Fresno City Council votes to sue Fresno County over controversial General Plan, escalating tensions over development

In a closely contested vote during closed session on Thursday, the Fresno City Council narrowly decided to take legal action against Fresno County over its recently approved General Plan update. Councilmembers Mike Karbassi, Annalisa Perea, and Tyler Maxwell voted against the decision to sue.

The controversial plan, which sets the stage for significant development along the Kings and San Joaquin Rivers, has drawn sharp criticism from environmental groups and the City of Fresno itself.

Last month, the Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the county’s plan, which could potentially worsen air quality, accelerate the loss of prime agricultural land, and exceed the county’s state-mandated climate emissions budget by 300%. Critics argue that the plan undermines California’s stringent environmental safeguards and fails to sufficiently address the needs of existing rural disadvantaged communities.

Prior to the vote, the City of Fresno had raised concerns about the county’s environmental review, noting that it lacked adequate mitigation measures to address the plan’s impacts on agricultural resources, traffic, and groundwater.

Another major concern is that the general plan’s analysis might inadvertently pave the way for a massive 7,000-acre development on the Kings River in the future, according to a city hall source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Such a project would likely have far-reaching and devastating consequences, the source said, and is not analyzed in the county’s general plan analysis, including what they say is the depletion of groundwater resources, the irreversible loss of valuable agricultural land, and the creation of severe traffic bottlenecks in the affected areas.

Supervisor Steve Brandau defended the plan during the board’s February 21 meeting, citing growth pressures across the San Joaquin River into Madera County.

A broken relationship since 2020

The lawsuit arises amid escalating tensions between the city and county over land use policies and the preservation of the region’s natural resources. Thirty years ago, the county agreed to refer all retail and suburban development to the City of Fresno in exchange for a greater share of property tax revenue.

However, that agreement expired in 2020, and the city and county have been unable to reach a new agreement. In the absence of a new agreement, the county appears to be attempting to attract some of Fresno’s business and re-enter the development game.

Environmental groups are expected to join the lawsuit, accusing the county of abandoning essential protection programs and handing over control of the Kings River’s future to developers.

The updated General Plan includes several controversial changes, such as removing crucial environmental protection programs, eliminating promised plans to enhance recreational access to the San Joaquin River, and weakening agricultural land preservation policies by scrapping 28 measures aimed at protecting farmland.

Critics also highlight that the county’s plan to prevent the overall loss of prime farmland is weak and unenforceable, offering developers a vague “menu” of options rather than clear requirements. They argue that the county’s approach is deliberately designed to be meaningless, demonstrating a complete disregard for preserving the region’s best farmland.

Last month, Fresno County’s General Plan attorney Sarah Owsowitz told the supervisors that the county’s mitigation plans were legally defensible.

County spokesperson Sonja Dosti responded to Fresnoland in an email saying the county hadn’t seen the city’s complaint. “The County engaged all stakeholders, including the City of Fresno, in a lengthy comment process prior to the approval of the General Plan and appropriately addressed all legally required elements in the Plan.”