Board of Supervisors - Regular Meeting

Where's Matt? Yeah, right back here. Everybody ready? Good. All right, thank you all for being here today. I'm gonna be very direct with you. because that's what the people of Fresno County deserve, direct, honest information. What's happening in Sacramento right now is one of the most brazen attacks on local democracy and local government that I've seen in my career in public service. And I've seen a lot. As usual, in order to understand, you have to follow the money. Before I discuss this corruption, let me remind you that 40 years ago, Fresno County residents, desperate for what they felt they deserved, voted to approve Measure C to build highways 41, 180, 168, and improve 99. It modernized our economy. Sacramento and state politicians wouldn't give us a dime for our roads. So our citizens taxed themselves to get the roads and highways built. 40 years later, the roads have been in tremendous disrepair. and our citizens want them fixed, despite being given false promises by politicians for decades that they would be. As elected leaders responsible for renewing Measure C began their work, a group led by progressive Ashley Swearengen, who used to be a conservative mayor, and her nonprofit now funded by rich out of town liberals, was allowed to hijack the entire process. She's threatened to fund her own signature gathering campaign until she got what she wanted in a new measure. And that's exactly what happened. First, they hijacked the Fresno Cogs process by installing 12 radicals onto a steering committee and causing the process to crumble. Then she spent nearly $1 million to get signatures to force their radical agenda, not the people of Fresno County's agenda, but their agenda onto the ballot. By the way, it's not hard to get signatures when you're paying $25 for every signature that they get. They turned in their signatures to the clerk, but didn't do the simple work of checking those signatures before submitting them. And lo and behold, they had invalid signatures. They begged the County of Fresno for every bit of preferential treatment they could imagine. The County of Fresno treated their measure just like we have treated any other citizen's initiative. When Supervisor Magzig had the gall to do his job and ask basic questions, the people who developed and wrote this measure couldn't answer them clearly and confidently. And so the board majority voted to order an impact study as allowed under California law. We followed the law. That's our constitutional responsibility. It's called doing our duly elected job. We asked for an analysis of the impacts of implementing a $7 billion 30-year tax on our citizens, and it was the appropriate thing to do. Now, because Swearengen's group didn't collect enough ballot signatures, they missed the August 7th deadline to put their measure on the ballot in November. Instead, it would go on the March 2028 ballot, as required by state election law. But that was not acceptable to her and her radical group. So they came up with another disgraceful and corrupt scheme. This time the scheme involves two San Joaquin Valley politicians, Esmeralda Soria and Ana Caballero. Two politicians with nearly 20 years in Sacramento who have never brought back from Sacramento one penny of taxpayer money to fix a road, build a highway, or repair a street. Not one penny after 18 combined years. These feckless politicians decided to take Soria's hospital bill, and it's a hospital bill, AB 1923, and gut and amend it for Ashley Swearingen. Now, if you're a resident of Fresno, Tulare, or Madera counties, AB 1923 should tell you everything you need to know about Sacramento. They will turn their backs on patients and hospitals at the drop of a hat. This was a bill aimed at rescuing hospitals on the verge of financial ruin, including ones right here in our region. These disgraceful politicians are gambling on the health care of three counties on a tax scam that won't even pave the roads necessary for ambulances to get to hospitals on the verge of financial collapse. That's what they did. Now, who will pay the bill for this betrayal of our hospitals and patients? Not Governor Newsom, not Saria, not Caballero, not even Shadow Mayor Swearingen. Our citizens will pay the price for their recklessness and betrayal. Now, the scheme also involved hiring an army of lawyers and lobbyists to convince corrupt Sacramento politicians, including her good friend, Governor Newsom, to hardwire this measure onto the 2026 ballot, despite Fresno County's full compliance with longstanding election law. The firm she hired to assist in influencing Sacramento politicians is Olsen Remco. That firm features Governor Gavin Newsom's personal campaign lawyer. Let that sink in. And one has to look at the cozy and corrupt financial relationship between Swearingen, her foundation, Governor Newsom, and Governor Newsom's wife's foundation. Now let's follow the money. It's been widely reported that Newsom and his wife are under investigation by the Department of Justice for financial