Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Thank you. you

Okay, Madam Clerk, roll call.

Supervisor Chavez?

Here.

Supervisor Maxing?

Here.

Supervisor Mendez?

Here.

Supervisor Pacheco?

Here.

Chairman Bredefield?

Here.

All present, thank you.

Thanks. Good morning and welcome to the Tuesday, August 11th, 2026 meeting of the Fresno County Board of Supervisors. We'll begin 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.

Thank you, Chairman. Today we have Chester Goodale. Chester is an elder at First Presbyterian Church of Fresno. He previously served as a deacon, children's music director, and adult children Sunday school teacher. He was a teacher for the past 40 years and recently retired from Madera County Superintendent of Schools. He's married to his wife, Julie, and they have three children and four grandchildren. Please rise.

Thank you. Good morning. Gentlemen, I wanted to start by saying thank you for letting me pray for you in person. My church is part of a network called 24-7 Prayer, which is a coalition of churches that said, what would happen if somebody was praying for Fresno 24 hours a day, seven days a week? Our church prays on the fifth of the month, and my slot is at 4.30 a.m. So I have prayed for you by name many, many times, and it's a pleasure today to actually see your faces and pray with you in person. Let's pray. Father God, we come before you today acknowledging who you are, the only self-existent, eternal one, the source of all life and light. creator of the universe and therefore complete in your knowledge and your wisdom, the author of history, the great I am, holy, holy, holy. So God, we acknowledge that you are God and we are not. We acknowledge that you have plans and purposes that you are accomplishing whether we are with you or not. We acknowledge that you have set standards for judgment and for governance and for community. and that we often fall short. God, we confess that we often are very willful. We think that we understand what we're doing or that we have our own way. And so as we confess that, God, we ask that you would forgive us for our willfulness and our disobediences. God, we pray that you would give wisdom. We pray that you would give guidance today, God, that you would be honored, but also that your plans and purposes would be unfolded by the conversations, by the decisions, and by all that takes forth. in this chamber today. God, we're thankful that you are a God of mercy, as well as judgment. We're thankful, God, that you offer grace, that you are faithful, and that you are attentive to all of us. And so we honor you, and we thank you for your presence here today, in Jesus' name. Amen.

Amen.

People, let's join in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Amen.

Thank you.

Okay, Madam Clerk. Item number one, approve agenda. Mr. Chairman, members of the board, county council wishes to delete item 21 from closed session, which is conference with legal counsel as an existing litigation.

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

Aye.

Carries unanimously.

We now move to item number two, approve consent agenda items 23 through 53.

Chairman, I'm sorry. I think we had item 51 that was going to be deleted. That's the one we're going to do right now. Oh, my apologies.

Sorry. Approve a consent agenda item numbers 23 Through 53, Mr. Chairman, members of the board, item 51 is deleted by CAO's office.

Okay. These matters are routine in nature, usually approved by a single vote. Would any board members like an item removed from consent for discussion?

I need item 31 pulled because of the Levine Act.

Okay. 31. Any other members? OK. Would any members of the public like an item pulled for discussion? Yeah, you can come on up, please.

Good morning.

Thank you for allowing me to speak today. I'm Rosemary Alaniz, chair of the Foster Care Oversight Committee. And I believe we reached out to you guys yesterday regarding item 51 and having it pulled. Item 51 is deleted from the agenda. Right. But I still wanted to just address the item 51, if you don't mind.

Well, I think you could address it in a public comment.

But not right now? No. Correct. OK. I will come back with public comment. Thank you. That's item number 11. OK.

Anyone else? OK. Is there a motion and second to approve the rest of the consent agenda?

Second.

All those in favor, say aye. Aye. It passes unanimously.

Mr. Chairman, we'll hear item 31 to follow item 5.

31.

We now move to item number three, presentation of retirement plaque to Edward Mayo, Sheriff Department, 33 years of service.

And I believe the Sheriff's Office is here to present.

Good morning, Chair. Good morning, Board. Today we are honored to celebrate the retirement of Deputy Sergeant Edward Mayo after 33 years of dedicated service to the Fresno County Sheriff's Office and the community of Fresno County. Throughout an exceptional career spanning more than three decades, Sergeant Mayo faithfully served in a variety of assignments, demonstrating unwavering professionalism, integrity, commitment in every role. Whether protecting our neighborhoods, mentoring fellow deputies, or embracing new challenges throughout the department, he consistently exemplified the highest standards of law enforcement. Over the course of his 33 years career, Sergeant Mayo earned the respect and admiration of colleagues, supervisors, and countless citizens whose lives he has touched through his compassion, courage, and steadfast dedication. His legacy is measured not only by his years of service, but by the lasting impact he has made on the department, his fellow employees, and the community he proudly serves. As Sergeant Mayo begins a well-earned retirement, we extend our deepest gratitude for a remarkable career defined by honor, sacrifice, and selfless acts of service. We wish him and his family continued health, happiness, and success in years ahead. May his retirement be filled with new adventures, cherished memories, and the satisfaction of knowing he made a lasting difference. The bagpiper, a tradition of reverence. For generations, the sounds of bagpipes symbolize remembrance, reverence, and honor, paying tribute to those who have faithfully served and those who have made the ultimate sacrifice. At the Fresno County Sheriff's Office Memorial stands a bronze statue. of a sheriff's officer bagpiper. Keep in silent and eternal watch over those we will never forget. The statue serves as a lasting reminder of duty, tradition, sacrifice, and honor. It is especially fitting that many have noticed the statue bears a striking resemblance to Sergeant Mayo. Just as the Memorial Piper stands as a symbol of unwavering commitment and service, Sergeant Mayo's career reflects those same enduring values. His dedication to the profession, his fellow deputies, and the people of Fresno County will continue to inspire those who follow in his footsteps. Congratulations, Sergeant Edward Mayo, on an extraordinary career. Thank you for a job well done.

If it pleases the board, I'd like to say a few words. Sure, of course. I can't leave a 33-year career without saying a few words. Chairman Bredefeld, Vice Chairman Chavez, and honored members of the Board of Supervisors, thank you all for setting aside time on today's busy agenda to recognize my 33 years of service with the Fresno County Sheriff's Office. I'm humbled to be able to stand here before you today. This career was not one I chose. but one that chose me. I am forever grateful to the Fresno County Sheriff's Office for allowing me to grow and serve this great county for my entire adult life. I've had countless experiences that have shaped me. I have seen the worst society has to offer, and I have seen the best in the people I work alongside. Over the past three decades, I've had the honor to work under the guidance and direction of four sheriffs. While each had different personalities, there was always a consistent mindset, service to the people of Fresno County, and a sense of family within the sheriff's office. Both of these could not be understated, excuse me, overstated. Sheriff Magarian hired me as a correctional officer. Richard Pierce promoted me to deputy sheriff. Margaret Mims promoted me to sergeant. and John Zanoni has provided me with the ability to grow as a leader and helped me with this transition into the next chapter of my life. Their leadership is rarely easy, but it is always needed, especially when choosing a path to follow that will directly impact so many lives. Thank you all for your leadership through the difficult times our county has had and will continue to face. Thank you for your support, and thank you for continuing to serve here in this room and in your leadership positions in your respective futures.

Thank you. Any comments from the board? Yes, Supervisor Magzik.

Sergeant, I have enjoyed working with you in developing the memorial that's at the Area 2 substation, and I think that legacy will last many generations. But your commitment here, as was stated, you've definitely left a mark. We appreciate that, and we hope that you are not a stranger. So thank you.

Thank you.

Yes. Congratulations. You know, you did leave your mark here. You know, if anybody wants to go to Area 2 substation, that's what a mark. And, you know, I'd love to share some stories with you sometimes on those are always some of the best. Have a happy retirement. Thank you.

Any other board members?

Sergeant, just congratulations on three decades of service to you. And you definitely will leave a mark. And I thought you looked familiar over being over at the statue. I think you might have had a hand in making sure that that looked like you or not. But thank you so much for your service. And thank you to your family for sacrificing and sharing you with our Fresno County family. Thank you. And well earned.

Thank you.

I would just add my congratulations and good luck in the next chapter.

And I too would want to say congratulations and thank you. Thank you to you, thank you to your wife and family because they have to support you and it's not an easy job. It's a tough job putting on a uniform and protecting this community and as you said, sometimes seeing the worst of the worst and you have to deal with the worst of the worst. and it's not a job I would wanna do. It's a dangerous job. Sometimes it's a thankless job, but I can assure you that most of the people in the community are very grateful and thank you all the time. You don't hear it all the time, but it's true. And so thank you and I wish you much health and happiness and peace with your family in your retirement. Any comments from the public? If not, please come on up and take a picture with the board. Hey, thanks.

Congratulations. Congratulations, sir. Congratulations.

Congratulations. Thank you.

Congratulations, Cheryl. good to see your hometown guys i bet that's hard she's a bluebell

We now move to item number four under Chairman Bredefield, present President Humane Animal Shelters Pet of the Month.

Yeah, come on up to the, like we have the Humane Animal Shelters Pet of the Month, which we all enjoy doing and highlighting. I believe we have Freddy, who is a Labrador Retriever mix, three years old, and he identifies as a male. So would you like to come to the mic and say some things about the dog?

Hi, this is Freddie. He is a lab mix. He is about three years old, and he is a very active boy who loves to go on runs. He loves to play with other dogs. He loves to play with puppies and small dogs as well. He's just an all-around great boy.

How long has he been there?

He's been there about three weeks.

Three weeks, okay. Well, we encourage the public to obviously come to the shelter. And there are plenty of dogs who are wonderful dogs looking for forever homes. And if you've never had one before, it changes your life for sure, for the positive. So any comments from the board? Yes, Supervisor Maxey.

He may have entered the shelter as a male, but when he leaves the shelter, he will be neutralized. And I just want to remind the public how important spaying and neutering at your pets is. Because one of the biggest problems we have in Fresno County is we have many dogs that people just abandon. And then they have puppies, a lot of those puppies, and right back up at our shelter. Last year, I had the pleasure of spending time with a dog by the name of Doug, who was a gigantic pit bull, but he was just a big puppy. And fortunately, we were able to find a spot for him, but I appreciate the work of everyone at the shelter. So thank you for all that you do.

