK with that, Mr. Brennan.

I am extremely familiar with the area, yeah.

And I think they understand. Yeah, we take that away in a heartbeat. I don't care how much you invested. You either do it the right way or you lose that privilege. It's real simple for me.

Yeah, so I'll make that into a motion under those circumstances that Supervisor Pacheco outlined.

I'll second.

All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Passes unanimously.

And just for clarification, your motion included all the recommended conditions, the additional conditions? Correct. OK, thank you.

Then if they violate them, they got their deals pulled. We'll be back. Bring it right back.

OK. Next item.

Mr. Chairman, I want to take you back to item number six. It appears that The notice of hearing was not published in the newspaper of general circulation. The notice of public hearing was not published in a newspaper of general circulation. We contacted them this morning. They confirmed that they did receive notice from the clerk's office. Unfortunately, it fell through the cracks on their end. I will put processes in place to avoid this situation in the future. We'll put extra steps to avoid that. So we will now move, item six will be continued most likely to September 8th. Okay. We will publish it Friday, get confirmation from the newspaper of general circulation to confirm, and then that will give us 10 days so it lands just right for September 8th.

Got it.

Okay. We will now move to item number... 8, under Public Works and Planning, consider an approved petition for cancellation of agricultural land conservation contract number 8271 filed by Yamabay and Horn Engineering on behalf of Joseph Crown to remove a 38.18 acre parcel from Williamson Act program to allow parcel to be annexed to City of Fowler and developed as a residential subdivision.

Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Chris Motta with the Department of Public Works and Planning. This item is a request to approve a petition for cancellation for our agricultural land conservation contract number 8271 to remove approximately 38 acres, 38-acre parcel from the Williamson Act contract and allow the parcel to be annexed to the city of Fowler. Staff was able to make all the five cancellation findings to recommend approval of this request, and that concludes my presentation.

OK. Any comments from the board? Okay, any comments from the public? They're bringing it back. Is there a motion and a second? All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Passes unanimously. Next item.

We now move to item number nine, under Board of Supervisors Committee Reports and Comments.

Any committee reports or comments? Yes, Supervisor Mags.

So some of Fresno County staff, my office, we have a community meeting which is going to take place tomorrow for Shaver Springs Water Works District 40. I just want to thank staff. I know that we're reaching out to the State Water Board as well to try to see if we can get a representative coming out. We've got over 100 special districts in Fresno County, and I've brought it up in the past that there are many challenges and strains that we face as a county as it relates to a lot of our different districts, whether they be water districts, CSAs, CSDs. And so I think it's important for us to be fully engaged on that front. But that meeting is going to take place tomorrow. And I know that many residents are going to be coming out for that. And I look forward to providing an update on outcomes from that meeting.

lot of other things going on but I'll save I yield my time back to buddy because he always has witty things he likes to say make a comment I see Ben you'll sit in the back there and he has two of his sons with him you know it's it's always good to see Ben

Anyone else?

Yes. No.

Okay. So we don't have any... We now move to item number 10, board appointments. Yes, committee board appointments. None. Nope. We will move on to the next one.

We now move to item number 11, public presentations. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons designed to address the board on any matter not on this agenda, as well as we will take up closed session public comment for items 13 through 22.

Okay, any comments from the public on any matter not on this agenda or any comments from the public on closed session items 13 through 22? Please come forward.

My name is Jennifer Tabor, and I am a resident and customer of Fresno County Water Works District Number 40, Shaver Springs. I want to put several facts from the government's own records into public record today, because residents deserve an explanation of what happened to this water system. And over the last 17 years, records dating back to 2008, 2009 describe an extremely serious situation of WWD 40. All wells that serve WWD 40 have been contaminated with uranium nitrates or run dry as a result. The district no longer possesses drinking water. Another government record describes five of the six wells as chemically or radiologically contaminated and states currently the district does not have potable water. That same record identifies three water storage tanks and states that one tank was deteriorated beyond repair. It also states that four existing wells were supposed to be destroyed pursuant to recommendations from the California Department of Public Health. A March 20, 2025 state drinking water document states that a compliance order was issued in 2009 for uranium MCL noncompliance at Well 6. Another compliance order was issued in 2013 for a gross alpha MCL violation at Well 6. The water system must comply with the requirements of compliance orders until the water system is returned to compliance. What happened between the records saying The district does not possess potable drinking water, and Fresno County is subsequently providing the water to WWD 40 customers. Is that tank still part of our drinking water system today? The board has authority to call an emergency. I want the record to be clear that Fresno County is not limited simply to waiting for another agency to act. California.