issues related to requesting money from donors for his wife's nonprofit, the California Partners Projects. Now here's what the records show. The Center Square reported this week that Newsom has directed $4.28 million in donations to a wide variety of nonprofits. The San Joaquin Valley Sun reports that the Central Valley Community Foundation, run by Ashley Swearengen, has served as a fiscal sponsor for the California Partners Project since 2020. So for six years, she's been sponsoring Newsom's wife's foundation. Since the California Partners Project is a 501c4 organization, donors must go through Ashley Swearingen's foundation as its fiscal sponsor in order to make the tax-deductible contributions. According to FPPC records, CVCF Foundation by Swearingen collected $280,000 in contributions at the behest of Governor Newsom. including $50,000 from Blue Shield, $80,000 from the Pritzker family, $50,000 from Omid ER Network Services, and $100,000 from Vanguard. The Washington Free Beacon cites a $99,000 Newsom-behested payment routed through her organization in February 2024, and nine days later, the foundation was afforded a $14 million no-bid contract. Now, in fairness, the foundation alleges that this is incorrect, the filing's incorrect, but they acknowledge that since 2020, they have served as a fiscal sponsor for Newsom's wife. Now, because Ashley Swearengen has been collecting money for six years and funding that money to his wife, Cherry, she wants him to sign AB 1923 to deliver her ballot measure in November that she failed to get done herself. As the legislature debates AB 1923, counties across California are similarly and lawfully exercising the same authority that Fresno County did. On Tuesday, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors voted to order a 30-day study on a ballot measure that would increase the minimum wage, functionally forcing that measure to 2028, just like Fresno County did. Is there a bill in the legislature to shove that measure onto the ballot in 2026? No, there is not. Of course not. Which speaks to the targeting of one county out of 58, which is completely unconstitutional and violates the California Constitution. Now let me be clear. AB 1923 is a solution in search of a problem. There is no urgency. Funding for Measure C will still take place next year. If the state were truly concerned, and they are not, They could meet their obligations and fund road repairs just as they did before Measure C was implemented 40 years ago. Before Measure C was implemented 40 years ago, the state fixed roads. The bill undermines local control, turning Fresno County into a ward of the state unable to control its own destiny. And it sets a terrible precedent for similar actions from the state whenever they don't agree with the county's decision. What we're seeing in Sacramento is a blatant tale of cronyism and corruption, plain and simple. The established rules only apply when they help the powerful dominate the rest of us. With AB 1923, Governor Gavin Newsom will profit, Ashley Swearingen and her cabal of radicals will profit, and the Fresno County patients and residents will suffer. I call on Newsom to do the right thing and don't sign the bill. The people of California and the people of Fresno County deserve a governor who makes decisions in the public interest, in their interest, not in the interest of an organization that has been writing six figure checks to your family's charity for six years. Fresno County voters elected their local leaders. Sacramento must not rewrite the rules simply because it dislikes our decision. This is bigger than one road tax. This is about whether Fresno County governs itself or whether political power and Sacramento connections can be used to overrule us whenever local voters and their representatives refuse to fall in line. If they do this to Fresno County, it sets a terrible precedent for every county in California. The people of Fresno County are watching and so is the rest of the state. If the California State Legislature approves AB 1923 and Governor Newsom signs it, which I anticipate will happen, I will call upon my colleagues to vote to initiate immediate litigation at our upcoming Board of Supervisors meeting to contest the law's constitutionality and its violation of state election law. Fresno County's authority to control local matters is at stake. And we will never bow to radical, progressive extremists and corrupt Sacramento politicians like Saria and Newsom. The fight against this blatant corruption to ensure and protect our citizens' rights, to adhere to the Constitution and state election laws, and to maintain local control over governmental decisions influencing our community has just begun. We're not going to back down. We'll never back down. We're going to defend our constituents and protect their interests, no matter what politicians, what radicals, what extremists, or what corruption takes place. And it's all pretty blatant, and we're witnessing in real time. With that, I will pass it to you, Supervisor Mendez.