Thank you.

Yeah. Any anyone else from the board? Yeah. And I also have two dogs we've we adopted and they are the best. So I do encourage people to really reach out to the shelter. There are dogs who really need you. And we often need them without even realizing it. Any other comments from the public?

Supervisor, I was just going to add, adoptions are available, but fostering is also available for all animals at the shelter. So if you can't make a long-term commitment, but you're willing to foster, whether that's for a day, whether that's a week, or even months, the shelter is always open to that to add you to our network of fosters. And how can they reach out? How can they contact? They can contact the shelter directly or reach out to the Public Health Department. But the number I always typically give everyone, 600-PETS. So if you remember that, 600-PETS, you can call it, you can text it. They'll put you in contact with our animal shelter and then from there we'll facilitate. Excellent. Thank you. Thank you both. Thank you.

And we wish Freddie the best.

We now move to item number five, under Supervisor MacSick, proclaim August 17th through the 21st, 2026, as Safety Week in the County of Fresno.

Let me hang on one second. I see we have Congressman Jim Costa here. Welcome, Congressman. I understand you would like to do a quick presentation for the board. So let's do that.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Fresno County Board of Supervisors. Thank you for that courtesy. I guess I should have brought my dog. But it reminds me of the old story President Harry Truman once said that if you wanted to have a friend in Washington, get a dog. So anyway, I think we're among friends here, although it looks like we've got a very busy agenda. But let me make a presentation to the Fresno County Board of Supervisors that I think we can all agree upon. And that's the challenges that our nation faces notwithstanding this seminal moment we're living in in American and world history that we're also reminded that 250 years we remain the oldest democracy in the world. Through good times, but more importantly through difficult times, because difficult times, be they war or depression or other factors, clearly remind us that as Americans we have far more in common far more in common, beginning with our Constitution and our Bill of Rights than whatever differences we may have. And we certainly have differences. But the fact of the matter is, is we are celebrating 250 years. I want all of you to know here, and I know you keep accurate records here for the members of the Board of Supervisors and the public, that I was not there 250 years ago when this whole thing started. notwithstanding the Arctic blonde. But I don't know what is the best way the chair would prefer with your colleagues to go in front of the dais as we unfurl this symbol of our nation celebrating 250 years. But I'd like to make this presentation. Sure. Whatever. You want to come forward? Yeah, we'll come forward. Sure. Everybody can see us better.

OK. You want us to come up here? OK.

I'll sit over here.

That's your boss. Sorry.

Can we now move to item number five? Proceed with it. Proclaim August 17th through the 21st, 2026 is Safety Week in the County of Fresno.

Yes, and we have representatives here from the HR department, and so I'd like to turn it over to them. And we do, of course, have a proclamation, which we'll present right after.

Thank you very much. Good afternoon, Chairman, members of the board. My name is Jenny Thompson. I am the county's risk manager. With me today, we have our county safety team, Program Manager Mathias Beer-Stanberry, Senior Analyst Larry Gomez, and Human Resources Analyst Liz Arredondo. These three work hand-in-hand with departmental safety coordinators to assist county departments in identifying and addressing hazards. reinforcing our shared responsibility to keep our work sites safe. We are committed to building a strong culture of safety by making sure employees understand workplace hazards and have the tools and guidance they need to stay safe. Your board has long supported the health and safety of our workforce, recognizing that these values carry into employees' lives beyond the workplace. Many injuries are preventable and Safety Week gives us an opportunity to highlight proactive strategies that reduce risk and support employee well-being. We encourage everyone to participate. Thank you for supporting the Proclamation for Safety Week in the County of Fresno. Matthias is going to come up and talk a little bit about the Safety Week activity we have planned.

Thank you, Jenny. Good morning, Chairman, Supervisors, CAO. I'm Mathias Beers-Stanberry, Program Manager in Risk Management. I want to echo the thanks for supporting safety for our county employees and thanks Supervisor Magsid for sponsoring today. For Safety Week this year, we will have informational emails going out every day sharing safety topics for our employees. We will also have two safety fairs, one in the Plaza building across the street on Wednesday the 19th from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., and then the other at DSS's Hope Plaza at Pontiac on Thursday the 20th, also from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. We encourage employees to come out and get safety information from the risk team, some of our vendors, and some of our participating county departments as well, and enter our raffle while you're out there as well. Lastly, I just want to thank the board again for your support in our safety efforts. It's much appreciated.

Thank you. Is there anybody else who wants?

Okay.

Supervisor Magnuson?

I'm ready to make a motion to approve this proclamation.

Any comments from the board? Any comments from the public? Okay, I'll bring it back.

I'll move for approval.

All those in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Pass easy and anonymously. Want to come up, get a picture?

Great.

We now take item 31 that was pulled from this morning by Supervisor Magsig due to the Levine Act. Under behavioral health, under administrative policy 34 for competitive bids or requests for proposals, determine that an exception to the competitive bidding requirement under AP 34 is satisfied and a suspension of competition is warranted.

Good. Good morning. Susan Holt, your behavioral health director and public guardian. Happy to take any questions.

Any questions or comments from the board? No. Any questions or comments from the public? Okay, I'll bring it back. Is there a motion? Motion to approve.

Second.

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

That concludes all items pulled from this morning. We return to our regular agenda. 5.1, Closed Session Conference with Legal Counselor, Government Code Section 54956.9 , deciding whether to initiate litigation against the State of California for violation of the State Constitution, Article IV, and Elections Code.

OK. Any comments from the board? OK. Yeah. Before the, well, OK. Let me ask any comments from the public before we adjourn. OK, before the board recesses to closed session, I asked if there was any comments from the public. The board will now recess to closed session. And once we're done, we will come. Yeah, you wanted to come? OK. Sorry about that.

My name's Bill Scott. I live in Clovis. OK. We just celebrated the 250th anniversary of this country. And I was kind of disappointed that we didn't have more on what the words in the Declaration mean and how they are our foundation for everything that came after that. One of the things in there, it says that the purpose of our government is to secure our God-given rights. That's its most important and basically only job. And that it gets its power from the consent of the governed. Well, I think our government today has grown into this just gigantic maw that politicians love to shove boxcars full of money into. And very rarely does anything come out of it that benefits the private sector working class. But there's this huge noise that comes out of it that goes, more. And politicians run around looking for ways to get more. And it's you get a tax, and you get a tax, and you get a tax, and you get a tax. Doesn't matter what it's for, just more money to fill this hole. And I think this measure is exactly that. They call it better roads, safer streets. I think it should be called more bike lanes and less streets. Everything in it seems to go that direction. And I'd like to see more people notice that so that we can vote no for it and not give our consent. But when the government turns around and pulls a funny stunt like they're doing with this, I think you guys have to go to them and have a suit against it. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Anyone else from the public? Yes.

Thank you. I just think this is a very serious violation by the state upon the responsibility of the county. And I think this has ramifications for all 58 counties. It's a jurisdictional dispute, which could be a violation of federal as well as state law. So I think the Board of Supervisors is definitely doing the right thing by going to court on this issue. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else from the public?

Why not?

I traveled the whole hour to get here.

Welcome.

And to learn there's no breakfast burritos. You guys are doing something wrong here.

Wasting time, right?

All right. Well, good morning. Mayor Ray Leon, city of Huron. And Huron is one of the four poorest cities in the state of California. Yet we are the center of the garlic industry in the state of California, harvesting within 15 mile radius of our city over 90% of the garlic harvested in California. And a great majority of the garlic harvested in the nation. On an annual basis, that's $300 million crop. So yet we're one of the poorest cities in the state of California. And I mention this because We shouldn't be poor. And we shouldn't have the messed up streets we've been historically having forever. You know, we've had already two Measure Cs. I was part of the, what's that called, the Citizens Oversight Committee of the second one. That's how I was able to start getting the money for the bridge that we needed for 100 years, right? Had to become mayor to get the rest of it, to make that bridge happen, that when it didn't exist, people died. So those are the type of situations that farm worker communities like Huron go through, environmental justice communities go through. And it's always a challenge. And there's never enough to fix the roads. I'm really happy that we have this measure that was put into play by the citizens, citizens that participated in sharing input first time ever. And I've seen what citizen input looks like usually with contractors. It's 0.01%, and usually not those most impacted by whatever it is that they're commenting on. Now farm workers have been a part of this process. Input has been provided. A new measure C is coming into light. And supervisors, all you had to do is, OK, the voter registrar has certified it. This is what we do. Boom, boom. Almost mechanical. Ministerial is what they call it, right? So I'm here in support of what was passed at AB 1923. I was out there on Tuesday and Wednesday. And not sleeping well because we needed to get it done. And so I will be supporting Measure C once it's on the ballot. And don't waste our public monies on attorneys and taking that lawsuit up.

Thank you. Anyone else?

Hello, my name is AJ Rasamni and I Need to talk about measure C because I've been researching for last three weeks About measures here. It's a temporary tax we had for 40 years and what do we have to show after 40 years? so in 2008 the PCI in 2008 the estimate to fix all the roads in Fresno was at five hundred and and $5 million. Three years later today, it's at $1.2 billion plus $300 million for sidewalks. So it went from $500 million to $1.5 billion in the last three years. In the last four years, we have $2 billion generated from Measure C plus over $8 billion of federal fund and state fund for the road and sidewalks. And what do I have to show? We have the PCI in 2008. was at 72, which means good. Today, after over $10 billion of taxes for the roads and sidewalks, our PCI was at 60, and recently the city has upgraded to 64. So we don't have accountability for the money. So we cannot move forward unless we have accountability. Thank you. Thank you.

Is there anyone else? OK, I'm going to close the public portion. We are going to recess for a closed session.

Thank you. you . .

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, we are back in session.

