What’s at stake?
Although Fresno Mayor Jerry Dyer said he’s previously been concerned about the possibility of two transportation-related ballot measures appearing before Fresno voters and causing “confusion,” he said for now he’ll just campaign for a “yes” on both the city’s general tax and Better Roads, Safe Streets — if the latter surmounts promised legal challenges from the Fresno County Board of Supervisors.
What’s Fresno Mayor Jerry Dyer’s recommendation if Fresno County voters have to decide on two separate, transportation-related tax measures this November?
Vote “yes” on both.
The mayor outlined his position on the general tax his staff submitted to the county clerk at the eleventh-hour last Friday — as well as the countywide transportation measure he’s championed for months that may also end up on the November ballot, thanks to last-minute intervention from the state — at a news conference Monday morning.
He reiterated that his last-minute reversal on whether to submit the city’s general tax to the clerk by the Aug. 7 deadline to land on the November ballot was to avoid doing anything that could hurt city residents — and said he feared he would’ve faced a recall effort had he not taken action.
“People would have been extremely upset over the fact that we did not act when we should,” he said.
The mayor had originally issued a statement last Thursday saying that he wouldn’t submit the city’s general tax measure to the clerk in order to avoid “confusion” for voters between the city’s tax and a second, countywide transportation tax measure known as Better Roads, Safe Streets.
That statement came shortly after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed AB 1923, a state bill from a pair of Central Valley lawmakers that aimed to guarantee a spot for Better Roads on the November ballot, despite a controversial move from the Fresno County Board of Supervisors last month that likely would’ve delayed the measure from appearing before voters until March 2028.
The city’s tax was originally framed as a stopgap measure in case Better Roads didn’t land on the ballot prior to the expiration of the county’s longtime transportation tax, Measure C, in June 2027, leaving millions of dollars and hundreds of jobs on the line for the City of Fresno alone.
But almost exactly 24 hours after Dyer said he wouldn’t move forward with the city’s general tax, the mayor reversed course and issued another statement explaining that he did ultimately choose to submit the city tax measure to the clerk.
Dyer explained to reporters on Monday that the reversal largely came down to concerns from top city officials over whether AB 1923 will hold up against the legal battle the Fresno County Board of Supervisors have vowed to wage.
Specifically, he referenced a written legal opinion City Attorney Andrew Janz shared internally last Friday.
That opinion from Janz — which Dyer later said was a “protected document” — outlined risks if the city didn’t submit its own measure, as well as from potential legal challenges from Fresno County.
Among those risks were comments at a news conference last Thursday from Fresno County Counsel Doug Sloan, who questioned whether AB 1923’s “urgency” clause that allowed the law to take effect immediately was appropriately invoked.
The board of supervisors, meanwhile, is scheduled to take its long-awaited ministerial vote on placing Better Roads on the ballot at its regular meeting on Tuesday.
The supervisors had originally been scheduled to take that vote on July 14, well before the Aug. 7 deadline to qualify for the November ballot — but instead opted to call for a 30-day study of the financial impacts of the measure, delaying their ministerial vote on its ballot placement until two business days after the Aug. 7 deadline.
The board will also receive that financial study at Tuesday’s meeting, which was prepared by a consulting firm with ties to a group that had at one time announced intentions to put together its own transportation tax measure, known as “Fix Our Roads,” to rival the Better Roads proposal.
In an unusual step, the Fresno County Clerk / Registrar of Voters’ Office has attached two different versions of a resolution to the Better Roads agenda item at Tuesday’s meeting. One has the supervisors voting to place Better Roads on the March 2028 ballot. A second, “alternative” resolution has them voting to place it on the ballot this November.
The alternative resolution contains multiple clauses documenting the county’s objections to AB 1923, calling it a “last-minute state legislative power grab usurping the County’s authority.” It also echoes Sloan’s comments about the urgency clause.
“Nothing in this Resolution constitutes a waiver of any challenge to AB 1923,” the alternative resolution continues, “or an admission that the legislative findings and declarations in AB 1923 are accurate.”
James Kus, the county clerk, didn’t return requests for comment Monday afternoon regarding the two different resolutions.
Garry Bredefeld, chair of the board, told Fresnoland in an interview Monday afternoon that the board has two options on Tuesday: either to support the resolution that places Better Roads on the November 2026 ballot, or resolution that places it on the March 2028 ballot.
“The board followed state election code, and I believe we should follow through on that and move it towards March 2028,” he said. “But I’m open to hearing other points of view.
“I also want the board to file a lawsuit against the state regarding AB 1923 because I believe it is completely unconstitutional.”
Also on the board agenda Tuesday is a discussion in closed session to decide “whether to initiate litigation against the State of California for violation of the State Constitution Article IV and Elections Code.”
In a brief statement shared Monday afternoon, Assemblymember Esmeralda Soria, one of the co-authors of AB 1923, said regarding the supervisors’ agenda item on Tuesday that “any action the Fresno County Board of Supervisors takes should be consistent with the law.”
What happens next?
Although Dyer’s staff submitted the city’s general tax to the county clerk before the deadline to qualify for the ballot, Fresno City Council does have an opportunity this week to withdraw the city general tax from the ballot, Dyer confirmed to reporters on Monday.
But the council would have to call a special meeting to take a vote in time with the deadline to withdraw the measure, which Dyer said he believes is either Tuesday or Wednesday.
Either the council president or a majority of councilmembers have the power to call a special meeting.
Nelson Esparza, president of the board and sponsor of the city’s general tax, said on Monday in response to a question about whether he’d consider calling a special meeting that he doesn’t think the unanswered questions regarding Better Roads will be answered in time. Esparza has previously said he would refuse to call a special meeting in connection with a string or last-minute city ballot proposals, including the general tax backstop measure.
“The City’s measure is there simply as a backstop in the unfortunate event that AB 1923 is stymied through defiance or legal challenges,” Esparza added in the statement shared over text. “We can’t gamble the livelihoods of several hundred city employees on the judicial process.”
Barring such a measure-stopping special meeting, voters in the City of Fresno will have the opportunity to weigh in on at least one proposed tax measure aimed at covering transportation costs previously funded by Measure C.
But to do that, the city has proposed a general tax, which means none of that money can be earmarked for a specific purpose. That has led some critics to believe that voters may be writing the city a blank check.
The general tax will sunset after 10 years or once a countywide transportation tax gets implemented — a provision Dyer emphasized was written into the measure in order to avoid competing with Better Roads.
He said he believes that provision will help avoid a situation where the two ballot measures sabotage each other.
“I’ve always had a concern that when you have multiple measures on a ballot, it can create some confusion, especially when they’re in opposition, where you got to choose one or the other. In this case, you can choose both,” he said. “That is why we intentionally, in the City of Fresno, put language in that would nullify our measure, should Better Roads pass. And so that’s a message I really want to get out to the people of Fresno: I will support both, and I hope they do, too.”