Thank you, Supervisor Brutterfell. That was... covered quite a bit in that deal uh you know i want to start off with how we got here you know originally there was a uh you know they had us had the select committee you know to start you know measure c they selected a steering committee this is back last spring and during the summer uh Leadership Council and Ashley Swearensen didn't like what they did. And it was actually a left-leaning group. You know, there was more, I would say, more people on the left than there was on the right. So what they did is they started having, which I went to the first, I think, two. They had these behind-the-door, they were supposed to be ad hoc committee meetings to add people. to the steering committee. Well, during that process, Veronica Garibay was very nervous about a timeline. So we kept asking her, in fact, she's finally, I point blank asked her, I said, what is the problem with this timeline? And she admitted in front of everybody, well, we think we might eventually have to go to the ballot with our own initiative. So she was basically using the COG's ability to actually do a measure, what would have been a Measure C renewal. That's a Measure C renewal. It's morphed into something else. So people need to be aware of that, and everybody seems to forget about that. So anyway, they continued the process with the 12 new people. About six people that were on the committee quit. because of how it was being ran, especially with these new people actually trying to dominate the rest of them. So it ended up not going anywhere. So I think it was... Late last winter, they went out and said, okay, this isn't working. We're going to go out and do our own initiative because they never looked at the mechanics of how to get it through. To get a public initiative through, it's like making sausage, but the thing is it has to barely be eaten. You know, it can't be so horrible that nobody wants to eat it because in the end, nobody will vote for you won't get two-thirds. So they knew they would never get two-thirds with what they wanted, so they went out and tried to get an initiative. Now, what they did is they took what was done in COG and then took it. They didn't copy it and paste it. They went through it, and this is Garibay and some of Ashley Swearingen's people, and they come up with a citizens initiative. It was very convoluted. So actually at the, I think it was towards the end, one of the last regular Measure C meetings, you know, about renewing Measure C, county staff started asking questions. And believe it or not, most of the questions they asked were very similar to Nathan Magsick's questions. They never got answered. Basically didn't answer them. So That's what Nathan was doing, and he did a great job of when it finally came back to us. Now, you've got to remember, their initiative, when they finally got the signatures, it was too late to do what's called a regular count, where they go through and count them all. Okay, so it went into the random deal, which they flunked. And then they were lucky. You know, James Coos is a get-it-done kind of guy, right? So he told them, hey, I can't guarantee it, but we'll do our best and see if we can go through these signatures. So he went through the signatures, and here's another misinformation deal. They say they gathered 32,000 signatures. 21,800 were legitimate. There was only less than 2,000 left. So I don't know who these other people were that were signing their initiative. So anyway, it comes back to us. So they knew we set our calendar back in January, actually before we sit in January. The new board in January approves it, and that's our schedule. And everybody knew there's only one meeting in July. Okay. James Coos brought this initiative in July. I think if you want to really know what's going on, I think if you're going to be a reporter, you deserve... To watch that, Nathan Magzik's questioning, he questioned the actual author. You got to remember there was, I call them ghost authors. You look at this initiative, it has authors, but Veronica Garibay was, I think, the only real author of that group. And Veronica did answer the question. So like I said, go back and look at the film. You know, it's online. You want to get it, watch it. He asked 50 questions online. that all she could answer was, well, that wasn't the intent. And Nathan would answer back, well, that's what's written here. That's the language that's going to be followed. So that got the board to say, hey, wait a second, the majority board, we need to look at this. And we didn't do a, I call it a BS economic study. I think that's what they got from Fresno State, you know, with their deal. It's a lot of copy and paste. What we wanted was an analysis on the questions that Magsic asked and what are the consequences of that actually happening. Do you guys understand that? That's what we were trying to do. So, you know, this measure, and there's a lot of misinformation out there. Ashley Swearengen got on KMJ the other day and said, oh, there's more oversight in this initiative than the last one. That's just a bald-faced lie. There's almost no oversight. There's 11 people that have no, that don't have to answer to the public that COG can put on this, on this committee. And COG, I don't know if you guys have been paying attention, COG's a very Mickey Mouse operation right now, making a lot of mistakes and not following their procedure. They couldn't even follow the last Measure C procedure that they have to do. They have to do two things. They have to vote in an east side and a west side representative to the Transportation Authority. Well, they were letting everybody vote on a east side selection when the law and the original measure says that only east side and only west side mayors can vote for that position. So they can't even do things right. So I think it's very important that we look at it, get this study back, and actually see. And this will be a public document. So see what the initiative is about. So it goes on the ballot. This is a good thing to give to the public and say, hey, you know, or at least give them the executive summary of it and give it back. So thank you. Who's going to speak next? No, that's the state tax board that collects sales tax. Then they give it back to who has it. Like Measure P is a sales tax. They have to give that money to the city. I'm not 100% sure. But it's usually, I think it's COG. Well, I don't know. You calling it that? Well, I'm not saying that. Because if it wins, it wins. Any other questions before I leave?