We move to item number six under county clerk register of voters. Receive the report from the Fresno County Public Works and Planning Department as requested by your board on July 14, 2026.

Good morning, Chairman and members of the board. I'll just introduce what members of the team are coming up. Pursuant to your board's direction on July 14th, Public Works and Planning staff, along with our consultant, has put together a study that has been presented to your board that is, with the appendix, about 500 pages long. It's a very thorough report. They have a very brief presentation that they will provide to you at this time and then answer any questions that you may have.

welcome i think paul has done an excellent introduction to the item and i believe you are here to receive a report from public work so i'll let them take over here thank you chairman board member steve white director public work and planning next to my right bernard jimenez assistant director

And I have Joe Harold, Division Manager. I have Jeffrey Martin, the Senior Analyst. And I have Jenica behind the computer over there. She's another Senior Analyst for us. So let's just go right into it. So this presentation is directed on the 14th of July. There's a lot of data here, and there are binders in the back. In those binders are actually a digital copy. And the public is welcome to take them with them and enjoy the reading in the evenings. So this report is conforming to the 9111 report criteria set forth by this board and outlined by the board comments. Now, I refer you to Appendix J, where the meat and potatoes of most of the discussion that occurred at the last board meeting exists. That is all the questions asked by this board, broken down by Chairman the vice chairman and all the board members. And then Appendix I, excuse me, K, is the board transcripts converted over. And the last piece I want to bring to your attention is way in the back of the binder, I think it's P, which talks about projects. This binder is complete with every road in this county and the PCI condition of all those roads, including with the disadvantaged communities. So we looked at, in the presentation, slide two, the fiscal, planning, infrastructure, economic, as directed by this board. And it covers both the unincorporated, countywide, and regional impacts and effects. And this was done in 26 days, over 1,250 man hours when compiling this report. It was a difficult task to do, but we committed to doing it, and we delivered it today. With that, I'll turn it over to Bernard Jimenez to do the finding report.

Thank you, Steve. And based on our review of the initiative and the direction received from your board, staff has a summary of its findings and conclusions, which is up on the screen right now. So in summary, the initiative does provide substantial dedicated transportation revenue throughout the entire county. The initiative's formula favors neighborhood roads, transit, equity, and active transportation. We concluded that the initiative, however, is not consistent with the county's general plan, especially as it relates to the county's policies and initiatives to accommodate population and growth over the planning period of its general plan. We do expect the county to grow over the next 30 year, the life of the measure, and undoubtedly there will be need for enhancements to our transportation network to accommodate that growth. In addition, the state has its own initiatives that the county and each city are responsible, including the regional housing needs allocation, planning for growth, planning for housing. So the initiative fell short of that consistency finding. The initiative reduces funding flexibility for preservation of the regional high traffic facilities, which will require identification of new funding sources, not just for the county, but also for each of the cities. The initiative would improve the county's worse roads, but the available funding is expected to only maintain the county's current average PCI of 65. To achieve the stated objective PCI of 70, the county estimates a need of approximately $30 million annually of investment into its road system. And then the initiative contains several ambiguous and internally consistency issues that generate significant concerns and ultimate implementation through the required strategic implementation plan is going to be necessary in order to vet out those inconsistencies and concerns in the future. That concludes staff's summary of its findings and conclusions and we're happy to take any questions.

Okay, thank you. Any questions from the Board? Yes, Supervisor.

Actually, a couple of quick questions. I know that in that Exhibit A document and some of the questions I had last week, I talked about the ambiguous nature of a lot of that language. So even if it's handled in the SIP after the fact, do we still have the potential of this landing in court? Because it's my understanding the document, it's a self-performing document where there's language in there saying that this is the will of the voters. And so if the implementation plan is in conflict,

Supervisor, in response to that, obviously, it's a legal question. We can deal with the technical aspects of how do you implement this, how do you interpret this, how do you build this widget, or whatever else. When it comes to a legal question, I'll have to turn to Doug to answer that question from the legal standpoint. Technically, we need to be at the table at all aspects of the development of this strategic implementation plan. And that's where we are very concerned, that if we're at the table, we can discuss and work through and hopefully find a resolve to make this implementable. With the legal questions, I'll turn to Doug.

So the answer is yes. Should there be an ambiguity or dispute about what the ordinance language means or implementing it in the future, there could be litigation.

I want to thank staff. I spent over an hour, of course, with a lot of the questions and concerns that I had. Some of the concerns were actually laid out in this technical document just stating that it may be very difficult for us to fully expend our allotments. And right now with regional projects, we take a dollar of Measure C and we're able to leverage that sometimes six, seven, eight times with state and federal dollars to build regional projects. So as we spend to maintain local roads, there's not a whole lot of leveraging that can be used so this report speaks to a lot of that and also to where there are roadways in the county where we need to expand capacity because of congestion measure C makes it very difficult to use a future measure C dollars on those things which all of our communities are having to deal with growth and but there's no provision that I was able to find saying that we could actually reduce congestion So this report highlights that. So again, thank you for the thoroughness and answering many of the questions that I had at the last meeting.

So I would direct the board to a table that helps put the complexities of the issue, the ambiguity of the issues on page 102 and 103. It was well presented. It talks about FC transition, county CROG real world issues. The table was prepared in clarifying, is it high, medium, or low? So with that, I would turn to, it's a great reference. It's a great reference. There's a lot of moving parts that need to be put together to make this a successful initiative for the people that live in the county of Fresno.

Any other questions? I also want to thank you for This is the work of 30 days a month with all the staff, with all the information that can now be presented to the Fresno voters when this measure comes before them. We had, by election code, the responsibility and the obligation and the opportunity to get this information, and we followed the law. We did exactly what we were allowed to do, required to do by state law, And I think this is very important information that the public is going to have access to when they make the decision on this measure. So I thank you for all the work that you've done. With that, let's go out to the public. If you have any questions or comments you want to address this item, please feel free to come forward. I would ask that if you want to come forward to form a line so we know who wants to speak and we can go forward. Please state your name and your comments.

Brian Wilson, Clovis, California. I'm here just looking at that binder you have. The actual measure that was produced by Better Roads, Safer Streets is like 34 pages. So where is that available online? Through the county. Thank you.

One thing I just mentioned is that we actually included the entire board agenda item, including all of the text of the measure in one of the appendices. Any of the public, if they grab a binder, they can have all of the data that the board had at the time.

OK. It's included. But you could have gone online as well. It's online. Any other comments from the public? Okay, seeing none, I will bring it back. Supervisor Chavez.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Did we, or County Clerk, did you want to speak on this?

Did you have anything you wanted to add? I apologize.

So the item today actually is a two-part item, the first part of which is receiving the report that you have received today that you requested four weeks ago. The second part of the item is per Election Code 9118, Once you have requested, you have the right to request this report, but once you receive this report, your board has a responsibility to put forward a resolution placing this sufficient initiative onto the future election. There are two resolutions that staff have provided your board and we'll need some action from your board so that we can move forward. Thank you very much and I apologize for overseeing you speaking forward. And I'm available to answer any questions if anyone has anything.

Any questions? Just before you sit down, County Clerk, just for the record, how many signatures were submitted and how many were certified officially?

Over 32,500 signatures were returned on petition sections. Over 23,000 were found to be valid. We actually went beyond that minimum amount just because we were working on that day. We stopped on the day that we reached sufficiency. There were over 2,000 signatures that we did not ever review because once we reached sufficiency, we stopped.

And so thank you for that, because I think Supervisor Pacheco had a quick question.

Yeah, County Clerk, it's my understanding we have two resolutions that we're going to vote on today. One is for March and then one is for November. What's your intent or are you going to wait until you see the outcome of that vote? I will the outcome of that? Well, I guess my question more specifically, will the outcome of the vote influence what your decision is going to be?

I have been given direction from the state, through the state via Assembly Bill 1923, to continue to place any initiative found in the County of Fresno sufficient as of July 8th of 2026 on the November 2026 ballot.

All right, thank you.

Thank you. And thank you for that, County Clerk. I did want to ask you that question on the record, just because I think, for me, this conversation has kind of segued into a number of other conversations with regards to the technicality of Measure C, provisions, clauses, stipulations. But I think, for me, it's always been very simple. And I'd like to always put people first. The 32,000-plus folks that you referenced, 20,000 plus folks that you were certified, I think to me, spoke volumes. And I think on my end, my preference would be to put this on the November 2026 ballot and comply with everything you just mentioned. There was a state bill that went through the legislature, both houses signed by the governor. And subsequently, we did receive a notice from the author of that bill, Assembly Member Soria, that this was the law of the land, so to speak. There might be some debate and conversation as to what that specifically said. But I do want to put on the record that we have been also notified by the proponents of the roads measure that if we do not comply with that, that it will be subsequent litigation. And that'll work itself out the way it does. But I think for me, as I was going through this conversation, it really weighed on me, the 32,000 folks that did sign their name. And they signed their name with the expectation that they would have an election November 2026. I want to honor that. And I give a couple examples as reasonings for that. Whenever any of us run, whether you run for state, for local school board, you have to get pre-qualifying signatures to appear on the ballot. To me, that's the people speaking very loud and clear that they want to see that individual on the ballot for that particular cycle. I believe in honoring that. I believe that's almost sacred. And I'll give two examples because I know we've had a lot of conversations about what local control means for our folks. Last year, we went through an exercise here locally where we had to change our local policies and procedures to align with federal law and statute. As many of you recall, the president signed an executive order mandating that local jurisdictions modify their DEI language. We subsequently did that. Many of us did not agree with that, but we did it to comply with a new law that was drafted. The other example that I want to give on honoring people's desire to have an election is if some of you will recall a couple of years ago, the governor, current governor, actually got recalled. There were folks that went out there, they collected signatures, they submitted them, they had them certified. And can you imagine what the legislature, if the legislature would have said, you know what, we're going to do a study and we're going to have the election in two years. To me, that public outcry would have been just exorbitant. And that's exactly what happened locally. I think a lot of people felt that they signed a document, they wanted to have an election in 2026, and subsequently that should be honored. So on my end, that's what I'm going to be weighing. I do want to hear what my colleagues have to say. But I do want to make sure that we respect those people's wishes because at the end of the day, we all have to remember that we work for the people, not the other way around. And there's nothing more powerful than somebody signing their name wanting to see something on the ballot. And I intend to do everything I can to honor that today. So thank you, Chair.