Yeah, thank you, ma'am. Thank you. Next, please.

Hi, good afternoon. I'm a young resident of Shaver Springs. My name is Kaylee Tabor, and I live in Shaver Springs. I'm not a water engineer, attorney, or a governor official. I'm a young person who should be able to turn on a faucet in my home without wondering whether the water is safe. Over the past several months, I've watched my mom spend countless hours trying to understand what has happened to our water system. And what she found didn't come from Facebook or rumors. It came from the government records. Those records talk about uranium, gross alpha, contaminated wells, a system that was described as not having potable water, and a storage tank that was described as deteriorating beyond repair. These problems started when I was a little kid, and some of them even started before I was born. Yet families are still standing here asking what happened. Young people in Shaver Springs didn't create these problems. We can't inspect a water tank ourselves. We can't replace a contaminated well. We can't issue an emergency declaration. But you can. And we can't force a government agency to fix a public water system. We depend on adults like you responsible for the system to protect us. I'm not standing here today to tell you what our water caused anyone's illness. I'm asking something much simpler. Please make sure the water provided to our families is safe and prove it with testing, inspections, and records. If the tanks haven't been internally inspected, inspect them. It's not that hard. If contaminated wells were supposed to be destroyed, show us what happened to them. And while these questions are being resolved, please do everything within your authority to help families obtain safe drinking water. Please treat the families and children of Shaver Springs like how you would treat your family. We shouldn't have to wait for something worse to happen before someone decides this deserves urgent action. Thank you for listening.

Thank you. Hello, my name is Jessica Mahoney. I'm here to support the families of Shaver Springs, California. Their water system has been horrible for years, before and after the Creek Fire incident. I'm a resident of District 3. I do not live in Shaver Springs, but this doesn't mean I don't care. I volunteered with the Red Cross during the Creek Fire. I helped people get into motels. I delivered food to the motels. I care about our community and our neighbors. Our neighbors are our neighbors in Christ and human beings that deserve clean, safe drinking water. I submitted to the county clerk this document from last year. sanitary survey report on Shaver Springs wells. They gave you 15 different items to fix, different timelines, but three of them were immediate corrections. One was called tubuli, which is the discoloration of the water. It's caused by minerals, bacteria, biotaminates, higher iron, uranium, you name it, it's in that water. And a is usually one MCL. This was 28. According to EPA, anything over a five is dangerous to drink and should not be drunk by anybody, not just babies. Not elderly, not people that are sick. Nobody should be drinking the water at a WW40 immediately. These people need bottled water like you guys did in Contuna Creek and those areas a couple years ago. I don't know why these wells haven't been fixed. That property across from Millerton, that development a few years ago, they got a COVID loan to fix their wells. These people are not big developers. Their families paying a high, high rate, the biggest in the country, thousands of dollars each month for water they cannot drink.

Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Olga Maya Silva. I live in the community of Del Rey. Del Rey is a small community with a lot of poor people. a lot of seniors, a lot of people that do not have a lot of resources. But I'm here to talk about an intersection of Delray and American Avenue. It's a very dangerous intersection. There have been many accidents. I pass by there daily. And I have had very often serious almost near misses of having an accident. There have been deaths there before. There have been several accidents that were recorded in the past. A lot of people that I know have had near misses and been run off the road or whatever. And they do not report it because a lot of Mexican people don't like reporting things. You guys have done or there have been measures where they put flashing lights and a sign that says cross traffic does not stop. And that's fine, but it's not going to solve the problem. We've been having this problem for years. We want, no, we need a four-way stop there. Someone said that it's a highway or it's a major street, especially for the business of Palm Wonderful, which is true. But there's a stop sign a mile down on North and McCall. No, excuse me, American and McCall. And then there's another one on Bethel and American. So we're requesting that you provide another stop sign. There's an issue with visibility. If you are on Delray Avenue heading north, you have a light pole, you have bushes, you have mailboxes, and you have vehicles that park there. That, because of safety, you have to practically pull out into the middle of the road to be able to see oncoming traffic, which are mostly big trucks. South by, oh, sorry, you have weeds. And so we're asking, is it going to take another death? I hope not. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

