Judge rules against Fresno County in Measure S fight

Measure S – the half-center transportation tax measure known as the Better Roads, Safe Streets initiative – will appear on the November ballot. 

Fresno County Judge Jonathan Skiles ruled against the Fresno County Board of Supervisors on Monday, determining that Assembly Bill 1923, the bill that placed Measure S on the ballot, did not violate the California Constitution. 

The backstory: Fresno County sued the state, Measure S backers and Fresno County Registrar of Voters James Kus on the grounds that AB 1923 was unconstitutional and that Measure S should appear on the March 2028 ballot and not in November. 

Measure S was set to be pushed off to 2028 after the Board of Supervisors ordered a 30-day study and brought the initiative back after the deadline to place measures onto the November ballot. 

But the Legislature intervened with AB 1923 to force the count to place Measure S on the ballot. 

What Skiles ruled: After hearing arguments from Fresno County, the State and Measure S backers in court last Friday, Skiles published his ruling Monday morning, finding that AB 1923 is valid and enforceable. 

Skiles ruled that AB 1923 does not violate article IV, section 16 of the California Constitution, as Fresno County contended. 

He denied Fresno County’s request for a peremptory writ of mandate directing the state to refrain from implementing AB 1923 and the request for a peremptory writ of mandate directing Kus to refrain from placing Measure S on the November ballot. 

Skiles also denied Fresno County’s request for a permanent injunction. 

Zoom in: Similar to the focus of his questions at last Friday’s hearing, Skiles discussed State Elections Code 9111 in his ruling. 

Elections Code 9111 gives county boards of supervisors the authority to order a report on ballot measures. He wrote in his ruling that the code was intended to help local governments determine whether to enact an initiative into law without submitting it to the voters, which governments can do on non-tax measures. 

“It was not intended to delay placing a qualified initiative on the ballot where the board of supervisors was mandated by law to allow the citizens of the county to decide the issue,” Skiles wrote. “The court affords the legislature, as a co-equal branch of government, the deference it is entitled to in deciding if such conduct is a misuse of the statute and/or whether a special statute is required to address the misuse.” 

What we’re watching: Fresno County Board of Supervisors Chair Garry Bredefeld announced Monday that the county will not appeal the ruling, meaning Measure S will face no more opposition to appearing on the November ballot. 

Notably, Measure S will not be the only major tax measure on the November ballot. To the dismay of the social justice groups who proposed Measure S, the City of Fresno placed a general half-cent sales tax on the ballot in case the Better Roads, Safe Streets tax failed to make it. Coalinga and Fowler also have their own half-cent general tax measures on the ballot. Fresno’s tax would not take effect if Measure S passes. 

What they’re saying: Bredefeld said in a statement that he respects Skiles and believes he gave all sides a fair opportunity to present their arguments. 

Bredefeld said he will actively work to oppose the 30-year tax at the ballot box, saying Measure S stands for “scam.” 

“Measure S will eliminate driving lanes and increase traffic congestion,” Bredefeld said. “It prohibits cities and the county from spending a single dollar to widen roads until achieving a pavement quality standard that has never been met in Fresno County’s history. It locks 25% of all revenue into public transit – guaranteed regardless of ridership – for the next 30 years.” 

Bredefeld said Fresno County does not need a “multi-billion dollar blank check designed to get people out of their cars and onto buses, bikes, and scooters.” 

“The people behind this measure couldn’t follow the rules to gather their own signatures, couldn’t answer basic questions about where the money would go, and when we did our job and asked for a financial study, they ran to Sacramento and had their political friends rewrite California election law to target us – and us alone out of 58 counties. That is what unbridled corruption looks like. And we will defeat that corruption and not allow our children and grandchildren to be ripped off for thirty years by radicals that want to destroy our way of life.”