But, but, Buddy, you were, he was going to go last. Oh, are you, Buddy, did you want to speak at all?

Well, if not, no, if not, I'll go. Okay.

Okay. I appreciate those comments. You know, the DEI language that you alluded to, that was put out broadly across everywhere. It was a national law. It wasn't solely set for Fresno or Los Angeles. This law was. This law targets Fresno County. It's not set aside across the state. And that's the difference. We have general laws that are made by the legislature across the state. This is very different where they have targeted Fresno County to benefit the people that they have relationships with and that's what happened. The fact is people sign signatures, we respect that. But not all the signatures were validated, and that delayed it. And if that hadn't been delayed, we wouldn't be here today. If they had been approved when you started counting, this would have come before the board months and months ago. And this board, from ministerial action, would have put it on the ballot, still would have ordered a study so the public has the right to view all the information about this. But because it was delayed, because you had to verify signatures, it delayed it, came back to us in July. We had the opportunity to order the study. As it turned out, it comes back to us August 11, past August 7. That gives us the opportunity to still put it on the ballot. People still get to vote. They would get to vote in March of 2028. This board did nothing wrong. It followed state election law. The people who are proposing this, who hijacked the process a year ago in Cog, didn't like the fact that they didn't get their way, that it went to March 28. And so they got the governor and their friends up in Sacramento to enact a new law, something that's never been done before, where they target a county. Because they didn't like the fact that the procedure that we followed, which is state law, didn't meet what they wanted, which is to get it on the November ballot. So they crafted a new law. We will see the constitutionality of that. I certainly question the constitutionality of it. I certainly question assembly members gutting their own Assembly Bill 1923 that was geared towards distressed hospitals and patients who need those hospitals. And because their friends in Fresno called them, they gutted their own bill. turn their backs on distressed hospitals and patients who are in need, and maybe those hospitals will now close in order to curry favor with well-heeled people in Fresno. It also raises the question of some certainly questionable corrupt things where money is behested to a foundation in Fresno to go to the governor's wife where there's an investigation going on by the Department of Justice. And Ashley Swearengen has Governor Newsom on speed dial. We can call him to sign legislation to target Fresno County. It's pretty corrupt. It's everything that people hate about Sacramento and Sacramento politicians. It's been outlined before. I've said it publicly. It's a disgrace. The politicians who did this are a disgrace to their constituents. They betrayed their own constituents. But this body's done nothing wrong. This body followed election state law and are putting this on the ballot. Whether it's November or March, we'll determine in a few minutes what this board's going to do. The bottom line is all of us up here represent over a million people. We have a responsibility to make sure that when they vote on a 30-year, $7 billion tax measure, that they have all the information that they need. And whether it's put on in March, which we are allowed to do, or November, they had the right to have that information. As far as I'm concerned, the measure is a tax scam, a tax scheme. It's a progressive measure to put people out of their cars, riding buses, bikes, and scooters to work, putting 120 miles of bike lanes throughout Fresno County. If you love bike lanes, go to the Tower District and see how it destroys the streets. That's what this measure is about. That's what we've been fighting about. And we have every right to stand up to those special interests. Having said that, we're here today to determine where we're going to put this on the ballot, whether it's March or November. I have a question for you, sir. You had mentioned, I think I read, where you said you were waiting for the board to determine a resolution and that you had to follow that. Yet I heard you say something with Supervisor Chavez about 1923. So where's the conflict lead you?

So there are actually two sentences in Section 1 of AB 1923. The first sentence was, as I said to Vice Chairman Chavez, that Any initiative that was found sufficient by July 8th will be on the November ballot. The second sentence states that the Fresno County Registrar of Voters and the Fresno County Board of Supervisors shall perform the acts that they would otherwise perform to place a qualified initiative measure on the ballot. The acts that I would regularly perform to place an initiative on the ballot require a resolution from the jurisdiction providing necessary information. While right now I can say that this item will be on the November 2026 ballot, I don't have a ballot question I don't have necessary information to include in the county voter information guide. I need that information through my regular processes, which requires a resolution from your board.

Okay, and if the board passes a resolution for the March 2028 ballot, where does that leave you?

I will begin to use those materials to place it on the November 2026 ballot.

OK. OK. And that answers my questions.

I'm not going to pontificate here. I'm going to get right down to the ballot question. OK. Fresno County Transportation Improvement Act. Shall the measure to impose a new half cent tax to pay for streets and street repairs, buses, bike lanes, safety improvement, free transit service for seniors, veterans, people with disabilities, and students, initially providing approximately $113 million annually for 30 years, requiring an independent oversight and annual audits to be adopted. Now, spending 12 years, that's my statement, spending 12 years on the Transportation Authority, some of the same mayors that were pushing for this are anywhere from two to three years behind getting their audits done. So it's going to be kind of an interesting deal if they're going to be held accountable or, oh, they're OK. They got good standing with COG. So we're not going to do that. So what I'm saying is there's a lot of holes in this thing. Go ahead.

So what I hear you saying, with what you just read, that's the proposed language that you would want used? Okay, fair enough. And James, some questions I have for you, and I know that you're not an attorney, but I have to ask these questions because I'm in a bit of a conundrum with 1923 and elections law. So based upon your reading of 1923, did AB 1923 set aside election law or are we still supposed to follow election law?

My understanding of AB 1923 is that it qualified the initiative for the November ballot without a resolution needing to be finalized by the due date of E-88, which applied to all other resolutions for this upcoming election and for any election going forward or any other time. But that's all that AB 18 in 1923 said. It then gave us that second sentence that I read out there, which says, follow your regular rules.

And regular rules say that we cannot add a measure. Elections law says that the deadlines 88 days from the election is the deadline for a measure to be on the ballot. Is that correct?

Yes, sir.

And so what you just stated is you have 1923, which has been very instructive, but then it also says follow elections law, and elections law is in conflict with 1923, correct?

The two sentences in Section 1 of AB 1923, one is effectively saying ignore this election law and the rest of it says follow all election law.

And here, this is why I'm in a conundrum with this, and I can appreciate the legislature trying to solve a problem, but what they've done is they've actually created... many, many more problems for me as I sit here today, because I recognize we are a nation of laws, and we are a state of laws. And I find that 1923 is now in conflict with election law. One way the legislature could have corrected that is if they would have written the law and they would have set election law aside specifically for 1923, that would have allayed a lot of my concerns, but that wasn't done. I didn't read that in the language that they said, you know, we're setting election law aside. They said that in one sentence this will be on in November, more or less, but then they also said follow election law, our normal processes. So to me, this is something that the courts are going to end up having to figure out because this is a big issue. It's because of this, 1923 is instructive. The second portion says we have to follow our normal processes, and I don't want to be in conflict with election law, which says that we cannot add a measure 88 days before the election. It's because of that that I would want to incorporate the language that Buddy Mendez read. So when this measure does go before voters, I think the language that Buddy read, which is descriptive, I think a better description of what the measure is going to do. But I do believe that this does need to be on the ballot March 7th of 2028. And originally when this was agendized, it was agendized Wednesday of last week before 1923 was passed. And, of course, with 1923 passing, it's in conflict as I read it. And I want to make sure that we follow the laws. So it's for that reason that... I make a motion that we incorporate the language that Buddy stated and that we consolidate this measure with March 7th, 2028 election cycle.

Mr. Chair, may I offer some language to be included in the recitals of the resolution that you're making the motion on? Can I read that into the record?

Yes.

This would be included in the actual resolution that you're approving that includes the ballot language that you discussed too. And bear with me and we will provide a copy of this to the clerk too. Whereas Assembly Bill 1923, Statutes 2026, Chapter 108, Quote, AB 1923, end quote, provides that any Fresno County initiative petition certified as sufficient by the registrar on or before July 8, 2026 shall be submitted without alteration to the voters at the November 3, 2026 statewide general election. And further directs that the registrar and this board shall perform all acts that they... would otherwise perform to place a qualified initiative measure on the ballot, and whereas AB 1923 does not amend or repeal any provision of the Elections Code and does not provide that it operates notwithstanding the Elections Code or any other law, The timing provisions of Elections Code Sections 1405 and 9118 accordingly remain in full force and applicable to the County of Fresno. And whereas the 88th day preceding the November 3, 2026 statewide general election was August 7, 2026, AB 1923 was enacted on August 6, 2026, and this Board's first opportunity to order an election on the measure following enactment occurred fewer than 88 days before November 3, 2026, and whereas among the acts this Board and the Registrar would otherwise perform to place a qualified initiative measure on the ballot, is compliance with the timing requirements of Elections Code Sections 1405 and 9118 and whereas this Board is obligated to comply with and by this resolution intends to give full faith and harmonious effect to both AB 1923 and the Elections Code and whereas reading AB 1923 and the Elections Code together The next statewide election at which the measure may be submitted consistent with the requirements of both enactments is the March 7, 2028 statewide primary election and whereas this resolution reflects this board's good faith construction of the statutes applicable to the measure. That's all.

That basically sums up exactly what I said but in a resolution so yes I accept that language.

And that was seconded by Supervisor Mendez. You had a question?

Yeah, County Clerk, just for the benefit of the public, Having heard the conversation now, it is your position to comply with AB 1923. You're moving in that direction. Subsequently, the language that you will use to do that compliance will be the language that this board will adopt. That's the material that you will use for placing on the November 2026 ballot. Is that correct? Correct. Short of a court telling you not to do that, that's what your direction will be, correct? Correct.

Yes, anytime we receive direction from a court on an election, any question about election law, we will be following the court's direction. Okay, thank you.

Okay, any other comments?