So, the steering committee, if that process would have gone correctly, and you would have come up with a replacement for Measure C. We all knew that Measure C was going to...

Correct. That's a proper way to do it.

on correctly, according to you guys, and then you referred the measure as the County Board of Supervisors, right? It would have been a referred measure, not an initiative.

Right.

And it would have required two-thirds to pass.

Correct.

This initiative only requires 50% plus one because it's a citizen's initiative.

Right now.

Have you ever seen so many mayors... a part of a citizen's tax initiative.

No, and here's the deal. You know, it's a great con job. You know, I didn't want to get into the minutia of how this stuff works. They thought, hey, we're going to get more money. They don't care how they have to spend it, but the initiative says you can only spend it in a certain way. So in other words, if you don't, the steering committee can come back and say, well, you didn't put enough bike lanes. You didn't do enough walking trails. Oh, by the way, you didn't put trees on the walking trail. And they might be denied their money. And they could be in a position where they don't have water to put trees. water on the trees.

Do you think that Prop 43 has anything to do with this very drastic measure that state lawmakers?

Oh, I'm sure it does. I mean, I'm sure they've done all the calculations on every angle that there is. Now, good question.

Let me just say something before I introduce Diane. The process also, you mentioned the steering committee, got corrupted very early. Ashley Swearengen's group came before the COG before I got there. I'm on there now. And basically threatened the COG, which is 15 mayors plus a county representative, that if they weren't going to get their way in what they wanted in the measure, they would run their own citizens measure. And that intimidated me. the mayors, and that's why they allowed them to put 13 members of their group on the steering committee. There were only about 20 before then. So they had direct control over the steering committee and what came out of that steering committee. So the process got hijacked early. Unfortunately, 11 out of 15 mayors bent the knee to Swearengen and her efforts out of fear that she would do exactly what she did. and also understand that this measure that they're trying to get passed removes the Fresno County Transportation Authority, which right now is made up of elected officials who oversee the expenditures of Measure C. It's been very effective for 40 years. There have been no problems. I know you serve on it. I serve on it now. This measure removes the Fresno County Transportation Authority. And then who oversees the $7 billion? A steering committee appointed by COG. The very same members that caved before will appoint the same people to be on the steering committee. That would be Veronica Garibay, Sandra Celadon, Ashley Swearengin's group. Those people would oversee the $7 billion. And I've said before, this is nothing more than a public transportation tax disguised as a road tax because they want to get people out of their cars, riding buses, bikes, and scooters, and put 120 miles of bike lanes throughout Fresno County. That's what this effort is. They're radicals, they're environmental wackos, and if this goes through, they're going to get their way and remove FCTA, Fresno County Transportation Authority, and put those same radicals in who developed this measure, and they'll be in charge of the expenditures. With that, I'd like to introduce Clovis Mayor Pro Tem Diane Pierce, and we also have Matt Tuttle, Reedley Mayor.