Hi, good afternoon, Victoria Satian with California Rural Legal Assistance. I'm here because we work with a community group in the community of Delray, and we are here to request for an all-way stop on Delray and American Avenue. In December of 2014, a young lady named Alondra Yanez lost her life, leaving behind an eight-month-old child who is now 11. Marvin will not ever know his mother. He won't ever remember what her touch is like. I'd just like to take something Board of Supervisor Mendez referred to when he was dealing with the divider that they put onto the 41 between Lemoore and Riverdale. Board of Supervisor Mendez, you made it clear that this divider was a bandaid on a broken arm. So here, as somebody who works with the community of Delray, we'd like to move, we'd like for you to help them move forward and help them take off that band-aid for the intersection of Delray and American Avenue and help put a cast on that arm so that they can start healing and have a more safer way of commuting to and from the community of Delray and It's very important to make this intersection safe and move forward with taking off that Band-Aid, putting on a cast, and letting them heal in the community of Delray. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Amanda Estrada. And I'm asking for the four-way stop. I don't live in Delray anymore, but I'm through there every day. I'm part of Shiny Light Ministries, and I'm also part of the Delray community. When you lose someone, it's just not a report. It's not a file. It's a person. My grandson is barbecued dogs. He asks us about his mom, and the only pictures he can get is what AI can make. The roads are dangerous. This is my second time up here, but before this, since she passed away, I've been collecting signatures. Whatever needs to be done, I stop what I'm doing. I help run a food ministry. I have my own. But whatever it takes to try to get these four stops, it's not gonna bring her back. But it might help somebody else save their life. When you guys go home, your wives expect you home safe. She left Palm, used to work at Palm Wonderful, and we got a phone call saying go get her. We had to drag my son. Four firefighters couldn't get him off. He was saying, let me get her, let me get her. They couldn't. We need this done, whatever it takes. If you need us to sit there and record whatever it is, let us know. Because it's just not my family. It's everybody else's. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

Good morning, supervisors. My name is Joel Hinojosa. That was my wife. We were devastated when this accident took place. We were both active members in the community of Delray. We attend church there. There's a men's home that we're a part of. We've lived in Delray. I'm in the ag industry, and I go through that intersection on a daily basis. It's like every day. Since the 70s, I've been in this part of the valley my whole life. Since the 70s, there's been numerous accidents there, and I know personally of three that have been fatalities. Unfortunately, that affected our lives, being one of them. When this took place, we started to become active trying to, you know, garner signatures and take the steps to see if we could get something done about the intersection. And being a member of the community, I've spoken to many, many people in Delray, in the city. I've never spoken to anybody in that city that hasn't said that they would love to see a four-way stop. AGAIN, BEING IN THE AG INDUSTRY, I REALIZE THAT PALM WONDERFUL HAS A LOT OF TRUCKS THAT ARE GOING THROUGH. I KNOW THAT A LOT OF TIMES IT'S ABOUT THE DOLLAR, HOW MUCH CAN BE MOVED ON A DAILY BASIS. I SEND TRUCKS OUT ALL THE TIME. BUT IN THE AG INDUSTRY WE NEVER PUT LIFE ABOVE THE DOLLAR. We always look out for the best of our employees, the people that work around us. And I kind of look at it from that aspect as far as the ag industry goes. But above that, I don't want anybody to have to go through this. I don't want anybody else to have to lose a loved one or have to deal with the repercussions of it. My wife was trying to get across that, hey, all in there.

OK. Thank you.