Okay. I do have one request there. So Supervisor Mendez was talking about the question itself. Are we making amendments to the question? And have we been certain that those amendments are within the 75-word limit?

Yes. So in other words, what's in the resolution now would be changed to what Supervisor Mendez said, and we'll provide that language to you.

Thank you. Just wanted to... Amendments are allowed. I just wanted to make sure we were still staying within all those election codes. Thank you.

So it's understood that we are moving towards the March 7, 2028. That's the motion. OK. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Those opposed? No. Passes three to two.

We now move to item number seven.

There are a couple of other actions that you can take. Yes. You can decide whether you want to have committees to prepare arguments for the ballot measure, for and against. You have that opportunity if you choose to.

You're going to have to provide additional information to the board. What are you referring to?

I think I understand. With this going before voters... the ballot statements in favor and against, I think it would be perfect to have Luis and Gary to be the individuals to do that. So it's very similar. Anytime you have a measure that's brought by the Board of Supervisors or an initiative, the Board of Supervisors has an opportunity to opine on that.

We'll do that. We're used to arguing with each other.

You two are perfect for it. So as far as committee is concerned, I think those two would be perfect to deal with the arguments in favor.

Do we need a motion on that?

It can be by consensus.

Consensus is agreed. Okay. I'm good. Good.

Okay.

Okay. We're ready to move on.

We now move to item number seven under public health. Conduct the first hearing to amend the master schedule fees charged under the cost ordinance by amending section 2100.

Could I have a question on the last item? And I don't know if we need to open it up. Can we modify the resolution that the materials would be provided in September?

I don't understand the question.

The question I have is can whatever materials we need to provide to the clerk, can we provide them in September as opposed to immediately? If the...

So going from memory, I think there's like a 10-day clock that will start once it's set. And so depending on what the courts may do, because right now we just passed this for 2028, so the clock on when the arguments in favor and against are due are in the future. But if for some reason this ends up on the ballot in November, you have so much time to write your argument. Typically, it's 10 days. So you'll be notified by the clerk's office.

So you're not talking about the resolution itself?

No.

Right. Okay. Because that will be finalized today.

Okay. Okay. Good enough.

Right.

Good morning, Chair, fellow board members. Joe Prado, director for Fresno County Department of Public Health. Before your board today is a fee, a proposed fee increase to our EMT paramedics training program. You're seeing a proposed increase due to increase in operational costs over the last two years. Dan Lynch, emergency services division manager and I are available to take any questions that you may have.

Any questions, comments from the board?

So just a question I have for County Council, and also for Joe. So these EMT fees, your office supplies certification to individuals who go through the EMT process, right?

Correct.

So a question I have. Am I conflicted out on this? I just thought about this. My son is a licensed EMT family member, but is this general enough that this is something I can vote on, or is this something that I need to leave the room over?

This is applicable to the public in general. OK. So arguably, there's no conflict. You can always recuse as a matter of to be cautious, though. That's really up to you. All right. Thank you. But I don't believe there's a required conflict. OK. Because it's applicable generally. The public. OK. Thank you.

Any other comments from the board? Any comments from the public? Seeing none, I'll bring it back. Is there a motion to second? Is there a second? All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed?

And I'll abstain. One abstention.

One abstention. Four ayes and one abstention.

We now move to item number eight, under Public Works and Planning, receive information relating to county's current solid waste recycling and organic waste collection management program.

Good morning, Chairman and members of the board. Annie Shelton with the Department of Public Works and Planning. We have a presentation here for you guys that we'll share here shortly. Is that better? Awesome. Thank you. All right, so we'll go ahead and get started here. So essentially, this is going to be an overview of our current Fresno County ESAP program. The ESAP program was implemented in response to a compliance order issued by the state in 2003. There are currently seven active ESAP haulers with seven individual service territories. All agreements are set to expire February 27, 2028. There are six service rate areas, Zone 1, Zone 2A existing, Zone 2A new, Zone 2B, Zone 3A, and Zone 3B. Zones required to comply with SB 1383 have a three container curbside collection system, while the remaining zones, that's going to be 2B and 3B, are exempt due to a state issue low population waiver. Under the ESAP program, haulers host an annual community cleanup drop-off event for unincorporated Fresno County residents. Solid waste collection services are non-mandatory, meaning residential and commercial customers can choose to self-haul. Next slide, please. The slide that you see here is our hauler territory map, which identifies the ESOP hauler's territories. Next slide, please. And then this final slide that you'll see is the hauler rate area map, which identifies the rate area and the cost of service to the customers. This concludes our presentation. Staff is available for any questions you may have.

OK. Any questions from the board? Comments? Go ahead.

Thank you for that presentation. Just want to make a really brief statement to folks. I think last time when the agenda item came forward, there was a lot of perception that we somehow just wanted to have one hauler. I can tell you that was not the case. We don't have an interest in taking anybody out of business. I think we want folks to keep doing what they've been doing. Having said that, I also would like as we go forward through this conversation to include some language that really makes our haulers a true partner in this conversation. I know in the past language has been very loosely written. I think staff needs that. And I say that because this trash world, no pun intended, has been changing for the past 20 years. I think the state of California comes down with, you know, every other year some new mandate, some new requirement. Right now we're trying to work through ensuring compliance with the organic waste, which creates another layer of work for our folks. But in that spirit, I do want our haulers to understand that we do need them to be true partners and provide data when that data is requested by staff. that needs to be provided promptly because if we don't get that at the end of the day, we're the ones that get penalized. I think $10,000 a day is the norm for these types of payments. And I do want to thank Annie, you and Steve's team for really helping me with I think it's been a hotspot, not just for illegal dumping, for folks that somehow think that that's an area to just dump their trash, their construction material. I know Supervisor Pacheco has had that problem out in the rural communities. We're trying to problem solve. So along those spirits, I just want to put something out there for my colleagues as we're going through the conversation. I would like some support in that area. I think what we could do is do a closed bid process for existing haulers, have staff come back within 60 days. What I would like to see in Kalawa and Mayfair is the cart service, obviously, but then also one operation cleanup within the urban zone. Supervisor Redefel, I know you've struggled with that challenge as well in your community, but I know you also want to have a conversation with your constituents and make sure that that fits and works. I think that's plenty of time to come back with 60 days, request those pricing measures from our existing haulers, and then with the ultimate goal of coming back November 11 with some staff recommendations and some budget to the board for approval on that. I want to put that out there, you know, Cali I think for me has been one of the most challenging areas. I know my colleagues have and know their constituents really well. I have no idea what the trash collection world looks like in the mountain and the rural communities. I'll defer to my colleagues on that area.

I didn't quite understand what you were talking about. What are you talking about in Mayfair and Cal?

So right now, as it stands, they have the traditional cart service. They have their trash, all that. What I would like to see is having like an operation cleanup, what the city does, where once a year they come and clean up their material and pick it up for their constituents.

You're talking about curbside. I'm totally against it. And I'm talking, you know, I live in a rural community You know, we actually have mandatory garbage pickup. And we have a place that the hauler can put 55-yard bins. And they do a fantastic job.

And I'm not talking about.

You got to bring a bill.

And I'm not talking for rural communities, Sir President, if you want to leave yours.

That's going to cost somebody money.

It does. But it costs us more money when we're spending $4 million on illegal dump sites. And that's what I'm asking staff to do. That's what I'm asking staff to do to come back with some pricing on it.

If you do it where the rate payers in that area actually end up paying for a curbside service, I don't have a problem. I don't want everybody paying for your...

I agree with that, by the way. Just want to make that clear. We don't want Riverdale to pay for Kalawha or vice versa.

Okay. Any other comments from the board? Bring it out to the public. Anybody from the public wishing to speak or address this item? I'm here. All right. Come on up.

Welcome. Good morning, Chairman, Board of Supervisors, County staff, Joseph Kalpacoff, owner, CEO of Mid Valley Disposal. I want to thank you guys for taking this item up, thanking staff for their preparation. I know it came a month ago and it was one hauler and now it looks like there's just kind of an open mic for the supervisors and for the haulers to discuss this, and I appreciate that. I'm an advocate for, you have a unique county. You have seven companies competing in your county. I want to go back to 20, you know, 22 years ago when we gave up our right to compete as haulers and we helped the county get out of a compliance order. We gave up all of our business. We got one area. You know, the growth could only happen within that area. And, you know, 20, 25 years later, whatever the number is, it's working well. You're in compliance. We, you know, you gave us, the supervisors gave us faith in the haulers to keep them compliant with state regulations, and we did so. There was a lot of good investment that happened in this county. Cagley Environmental built a hell of a MRF and a transfer station. Mid Valley Disposal did a composting one and a MRF. You know Pena's has one up on the east side. So there's a lot of family companies that took your order You know 20 some odd years ago seriously and invested in this county You've got you've got five family companies that gave up their right to compete gave up their right of their business and Put it in the hands of the county, right? And that's you know, that's what we did. We chose to do that that time my ask today for you supervisors is to Remember that we kept you compliant. The Family Haulers invested in your county. And give us an extension and let us continue to invest, to pick up trash. What we do, it's all we do. and help you guys stay in compliance with the ever-changing regulations in Sacramento. I ask that and I ask for a long-term extension with those rate areas one or two and three. If Supervisor Chavez wants to look at rate area one, which is the urbanized areas, That's what he wants to do, but I'm looking for a rate area two and three, which is rural and mountain, which is all 100% family-owned operations, to give us a long-term extension, continue. If we need to abide by what the county staff wants to put some more teeth in their agreement, get some reports, some data, I'm 100% for that, and I support that. Thank you.

I have a question for you. Yeah. So you're in agreement with what the staff is recommending today, right?

Well, there's no recommendation. There's an alternative that says there's an extension on there, and I'm okay with that.

That's what I mean.

Yeah. Personally, yes, I'm in rate area one, two, and three. And if there is a mandatory collection or there is community cleanup events that's going to be discussed today in the rural areas, so be it. I'm okay with that as well.

Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. Yes. Yes.