Good morning. I am Diane Pierce, and it is my privilege to serve the city of Clovis as Mayor Pro Tem. I want to thank Chairman Bredefeld for inviting me to be part of this press conference. What we have seen take place over the last week with the proponents of the Better Roads Safe Streets tax measure is a sad example of what happens when bullies don't get their way. This stopped being about a transportation tax and has become about respect for process and local control. It was noted by GV Wire's Bill McEwen that, quote, There's no negotiating with Swearingen, nor her six-figure salaried surrogates. It's their way or the highway, end quote. That highway hit the procedural end of our local election code on July 14th with our democratically elected Fresno County Board of Supervisors. when they opted to request a study on the impacts of the tax measure on the entirety of Fresno County and its taxpayers. And they couldn't accept it. Ashley Swearingen's interview on KMJ last week heard her state that, quote, we can't look to Sacramento to solve our problems, end quote. All the while, her Better Roads Safe Streets team was hiring lobbyists and writing letters to state legislators seeking a bailout to solve their problem. And what makes this an even more obvious power grab is the fact that AB 1923 only applies to Fresno County. Other counties, like Alameda, retain their ability to have say over their elections and what measures go on which ballot. What do we need city councils or board of supervisors for if every time some well-funded group can just run to their friends in Sacramento to scrap our local decisions and force their way? At the city of Clovis, we find ourselves exasperated quite regularly with the erosion of local control and the ever-increasing mandates from Sacramento. which made it really disappointing to see the letter asking for this government overreach and removal of local control, was signed by the mayor of Clovis. The people of this county deserve better than for the Better Roads Safe Streets group to throw a tantrum and run to Sacramento to bail them out. If our state legislators and Governor Newsom actually enact a state law targeting a single decision by a single county, we truly have entered a dangerous new era of government overreach. Thank you.

My name is Matthew Taro. I'm the mayor of the city of Reedley. You know, a couple few things. I want to touch on a couple things that Supervisor both Bertafeld and Mendez mentioned. You know, I'm only as good as my staff that gives me information. I need to depend on them, especially in a city like Reedley and especially on a council like the Council of Governments. this current ballot initiative, think of this, it's giving less money towards professional staff, taking away a level of oversight, as mentioned, I believe, by Supervisor Bredefeld, and asking less staff to do more. And so let that sink in a little bit. And another one thing, too, that was mentioned already, lots was mentioned, but about a third of the signatures for the ballot initiative were deemed invalid. About a third. You know, I'm rarely the loudest in the room, but being so close to this renewal effort for the last about two years, I've been witness to the loudest in the room have commandeered this process. It's important for me to be here because of that. I feel like I need to speak up a little bit more. Furthermore, in my experience, it's rare that the loudest in the room are actually the majority. I'm a military combat veteran. I appreciate and I definitely respect both chain of command and process. This process I am vehemently opposed to. The process to get to this point for almost two years now that I've been very much close to is very flawed. There's been times where I brought up questions and concerns, which it's my duty to debate and bring up questions and concerns, but I've been silenced, I've been talked over, and I've been shunned. I'm not the only one. Not just these behind me, but there's about a dozen other local elected officials that have gotten the same treatment through the whole process, simply because we are the minority and they're the majority as far as numbers. They can say that everybody's been at the table and everybody's been given input, but how good is that input when the majority is silencing the minority? It's not just elected officials, but when they started doing it also to our professional staff that we need to lean on to give us advice, that's where one extra time they crossed the line. We had professional engineers, city managers, We had finance experts that weren't allowed to give their opinion because it was contrary to the direction that they wanted to go. We even had lawyers that were ignored on their legal advice because their advice was contrary to the direction that they wanted to go. It's important for me to be here to voice my opposition to the Better Roads, Safe Streets ballot initiative. It's not just flawed, it was hastily done. That was, I think, very well addressed, but not just this morning, but also in the last few weeks, so I won't touch so much on that. But being from a city of Readley that we have about 26,000 people, we don't have a huge budget. This ballot initiative opens up the door wide open to litigation. It's important for me to be here to voice my opposition to the state bill that's being heard on the floor of both the Assembly and the Senate this morning as an emergency order, which takes away local control. It's been said, but I will say it again, what good are these two behind me and the other three if the state is going to come in and be big brother, make decisions for them? Our five county supervisors were elected into that position to represent over a million people in this county. And part of how I govern, part of my stance is if I don't like what's being done or a vote that's being taken, I will go to them. And if I really don't like it, I will try to vote them out. That's part of our way of democracy. But I digress, this is about roads and no doubt our roads need more attention. Many of them are crumbling and failing us. My concern is that this current ballot initiative does not address road condition as well as it should. My concern is some allocations are being used to supplement a couple cities' budgets. My concern is millions of dollars are earmarked for many things other than road construction. Many roads are in bad shape, but I would like to quote a main proponent of their ballot initiative, that if your city's roads are in bad condition, you only need to look at your local leaders, your elected officials, For 40 years, our road tax dollars from Measure C have been equally allocated to all 16 jurisdictions for 40 years. I'll say that again in another way. If you see or hear your mayor of your city on TV or radio, on social media or in Sacramento, Complaining about the condition of your roads. You only need to go to them and ask them What have you been doing with our city's road tax dollars for the last 40 years? Again, all cities have been given the same equal amount for 40 years through measure C The city of Reedley is ready to weather the storm of a couple few years of no measure C tax dollars if needed. We've prepared years in advance. That's part of my good governance. Years ago, we had this discussion for this exact outcome that we're talking about right now. No measure is better than a flawed measure that we're going to be handcuffed for 30 years. An example of them operating in bad faith. I have many, many watching the sausage being made that I'm not going to mention. We could be here all day. But when one side reverts to name calling, like using the word racist towards people, I don't know about you, but in my world, that is worse than a four-letter word, calling someone. I'm not just a military combat veteran. I'm also Japanese. I've had generations before me interned in internment camps for years. And I would challenge you to think, what does that word actually mean in our day and age now? What does racist mean? Because you don't get your way, you start to name call. If I operated like that, I'm confident you all would know my first, middle, last name, all my kids' names. If I operated like that for the last two years of that type of name calling, you all would know me very well. But I'm confident nobody here knows me. But again, that's why it's important for me to speak up. Also, 11 mayors are supporting this measure. Well, that means four of us mayors are not supporting it. And I will tell you, it's three of the largest cities in the county minus Fresno and Clovis. Reedley, Sanger, Selma, and Kingsburg. From the beginning, for almost two years, we've started as just asking questions. But the process very much was flawed, as I've stated. And we weren't even allowed a voice at the table. So they can say that everybody's been at the table giving input. But again, how good is that input if the majority is silencing you? This morning, I didn't want to be silenced. And so that's why it's important for me to be here. With that, I think we'll take questions, but I'll hand it back over to Supervisor Bedford.