Good morning, Board of Supervisors. This is Leticia. I am a staff attorney with California Rural Legal Assistance. I am providing a public comment on behalf of residents of Delray to request that Fresno County install a four-way stop on American and Delray Avenue pursuant to the county ordinance 11.04.020, which allows the Board of Supervisors to authorize the installation of a stop sign. The lack of a four-way stop sign at the intersection has resulted in at least 21 pedestrian and traffic collisions in the last 12 years. These collisions have led to known fatalities. But despite this troubling history, there is currently only a two-way stop sign at that intersection. In 2025, Fresno County determined that the intersection of Delray and American failed to meet the necessary criteria for the installation of a four-way stop sign based on a 2023 traffic engineering request. However, this request that Fresno relied its decision on was unsupported as it was based on incomplete and outdated information. The installation of the four-way stop at the intersection remains necessary to reduce the likelihood of collisions and therefore avoid fatalities or injuries. Additionally, the board should adopt the resolution to install the four way stop sign to align with the currently approved 2025 Delray community plan that emphasizes the county's commitment to improve traffic safety and being a part of bringing the community's vision to life. Again, this request is made pursuant to the county ordinance and documented history of the dangerous intersection. We also submitted a public comment written, and it had signatures that Amanda was talking about. So there is support in the community. Thank you so much.

Thank you very much. Okay. Seeing no one else, next.

We now move to item number 12, county council report.

Did you?

Item 11.

Okay. Go ahead.

Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. My name is Jeff Roberts. I'm a consultant. I do planning and entitlement work here in Fresno County. I'll be very brief this morning. I'm here with Ben Yule, who will also speak for a couple minutes. We would like to ask for your help in providing direction to staff to work with us on a new idea up in the Millerton-specific plan area. Very quick history, the specific plan was approved by the Board in 1984. There has been development that's occurred in the area, infrastructure that's installed. I can tell you that the area is not developing as fast or as big as was once envisioned. But things have changed up there. There's been some ownership changes that have occurred. There's been some rules and regulations that have occurred that didn't exist back in 84. And so we'd like to ask for your staff's assistance to look at some possible additions to the area, not ones that would necessarily add unit count, traffic, or environmental issues that haven't been looked at before, but possibly in a different location. I asked or I passed a handout out that shows the specific plan area that's highlighted in kind of a pink area, and then the area in yellow that we're talking about looking at as a possible study area for new development adjacent to the CSA 34 in Millerton. We'd appreciate any help that you can give us. Our goal is to develop a conceptual plan and come back to your board with that conceptual plan. We will have to file what are called pre-applications with the county. That has not been done yet, and we fully intend to do that. So when we do come back, we'll have a complete picture of what we would like the direction to be, and your staff will be fully informed. So appreciate the time to speak. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Good morning, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. Just wanted to make a quick mention on the project that Jeff Roberts just spoke to. Years ago, when this project was approved unanimously by the board, obviously, we've done a lot of work. A lot of things have been built. A lot of issues have come and gone. And a lot of people have come and gone. And I'm kind of still here. But I do recall the hearing when it was approved unanimously. And Supervisor Darren Collegian, one of your predecessors, leaned over up there and said, Ben, I'm gonna give this to you, unanimous approval, but you gotta promise one thing. Stick it out, see it through, and don't mess it up. And that's kinda why I'm here and like to continue, keep my promise of what I said that day. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else? Okay, we will now close that and move on to the next item.

We now move to item 12, County Council, reports from previous closed sessions.

There are no reports from prior closed sessions. However, I would expect a report after today's closed sessions. Might want to wait to vote to adjourn.

OK, then we will now go into closed session.

Ooh. so so

you

you Amen. Thank you. you Thank you. you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. you . .

Thank you.

you Thank you. Thank you. Amen. Thank you. Let's pray. you Thank you.

Yes, following closed session, I have some matters to report out. In the Ramos case listed, the board authorized a cross-complaint against the Biola Community Service District for identification. In the Ardaiz case that's listed, the board authorized a cross-complaint against West Star for identification. Also, in a case Ravanger seeing, the board authorized suit on a code enforcement matter. That's all.

Okay, is there a motion and second to adjourn? All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Passes unanimously. We are adjourned.