Good morning or afternoon. Yeah, good morning. Keith Hester, general manager for Calgary Environmental. I guess I could, the easiest thing for me to say to save some time for you is say ditto pretty much to everything that Joe presented. I think we've been great partners. We helped craft this process. I was part of it over 20 years ago. It's working well. I know one of the alternative recommendations is to extend the existing contract for two years. I would ask you not to pursue that. Part of what we heard from staff was the contracts don't have enough teeth in them. They can't enforce stuff if they're at it. If you approach staff and say, can you reach out to the hauler, they may say, well, it's not in the contract. Why do it for two more years? Why would staff want to consider going through the same painful process for two more years? So my ask would be the same as Joe's. Meet with us. We will work with you and give us a long-term contract, at least a 10-year agreement. And also, I sent a letter off. to county staff yesterday via email. I would just like to distribute it to you guys for the record, if you'd please. I'll hand it to you. With that, if there's no questions, I'm going to park it.

OK. Thanks. Any other? OK. Anyone else from the public? OK.

Zach Renfrow with Western Solid Waste. Again, thank you for meeting with us today. We follow with Joe Capricoff and Keith Hester that we agree we would love a long-term contract. Working with the county to most definitely put more teeth for the county to really explain the language so we're not going by the spirit of the contract. We want things black and white to be in compliance with the state, compliance with you guys, and to make things as easy on your constituents, our customers, and the county, and just move forward smoothly as possible. So we would like a long-term contract, like Keith said, not just an extension, but to move forward with rewriting the contract and getting us a long-term one.

OK. Thank you. Anyone else? Yes.

Good morning, Chairman, Board of Supervisors, Joe Heiser, CFO for Mid-Value Disposal. I did want to echo on the concept of those long-term agreements, right, and what a two-year extension looks like versus a solid rewritten agreement. I heard Supervisor Chavez talk about pricing and rate stability. Obviously, long-term creates that, right? It's very difficult when you're working with very short time periods. to give the sort of rate stability that we have. And I think part of this agreement has also kind of borne that out as we have had different types of negotiations and things to implement with a short runway in the history of this agreement. So I would say for consideration of maintaining the best possible price, I know staff has also worked on that as well. They've echoed that as their goal is to protect constituents. We're for that. We want to provide the best service, but we also want to give good value, but also help Utilize the investments that we've made right and and amortize those long-term facilities and infrastructure new garbage trucks The whole thing so just want to echo that that long term and price have a relationship and I think that's worth investigating or at least looking more into during this process, so

Let me ask you a question. Sure. When you're talking about a long-term contract, are you talking 10 years? Are you talking five years? What is your desire?

Typically, 10 years is what industry standard is, and that's what a lot of modeling is built around.

And that helps you with your planning?

Absolutely. I mean, when you purchase a new vehicle, you expect to get 10 years out.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, sir.

Yeah, hello, I'm Jeremy Jones with the new general manager for public services. I just moved to the area a few months ago. Enjoying the traffic, the heat's a different story, you know, but, you know, ditto for us as well as, you know, with the staff and support and, you know, we just want to make sure that we partner, you know, with you guys and continue to grow that relationship to extend us as well. We are here providing, you know, the best service and also to give, you know, everyone stability, our employees stability as well, and just to be a partner. and to continue to grow in the community with you and to help you with whatever you need and anything for compliance issues, we're going to be there as well for you as well. So anything you need, we would like to support.

OK. Thank you. Anyone else? Yes, sir.

Tim Guy, Miramonte Sanitation. Good morning. I would like to echo the same as the other companies as well. We've always worked well with the county, and we look forward to doing that. Compliance is a big issue for us, and we're willing to do whatever we can, whatever is necessary to make that happen. And we are also for an extended contract as well.

You also feel 10 years is what you're needing? Yes.

Yes.

Good morning, Mr. Chair and Vice Chair and honorable board members. I am with Waste Management. My name is Liz Gomez. We stand here in agreement with our fellow haulers that we would like to see an extended agreement with the county. We have invested in our services to the county. We're very proud in what we have done. We'd like to continue that. And we know that working together with our fellow haulers and with the county, we can come to an agreement where we are continuing to provide the best service that we can as a company serving your constituency.

And when you're thinking long term,

Also, we are thinking at the industry standards of 10 years would be good. And also working with Supervisor Chavez and the different needs that he has in the unique circumstances that we do see in Kalawa, we would like to work with county staff as well as the supervisor's office and see what, if anything, can be done to help with the illegal dumping that goes on in that small community that really does not deserve that.

OK. Thank you. Anyone else from the public?

Okay, welcome. Talking to me?

Good morning, Richard Cagley at Cagley Environmental, IWS. I would concur with everything that's already been said, but I would answer your question differently. I say give us a rolling 10 years or a 10 with two fives.

A rolling 10 years of what?

A 10 with two fives.

Two fives, okay, thanks. Anyone else? Okay, I'm gonna close the public portion. Let me ask you something. So hearing the standard, at least from their perspective, what would be your objection to a 10-year plan?

So based on the department asking for the two-year extension, it's to currently amend and extend the current agreement. Allowing us to amend and extend it gives them the additional two years. However, it allows us to amend the language, as we've talked about. While it will do minor language change as to be able to hold haulers accountable, There's some language that we need to clean up to make it really more black and white and not leave that room for interpretation. One of the things that we discussed was that we recognize that from the hauling side, it would be beneficial for them to have a longer term contract. However, the way that the contract works right now, and I've been very vocal about this, is that it just really doesn't work. And so with us allowing them two year extension allows the haulers to be able to still assist the county, but it allows the county to work with, as we know, we have new board members that will potentially be coming in. It'll give us an opportunity to provide the history on this program, essentially how we got where we are and where we're trying to go to be able to move forward and put in a program that really makes way for further regulation that comes down from the state. And so the two years does allow us to work with the haulers to be able to still maintain some things and be able to have new language in the agreement to some extent. But I think overall, we realize that our program needs an overhaul. We need a new entire contract. And so just

Let me ask you a question. You were saying that there aren't problems for the most part with the way things have been going. Is that right?

No, that's not what I said. That's not correct. No, that's not what I said. So we do have problems with the way that things are currently going. We don't have the ability to hold haulers accountable when there's an issue. And we've had issues in the past. I will say over the last two years, we've been able to have a... We've been able to work with haulers better in terms of getting some things done. But previous to that, we had a lot of issues where we had to breach some haulers. The contract didn't really allow for that breach to be effective. That's the stuff we need to clean up. Additionally, when we get calls in from our constituents, from the customers, A lot of it is because of the way that things are implemented, and when you read the contract, you could go either way. And so what it does, it leaves me and other staff to negotiate with haulers, aside from the contract, to try to make things work and make things more palatable between the customer and the hauler.

I understand that, but can't you clean up the language, create accountability within a 10-year contract?

We can, but it would be beneficial to have a new, so if we're cleaning it up, are we cleaning it up and doing a complete overhaul, or are we cleaning it up and make minor changes that kind of stand out? B, it would be a complete overhaul, correct?

Yeah. Look, yes, go ahead, Supervisor.

I can understand staff's point of view. And again, it's no secret that 3D will be leaving. As a business person, I would want stability. I wouldn't want to wait two years for stability. I would want that right now. So again, we just heard that things seem to be going well. There are some things that need to be changed. I don't see why there's no reason why they can't make those changes in the next 60 days and present us with a 10-year acceptable contract to both us and the haulers. And if that can't be done, then fall back to the two-year position, because these trucks are not cheap. Their investments are not cheap. Staff just came forward 30 days ago, unbeknownst to any one of us, that they wanted one hauler. And if I was one of those haulers, I would have been up in arms for everything that I've invested over the last 10 years to have staff unilaterally try and make that decision to where six people, companies, and all their employees are going to be eliminated for the benefit of one. And so to me, long-term stability is a 10-year contract. The five of us up here are as stable as you can get and have that stability now so that they know how to plan their business in the next 10 years. Would you like to make a motion? Yeah, I think I would direct staff to come back to this board in 60 days with a modified, all the teeth you need, of a 10-year contract, because what difference does it make if it's 2 or 10? So let's make that 10, give these companies and their employees the stability that they need, and if in any event you can't do that, then we'll fall back to a 2, and good luck with the three new members that you'll all be serving with.

Is there a second?

Yeah, I'll second that. You guys need to remember, me and Brian have been doing this for 12 years. And we have both know rural well. I know unincorporated communities well.

And again, I don't deal with all the haulers. I deal with one. And I believe, for me, for the last year, we maybe had one complaint out of 200,000 constituents, maybe one complaint. So for me, at least in District 1, things are going well. I want to continue as is. And I'd like that for the residents. Because in five months, I'm going to be one of those residents. And I want status quo.

Don't call us with your complaints.

Yeah, yeah. Good luck with that, yeah. Any other? But anyway, that would be my request.

Yeah, and I think as long as we just capture.

Incorporate what Supervisor Chapman wanted for the rule and whatever that is. For the urban area.

Yeah, yeah. And ensuring what. That he paid for and not letting him. Right, exactly what Supervisor Mendez mentioned, that those rate payers paid for it.

Any comments? Okay. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Passes unanimously. Thank you.

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

Oh, let me see. Where am I? What do they want to do? Could I? If I can, I'm being requested to let some of these folks, now how many are there that want to speak? Two people want to speak? Three people? Okay, we'll let three people speak and then we'll go to supervisor comments because they need to get back to work. So let's do that quickly.

Item number 11, public presentations. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons desiring to address the board in any manner not on this agenda.

Go ahead.