Yeah, we will take questions for anyone that you have.

Well, we're going to find that out on Tuesday.

We're having an election law specialist that we've already contracted with come and speak to us. and we will see what it is. I can tell you this, though. I'm all for it regardless. There's a principle here that we have to fight for in addition to fighting for residents from this corruption that's taking place in Sacramento right before our eyes. How much money are you willing to spend? We'll see what it costs.

Would you have to partner with another plaintiff given the previous lawsuit to try to file it with the state?

No, I don't think we have to. I mean, you know, we're the accountants.

Right. Well.

We will see what standing we have. Listen, I don't take corruption lightly, and I don't take Sacramento screwing my constituents lightly. I'm going to do everything I can. The fight has just begun. I don't give a shit what they do in Sacramento. The fight has just begun for me. And let me finish. And I think it's just begun for my fellow colleagues, the other two that don't support this monstrosity. And we'll see what happens. The legal issue is what they've done is unconstitutional. They're violating election law. We followed election state law. They didn't like what we decided to do, so they're violating the Constitution and targeting Fresno County. It's never been done before, should never happen again. Everyone should be outraged by this because it sets a terrible precedent for the future. And is this the way we want California to be governed? Newsom is always attacking Trump on election stuff, but I have a feeling he's going to do what Soria and Swearingen, his co-benefactor, to funnel money to his wife's nonprofit. He'll do what she wants. Read the Constitution. Doug, do you have any information on that? You're asking a legal question. I know the Constitution is being violated. Do you have anything you want to add? You want to?

Okay.

Go ahead.

Say it. Go ahead.

Article 4?

Okay. Okay.

The basis is the measure they developed. What they did was throw in some new language to make it their own initiative. But it's still basically what they were trying to push before. But the enabling language is where the rubber hits the road. You can have percentages and all this stuff. That's meaningless unless you go back and look at the enabling language. Enabling language on theirs was worse than even the COGS version.

I want to ask Fredafeld, what do you think the motivation is for this group to put together a road tax?

It's not a roads tax. It's to get people out of their cars, use public transportation, put bike lanes all through Fresno County. It's like Newsom with trying to get rid of the combustible engine and have everybody drive electric cars. No. Then in some way? Well, it benefits them in their radical ideology and in their environmental wacko ideology. Yeah. They don't care what people want. They know better. That's what most left-wing radicals think. They know better than everybody else. And so they're pushing this agenda because that's what they believe in. I'm pushing the agenda that we ought to fix people's streets and roads because having walked for a year and a half in the last campaign and all through northwest Fresno, northeast Fresno and Clovis, nobody asked me for a bus. Nobody asked me for a bike lane. They said, Gary. When is the county, city going to fix our roads? Because they promised it to us for decades. And I said, we're going to work to fight to make that happen. It has to happen through Measure C. And 65% when you're spending money on bike lanes throughout that 65% and 26% for buses that most people don't ride is a bunch of bullshit. And that's what this measure is. And so you got to call out the monstrosity in the tax scheme. You got to call out Ashley Swearingen and her secret shadow government because people are intimidated because she has well-heeled out-of-town donors and they're afraid of her doing exactly what she did. Well, I'm not intimidated. Supervisor Mendez isn't intimidated. The people behind me aren't intimidated. And we're going to defend our constituents and fight this outright blatant corruption that I've documented here today. And we will see what happens, but we will fight. And if we lose and we have to go to the ballot, we're going to make sure we defeat this piece of shit because it is not right for the people and they'll get screwed for 30 years. My action is if we have to sue, we're going to sue. That's my intention. We will do it. As I say, the fight has just begun. Well, we got to see how much it's going to cost. I mean, you know, we look at everything. But this is a very important fight for our constituents, and we're going to fight it. No.

I have one final question about... Did you want to answer something?

Yeah.

Well, let me answer your question that Gary answered. You asked why they're doing this. It's a no growth policy. Do you understand that? Okay. To grow, okay? You take – you got to remember Veronica Gerbe's group is suing COG right now over the interchanges south of Fresno. Do you know that? Yeah, that's running litigation. They're suing – they're using the – CEQA, but that's the process they're using because they don't want those interchanges done now how many how many use the Shaw Avenue interchange Any of you guys use it? Yeah, some people do that's probably nobody wants to drive over there because it's so congested but that that interchange is a by a four hundred million dollar interchange the fix right because the regional money was tooken out and Stuff like that will never get done. And what that does is that controls the growth to the West. It's about no growth. They want people to live in multi-high apartments closer to the middle of town. That's what it is.

My final question. If

the law bill if newsom signs the bill what is at stake for the entire state if that happens what's it what's at stake is that they can do this to any county they disagree with i mean this sets the precedent for that and this in a disgraceful manner soria gutted her own bill that was to help hospitals in distress. Patients who need hospitalization will now not get it because of these two idiot politicians who are bending the knee to Ashley Swearengen and these other radicals, because they're all aligned together, and have turned their back on Fresno County residents, Madero County residents, who may need that hospital. They gutted that bill for hospitals. I mean, it's unreal. These are the people who care. By the way, these two same politicians who I said have spent 20 years never brought a penny back for roads, but now they care all of a sudden. It's a disgrace. They're a disgrace. Newsom's a disgrace. The whole legislature's a disgrace. Well, we looked at it, and they felt that what they had done was legal, and so we didn't pursue anything. Yes.

Yes.

That's what I said.

Yes.

Fresno. And others. Is that your only question?

I guess I just want to make

So both. One thing that the mayor of Fresno said at COG sometime last year was it covered fax, Fresno Area Express buses, and how many, say, students ride and depend on fax buses. I don't understand why the county taxpayer would need to fund something, and that needs to be on the... the backs of county taxpayers on a measure that, in my opinion, needs to go towards potholes, needs to go towards gutters and sidewalks for students as well. One thing I would like to mention, it's been lightly mentioned, but being a rural city, Reedley is almost as far away from the heart of the county as you can be and still be in the county. We're closer to Dinuba in Tulare County than anything else. But we rely on regional roads. We have over half of our population in the city of Reedley travel outside of our city on a daily basis. And I would be very confident that that statement is accurate for the other 13 cities in the county as well, minus Fresno and Clovis. Regional roads are roads not necessarily right inside of our city limits, but they're the county roads that connect our cities. From Reedley, it would be Reed Avenue, Manning Avenue, Frankwood Avenue. Orange Cove is even further than the city of Reedley, and they need Manning Avenue, South Avenue, to be done. That road is terrible. And who's speaking up for Orange Cove? I'll tell you, their mayor was up in Sacramento vouching for this. This is one issue that I have with some of the very rural mayors supporting this measure, is they're dangled a few dollars to get a few of their roads done, and threaten that if they don't take it, then they're not going to get anything. I almost don't blame them for supporting this because of that more or less issue right there, that point. However, if we can rewind about two years, and if we can go back to some good governance, which this has not had good governance, and that's why I'm here. I don't want to be here. This isn't my MO. But it has not been good governance of this renewal process. There's been threatens. There's been threats, rather, of kind of what I've been talking about to local jurisdictions that you're not going to get anything. Your roads are going to crumble for 30 years. And there's allocations here that do not make sense to the over one million residents in our county. It just does not make sense. We are not L.A., We're not the Bay Area. We are a big county, no doubt, but we are still very rural in nature.