Good afternoon, Chairman and members of the board, constituents and the audience. My name is social worker Deborah Young. I'm a social worker with the Department of Children and Family Services. I am here today representing SEIU 521 members to bring awareness to the rising health care costs. We are asking the Board of Supervisors to keep health care costs affordable for all county workers. I've dedicated 25 years of my life to serving this community. Over the years, I've watched staffing levels decline and turnovers become constant. When I started in 2002, some of you guys probably weren't here. When I started in 2002, we hired maybe once a year. Now we're hiring multiple times a year just in effort to keep up. County employees are not expendable. We are an asset. Many of us stay because we truly enjoy the work we do. I don't like my job, I love my job. But Fresno County cannot afford to keep watching experienced employees walk out the door to other employers. I recently experienced firsthand why affordable care, healthcare matters. I passed out at work and had to go back and forth to doctor's appointments and specialists to meet the county's requirement to return to work. In one month's time, I spent over $385 in doctor's appointments. Between appointments, co-pays, and paperwork that had to be revised, I spent hundreds out of pocket on top of my monthly premiums and other medical costs. Those expenses add up quickly. Now imagine asking employees to absorb even higher health care costs. I've spent nearly half of my life working for Fresno County because of my love for this work. I want this county to be an employee.

Yeah, I've got to cut you off.

Sorry.

That's okay. No problem. Thank you. Next person, please.

All right. Thank you. My name is Brandon Einwalter. I'm a Fresno County, excuse me, eligibility worker, level three lead worker in my unit and an SEIU local 521 union shop steward. I'm here to share why investing in our healthcare isn't just about dollars and cents. It's about keeping dedicated public servants healthy, working, and serving our families, whether in Fresno or rural areas. When I first started with the county, I was learning my new job fresh out of school with the education that helped me earn this opportunity, all while finishing cancer treatment. Today, I'm grateful to say I'm in remission. During my battle with cancer, I relied on Medi-Cal. County workers like us helped me navigate the program and access the life-saving medication I needed. Today, as an accounting employee, I help other families access the health care and doctors that they need. But I still depend on medication that costs around $18,000 every month. Without strong health insurance, there is simply no way I could afford it. It took me five years to get healthy, build a career, and move up in my unit in a leadership role and provide stability for my family. Yet every open enrollment, I worry about whether my health care will remain affordable and whether I'll be able to keep the same coverage that allowed me to build this life. I know I'm not the only county worker facing cancer, serious illness, or expensive medical treatment. I'm speaking today for the coworkers who may be afraid to tell their stories. Healthcare should not be about where we cut corners. Protecting good coverage helps the county retain experienced workers like me and recruit the dedicated public servants our residents depend on. Excuse me.

Okay. Thank you, sir. I've got to cut you off. Thank you. Thank you. And you will be the final speaker, and then we're going to go to our regular agenda.

Mr. Chairman. Yes. We have one caller for this.

Okay.

Good morning. My name is Patricia Ochoa. I am a licensed vocational nurse with the Fresno County Behavioral Health Children's Division. I'm a proud SEIU 521 member, and I've served this county for about 18 years. I just returned to work last week from being a hiatus of almost a year. I am a cancer survivor. I was also doing chemo and had a lot of private medication, as a young gentleman said before me. I was thankful to have the insurance of Fresno County assist me in my chemo and medication. to be able to survive the disease. So I appreciate for the insurance that I currently have. I would have to speak up regarding the 30% increase, which would affect myself and many coworkers. I am a single parent living in a one-income household. If my health care costs increase significantly, I would have to find a second job. That would mean I would have to have less time with my family, as I would have to be working evenings, weekends, and holidays. coming to my current job exhausted. After 18 years of public service, I shouldn't have to choose between affordable health care and providing for my family and spending time with them. I know I'm not alone. We already struggle with vacancies and turnovers. Many positions are difficult to fill because workers can earn much more elsewhere. A potential 30% increase in healthcare premiums will make recruitment and retention much worse. When experienced workers leave or positions remain vacant, it's not just employees who feel the impact. It affects how quickly we can connect our families of these patients that we help to any services that they need. I've dedicated 18 years to serving Fresno County I want to continue doing this work. I love my job. I want the current generation and the future generation of county workers to be able to afford and stay as well. I'm asking the county to invest in the workforce and to please protect affordable health care. Thank you.

Thank you. And we have one on the phone.

And we don't know if that caller is specifically for this. So if you want to wait till the next.

We'll wait till the next. All right. So we're going to go back to Board of Supervisors Committee Reports and Comments. Supervisor Maxick, thank you for your indulgence.

Yes, I've got a couple of items. So our NACO, annual NACO conference took place July 16th through the 21st. I sit as the voting member for this body on NACO and I'm also on the board of directors of the National Association of Counties. It was a very humid conference because we were in Louisiana, but we had a number of different resolutions that we voted on. Really, there was nothing that was controversial. I also am the Vice Chair of the Finance, Pensions, and Intergovernmental Affairs. committee and we had about uh a dozen resolutions that we passed there that went on to the floor uh for approval so uh just wanted to comment about that and then also too in the news yesterday there was information about waterworks district 40 And that community, that's Shaver Springs in my district. And just one thing, a couple of comments that I have about it. The County of Fresno, we've got dozens of special districts. We've got El Porvenir, we have Cantua Creek, And there's been challenges through the years providing water to some of these special districts. There are some special districts that are cemetery districts, some that deal with sewer and water. And we have major challenges statewide, but especially here in Fresno County when it comes to a lot of our special districts. Shaver Springs is unique because there's only about 70 or 71 homes. There the county has applied for millions of dollars in grants to drill new wells and supply water to the community and Sometimes those wells produce water sometimes they don't right now the water is discolored and it's my understanding that that discoloration is being caused by manganese as well as iron that naturally exists in in the mountain and So I raise this issue up because this is something that this board has been working on for the 10 years that I've been here. There's no easy solutions, but it really points to the importance of investing in infrastructure. And because we have so many special districts like Shaver Springs that are challenged financially, I have reached out to Doug's office about the ability of the county to use its general fund or my special district funds to assist. I've been told we cannot. Because of the nature of how these county service areas are structured, waterworks districts are structured, the rate payers have to fully pay for the services that are rendered to them. But we need solutions. And so I raise this up because I'm not ignoring the problem. I'm open to any and all suggestions, but we absolutely have to be investing in our infrastructure. So I just wanted to state that as well. That's all I have.

OK. Anyone else? No. OK. We will move on. Board appoint, go ahead, I'm sorry.

Item number 10, board appointments.

Anybody have it? Yes, Supervisor Magazine.

So for board appointments, I've got a couple. So to the West Fresno County Red Scale Protective District, reappoint David Hines to the at-large seat, which expired on 7-29-2025. Waterworks District Number 18, appoint Alex Sisk to the District 5 vacant seat, formerly held by Richard Davison. And to the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board, reappoint Christopher Zeitz to the at-large joint city-county education-slash-government seat.

OK.

Thank you.

Yes.

Mr. Chairman, I have three reappointments as well. I'd like to reappoint Tiffany Magnum to the Fresno Arts Council in Board Member A position for a term ending June 30, 2029. I'd like to reappoint Sean Howard to the Lower San Joaquin Levee District in Board Member B position for a term ending June 1, 2030. and I'd like to reappoint Christina Garza to the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board and the Joint City-County Educational Government be at large position for a term ending November 1, 2027.

Okay, anybody else? I have three. I want to reappoint Chuck Rios to the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board. joint city, county, and labor at large position. Reappoint Alicia Bonner to the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board, joint city, county, labor at large position. and reappoint Dennis Montalbano to the Fresno Regional Workforce Development Board private sector at-large position. Is there a motion and a second to approve all this? Oh, I'm sorry, let me go out to the public. Is there anybody who wants to speak on this item from the public? Seeing none, I'll bring it back. Is there a motion and a second?

Second.

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

We now move to item number 11, public presentations. This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons as I address the board on any matter not on this agenda. We will also take closed session comments from 13 to 22 minus item 21 that was deleted.

OK. And any comments from the public on any matter not on the agenda or any comments from closed session items 13 through 22? Please, welcome.

Gloria Hernandez, Mothers Helping Mothers. In 2019, I retired as a patient advocate for Fresno County Mental Health. I was good at it, but it was time for me to retire. I came and I asked you guys to do an audit on the Williamson Act. You ignored me. I went to the grand jury and filed a complaint. And again, I was ignored. And then Fresno Land wrote this big old article on the Williamson Act and found in their investigation that there's a lot of big corporations that are taking advantage of it and aren't really small farmers and are like 300 miles away from the biggest city. So there's not going to be any development. So why are they getting all these tax credits? I'm really concerned because the tax breaks come at a hefty price at Fresno County, $50 million in 2022. The county tax records reveal totaling $820 million over the last 30 years. The public is effectively subsidizing the region's wealthiest corporations and families, thus diverting critical funds from the communities already struggling with some of California's highest poverty. The majority of farms enrolled in the Williamson-Mack County record show receive an average of less than $800 a year in tax breaks. Nearly 3,000 parcels in the Williamson-Mack get $0 in tax relief. On the other hand, the majority of the Williamson-Mack tax breaks go to the top 3% large-scale growers and hedge funds, according to the analysis that Fresno Land wrote yesterday. Most of these companies' hedge funds go to the Canadian royalties. A lot of them go to hedge funds. I'm asking, as Buddy, I'm sorry. I just want to quote Mendez on this. Mendez said that the risk of subsidizing farmer consolidation, there's nothing on the books that says you can't get the Mac tax. I want to know why you guys aren't that fraudulent people with the mansion and the pool.

Why aren't you getting the district attorney to continue to sue those people and recover that money?

We're facing a deficit and you're not being physically responsible to this county taxpayers. I'm leaving.

Okay, next.

Can you hear me? Oh, yeah. Hi, I'm Rosemary Alaniz, chair for Fresno County Foster Care Oversight Committee. And behind me is co-chair Kevin Liston. So I'm just so thankful that you guys went ahead and deleted item number 51. Because item 51 proposes a substantiative structural change to how the county licenses and operates foster placement services, including designating the DSS director as CEO of the new agency. It is being brought forward while DSS is in the middle of a California Department of Social Service audit prompted by whistleblower concerns about reunification practices and by the foster care standards and oversight committee's own reported concerns about transparency and access to data. Given the timing and the scope of authority this item would grant I believe it warrants the board's individual attention and also Should this go forward, it would create a licensed FFA foster family agency for the purpose of capturing the administrative rate portion of the intensive services foster care. Level of care is county DSS prepared to pay for the initial startup application fee, the annual license fee, and the annual per resource parent fee. License your process. Will the county only require master's level graduates as FFA social workers as required by the regs and be able to keep the client to social work ratio at or below 18 to 1 if the caseload is Higher, will the ratio be lower if the acuity level? Does DSS know that ISFC program is scheduled to sunset on June 30th, 2027 when the state's new tiered rate structure is set to take effect? Thank you for listening to me. I appreciate it.