Fix our roads initiative? The other initiative? I don't know. I'm not responsible for it. I don't know. That other initiative. Let me say one thing. I want to add on to what Buddy said. Ashley Swearingen, when she was mayor, It was well known she did not want growth. If you talk to developers, if they're honest with you, many of them have told me that she told them she's not interested in development. She doesn't like development. And as a result of that, the development that should have been going to the north jumped the river, went to Madera. And you see what's going on there. They're expanding. They got great property tax, sales tax. She is an anti-developer, anti-development person, always has been, and I think that's part of also what Buddy was alluding to. They're not allegations. It's documented. I'm not a lawyer and I'm not a prosecutor. It's out there. The Department of Justice, as we know, are investigating Newsom and his wife. So allegations are being investigated. And we're now discovering clearly what her foundation is doing. I call it corruption. Whether it's investigated or not, we'll see. No, I don't need to file a complaint. The people who are responsible to enforce the law know very well what's going on. They're investigating, and I'm sure they are.

About the rewriting of the AB 1923 and the lobbyists, everything happened right after you guys decided, the board of directors decided about the 30-day study. Were you guys expecting the lobbyists or any of the lobbyists?

Was I expecting any?

Were you guys expecting like the rewriting of the AB 19?

No, no, I had no knowledge of what they were doing. And I'm sure nobody up here knew until we found out about it. Didn't know about the letter that was sent from the two mayors. Didn't know what Ashley was doing. But then we started hearing that something was in the works. And then it came out.

Right now, what solutions do you want to use to move the world forward?

Well, you know, this hand-wringing now of these mayors that supported this crappy measure, I would say to them, Supervisor Mendez and I tried to negotiate with these folks a multitude of times. And I said very clearly early on, we can't do 120 miles of bike lanes. A 30-year tax measure doesn't work. I know Northwest, Northeast, and Clovis last time voted down very strongly the 2022 measure. What they're proposing is not going to pass. I believe it's going to be voted down again because it's not doing what the people want. And I said it every month at COG. And like Mayor Tuttle says, it was ignored because they were in control with their steering committee and 11 mayors that bent the knee to these radicals and to shadow mayor, progressive Ashley Swearingen. And that's a fact. That's what happened.

Just so I understand this correctly, the cities, just like Reedley had said, they have a plan. We all knew that this was going to expire. The cities could have come up with their own tax to present to the people. Sure. So Fresno could have had its own city sales tax going directly to roads and transportation.

Well, they're doing it now.

Yeah.

Well, that's a general tax.

No, that's okay. If you do a specific, it's automatically two-thirds, even if it's in the city of Fresno.

Well, and that's... Totally. And that's why this general tax that you're proposing I believe has a lot of problems because they keep talking as though it's a specific tax. And the other issue, it's a general tax, which means there are council members who want childcare for all. I don't know where they're getting that money. So this would be an open pot of 50 or $60 million. And I can guarantee you, that the people who are on that board, as well as the ones that are coming on, are very left wing, want to tax and spend, have a lot of agendas that they're going to need money. And I can assure the people that money is not all going to roads. So it's misleading. It's a general tax, but all they keep talking about is a road tax. But I'm not sure how they're going to fund child care for all and give freebies away for buses and all the other stuff.

Anything else? Okay. Thank you very much.