Hi, everyone. Thanks for allowing us to be here today. I sit on, like Rosemary had just stated, my name is Kevin Losetan. I sit under Gary Bredefield. Thank you, sir. I appreciate you and this opportunity. Okay. What I want to talk about today is transparency. I've been sitting on the Foster Care Oversight Committee Board now for a few years. And as a member of our community, it is an honor to serve the Foster Care Oversight Committee. Not long ago, I was... I recall standing here and asking you to support an audit for the Department of Social Services. And I asked for you to consider using an outside resource And we learned it was voted to be an in-house audit. So you guys decided to get an audit within the state of California versus going outside of the state. Yesterday, I learned about item 51 and how our DSS was going to get an application for ISFC program by becoming its own FFA. and there's only three counties in the state of California that are offering this service. These two things are a concern I want on record. I am not sure how something as big, given our DSS director, this much control when we're in the middle of an audit, as this would be placed on the agenda for it to be passed with no involvement, no oversight. On the side note, with anything passed, it stays with active unless dated. So it stays with active leadership. So regardless of who our DSS director is, if it's Sonya or somebody else in the future, what we decide today is going to stay with whoever that next director is and those responsibilities. So I think it to be a very important thing because our foster care FFAs play a big role in... Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Good morning. My name is Lorraine Ramirez, and I am the whistleblower. Buddy Mendez, my application for the Foster Care Oversight Committee has been sitting on your desk since June, and I haven't got a word about any appointments, and there's still a vacancy. I'm here today for item 51. regarding the director of DSS being the chair of this foster care licensing. And I have an issue with it, as well as many employees at DSS. I am no longer an employee there. I retired, kind of force retired, because of what was going on. But I do know a lot of what goes on at DSS. With the audit, we were told it was going to be an outside agency, and it wasn't. So kind of concerned about those findings are going to come back. But without the findings being discussed and or reviewed, making a decision to make the director the chair is not a good move. There's a lot of issues at DSS continuing. Our children that's in this community deserve better. And until that audit findings come back and the foster care oversight committee is consulted, moving forward with the current director as any co-chair to licensing is not a good idea. Thank you.

And CAO, item 51 was removed, correct? Okay, I just want to make sure the public understands that. Councilmember Karbasi, go ahead.

Thank you. Good morning, gentlemen. I'm here to echo some of the comments of the folks that were just sitting behind me. They're the ones in purple. You know them very well. They had to get back to work. I think all of us, none of us are immune to inflation. Whether you're in construction, whether you have a small business, whether you're retired, whether you're a farmer, everyone's been hit hard. And our county employees They were here today, you didn't see any jeering, you didn't see any yelling, but you saw a lot of compelling stories and pleas. In the last couple of years, they've told me how much success they've had, how the tide has been turned with this board. But all that progress you've had, hiring more staffing for intake at social services, all the progress, what threatens that are the rising healthcare costs to be hit with over 30% in one year. they really feel strongly that they shouldn't be having to deal with higher copays, higher premiums, all in one year. To me, that means someone outside this building really messed up. We had a similar situation at the city, and in good fashion, in the spirit of Gary, we raised all heck, and we got some progress. And I think what they're looking at is to plead with you and ask to continue that partnership to help them fight these rising costs, because we've seen these companies, some of them are unscrupulous, they just don't care, and they just care about their bonuses and their incentives, and we're the ones stuck dealing with the bills. And these are people that are really essential to you, because they're the ones that make us all look good. They provide the services we depend on. I'm going to try to earn the Brevity Award today. Thank you for what you do. I think it was very clear how much they respect you and you're respected by the community. But you have the power to really stand up, speak up, my good friends do here, and make a point to these companies that you're going to invest and help them bear the burden by reducing those premiums and have better health care for our county employees. And thank you so much for the work you do.

Maybe when you get elected, you'll be on the insurance authority. Have our own insurance authority.

That's in the hands of the people. But thank you, buddy. Thank you all.

Thank you.

And to think you guys compete for these jobs. Quick comments on item 2.0 on closed session here this morning on behalf of First Steps Recovery. We've got Josh Beauchene, Ben Beauchene, CEO and COO. of First Steps Recovery. I just want to thank you guys for the partnership. We work closely, our legal teams work closely with county council. Supervisor Magzig has taken an interest in this issue. And as I've mentioned a few times before, We take everything we're doing in Fresno County seriously. Charlie Maxwell will talk a little bit about some of the mitigations we've made on the permitting side and the work that we've done, the investments we've made. We've engaged with nearly all of the neighbors directly. As some of you well know, some people in the county don't they're in the county for a reason they don't necessarily want to be bothered so it would be misleading to say that everyone is sort of in support but we've opened a line of dialogue that we hope to and will seek to remain in partnership with the county serving those that are facing you know drug and alcohol addiction something that hits all of our families. So again, we take it seriously. Charlie's going to talk about some of the mitigations. Leadership is here today to show that this is an issue that we care deeply about. And again, we'll continue working with our legal team through county counsel's office and looking forward to remaining a partner in Fresno County for hopefully years to come. Thank you.

Good morning, Chairman Bredefield, members of the board, Charlie Maxwell, Clovis, California. I started with First Steps almost a year ago. We spoke in front of the board about some health and safety issues. I'm happy to say two weeks ago we spoke to Mike Granite, your chief building inspector, and health and safety issues are off the table. He said that there was no more health and safety issues in our regular weekly meeting. I became involved in trying to work with the neighborhood and understand the problems. I've personally spoke to over 13 neighbors. This is a rural Clovis address, primarily five and 10 acre parcels. Their first concern was three of them said, there's a problem in my neighborhood. And I said, yeah, there's a rehab center just right over the hill. I said, well, it doesn't bother me. I talked to those three yesterday, and they said, I'm still not bothered. The other ones had concerns about lights and sirens. We went back to First Steps and looked at their operation, made policy changes so that people no longer transport themselves to the facility. The company, First Steps, transports people in and off the facility. If a patient decides to leave the facility because it's not his program or he's not ready for treatment, he can no longer come back. So it's basically a lockdown facility. Some of the other questions were the ambulances that came, and there was a number of people, different facilities that transport people to this facility. So we changed the front of the facility. It is fully lighted, security camera, an American flag, and a big sign with an arrow that says First Steps. Not hard to miss in this area. The first house is 10422, and they used to drop people off in front of the house, and that had direct refraction to the people west of there in their houses and what they're looking at primarily because of grade elevations between the east side of Armstrong and the west side. We changed that drop point off to the east side of the house so people coming and going from that treatment home no longer affected anybody on the west. Thank you. Thanks for your time. Thank you.

Good afternoon. I'm Josh Beauchene, founder and president of First Steps Recovery. And I want to thank the whole board, appreciate the support, and especially Supervisor Maxig for walking us through this process of getting things kind of dialed in on the permitting structures, and County Council for really giving us a direction move forward and so we have nothing but gratitude exciting first steps we've been here 12 years and we have four different facilities we are 50% of the non-government funded beds in addiction treatment in Fresno County and this year we treated our 10,000 Fresno County resident in treatment and so it's it's a continued crisis it kind of hits the media cycles here and there but it is an ongoing crisis and we Long to serve the county, and we've always done that. Fresno State Athletics approached us. We built a program for them. The veterans, the VA of Fresno, we served them. They approached us to build a program, so we built it out for them. Multiple support systems for families that are free on a weekly basis. And so we just appreciate you guys kind of getting behind us and helping us move forward and being able to serve. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else from the public?

We have one.

One online. Okay. Go ahead.

Welcome to the County of Fresno Board of Supervisors meeting, August 11, 2026.

Good morning, Chairman and members of the board. My name is Shannon Sadecki, and I'm a homeowner in Shaver Lake. Thank you for allowing me to speak today. I'm here to ask Fresno County to begin the process of adopting reasonable regulations for short-term rentals in our unincorporated mountain communities. I'm sure you received the prompt. Good morning, Chairman and members of the board. My name is Shannon Sadecki.

I'm here. I'm here.

We are now going to go into closed session. I would like to, in closed session, again discuss item 5.1. I have some questions about that. And I don't know if there will be anything to report out. I don't know what we need to do from a legal point of view. But I would like to include that in our closed session item discussions today.

That's within the board's discretion. Okay.

County Council, do you have any?

This is not about closed session. That one gal, what the hell was she talking about? Was she talking about property tax? I heard her say something about Fresno land.

We're still on, and we have item 12.

That's all right.

Okay.

I just want to get that clear. Okay. That article in Fresno land was so... It was just so incorrect and full of fantasy. It was pathetic. Okay.

Okay. Item 12, County Council, any reports from previous closed sessions?

There are no reports from prior closed sessions.

Okay. And we may have something to report out. Possibly is that something you have to say or no?

That being the case, you would wait to adjourn following the closed session?

No, we will not adjourn until we do that. Okay. We will go into closed session now.

do do

Thank you.

you Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . .

Thank you.

There we go. Start over? Yes, please. I do have something to report out following closed session. The board, by a vote of three to two, with supervisors Magzig, Mendez, and Bredefeld voting yes, directed filing suit against the state, the initiative proponents, and James Koos in his official capacity as the election official concerning the constitutionality of AB 1923. That's all.

Okay. And which item?

That was 5.1.

Oh, 5.1.

You may vote to adjourn now.

Okay. Is there a motion to adjourn? All those in favor?

Aye.

Passes unanimously. Now adjourned.