<\/p>\n
A sign near the Veterans Boulevard project near Golden State Boulevard and Highway 99 in northwest Fresno prominently touts the success of Measure C, the half-cent sales tax to support road and transportation improvements in Fresno County that expires in 2027.<\/p>\n
ERIC PAUL ZAMORA<\/p>\n
ezamora@fresnobee.com<\/p>\n
This much is certain for the tax measure (or measures) to replace Measure C \u2014 city of Fresno voters will decide on a city-only tax measure at the November election.<\/p>\n
Whether Fresno residents will vote on a second tax measure \u2014the countywide Measure S \u2014 could be decided by a court.<\/p>\n
Measure S, backed by the Better Roads, Safe Streets campaign, is currently on the ballot \u2014 thanks to an extraordinary state law. An ongoing lawsuit could decide whether Measure R is on the Nov. 3 ballot, or delayed to March 7, 2028.<\/p>\n
What\u2019s the difference between the city and county plans? Both are half-cent sales taxes, although it would be one or the other, even if both pass.<\/p>\n
The city tax measure \u2014 now designated as Measure D \u2014 goes to the general fund, without a specific purpose. It only needs a majority to pass. The city measure expires in either 10 years, or if a countywide measure passes.<\/p>\n
For measures where taxes are spent for a specific purpose, such as transportation, it matters how it reaches the ballot. A signature-gathered measure, like Measure S, needs a majority of voters to pass; a government-led effort for a specific purpose needs two-thirds. There is also another ballot item in November, Proposition 43, which would make the threshold two-thirds no matter how it got to the ballot.<\/p>\n
Knowing it was unlikely to gather two-thirds, the city measure goes to the general fund, and only needs a majority to pass.<\/p>\n
Here is an updated, chronological timeline of the effort to replace Measure C, the half-cent sales tax dedicated to transportation projects. The measure expires June 30, 2027.<\/p>\n
1986-2022<\/p>\n
Voters in 1986 approved Measure C with 58% of the vote, a 20-year tax that promised to raise $700 million for transportation projects. The tax helped extend the major highways in Fresno County \u2014 41, 180, 168. Voters renewed it for another 20 years in 2006, with 78% of the vote.<\/p>\n
A third renewal in 2022, for 30 years, ran into opposition from social justice groups. Sandra Celedon of Fresno Building Healthy Communities and Assemblymember Joaquin Arambula, D-Fresno, campaigned against it. Needing two-thirds of the vote, Measure C received 58%, failing to pass. A post-election analysis found tax-conscious voters in Clovis and north Fresno voted it down.<\/p>\n
The Fresno Council of Governments, one of the government agencies charged with administering Measure C, bypassed a 2024 attempt, and started a complicated process last year to renew the measure.<\/p>\n
2025<\/p>\n
Fresno COG began a bureaucratically-oriented method for the official Measure C renewal. The third iteration would raise an approximate $70 billion.<\/p>\n
The policy board \u2014 composed of the 15 mayors in Fresno County and a supervisor representative \u2014 formed a steering committee, made up of city community members and experts in the transportation field.<\/p>\n
A social justice group called Transportation for All (later to form as Better Roads, Safe Streets) demanded seats at the table. If not, they would gather signatures for its own initiative. Like 2022, they argued Measure C did not focus on public transportation enough, and did not help poorer, rural communities. A policy board subcommittee acquiesced \u2014 adding 12 Transportation for All members to the original board of 24 \u2014 and the group essentially took over the Measure C renewal.<\/p>\n
Opponents said Transportation for All hijacked the steering committee and proposed something different from the Measure C mission for fixing roads. Eventually, the policy board voted against the official Measure C renewal, allowing the social justice groups to circulate their own plan.<\/p>\n
The Better Roads, Safe Streets plan dedicated 65% for fixing roads and 25% for public transportation, drastically different amounts than the current Measure C. That created a schism among supporters \u2014 including Fresno Mayor Jerry Dyer and Clovis Mayor Vong Mouanoutoua \u2014 and opponents such as Fresno County Supervisor Garry Bredefeld and Clovis Councilmember Diane Pearce.<\/p>\n
January-July 2026<\/p>\n
Better Roads, Safe Streets started the process on January 26, 2026, and turned in 32,562 signatures on April 14. The initial sampling found too many errors, mainly duplicate signatures. This delayed the certification process until the office of Fresno County Clerk\/Registrar of Voters James Kus could examine every signature.<\/p>\n
Kus completed the process, finding 22,205 valid; the initiative needed 21,909 to qualify. He certified the signatures on July 8. By state law, the Better Roads, Safe Streets plan automatically qualified for the ballot, but still needed a formal vote from the Fresno County Board of Supervisors.<\/p>\n
The nonprofit Central Valley Community Foundation \u2014 and its president\/CEO Ashley Swearengin \u2014 financially supported signature gathering. Campaign finance records show CVCF contributed $810,000 from Jan. 1 to June 30.<\/p>\n
An alternate plan crafted by transportation experts, Fix our Roads, did not get enough signatures to qualify.<\/p>\n
July 14, 2026<\/p>\n
With the signatures certified, the plan then went to the supervisors for a formal vote to place the Fresno County Transportation Improvement Act \u2014 the official name of the plan \u2014 on the ballot.<\/p>\n
The supervisors had another option. State law also allows government boards to order a study, pushing back any required votes.<\/p>\n
The supervisors on July 14, voted 3-2 for the study option<\/a>. The study would take up to 30 days, returning at the next supervising meeting on Aug. 11.<\/p>\n However, the delay meant the board would miss the Aug. 7 deadline \u2014 a ballot has to be set 88 days in advance \u2014 for items to be on the Nov. 3 election. Better Roads, Safe Streets would have to wait until the next state election in March 2028.<\/p>\n Supporters objected, saying the move denied the right to vote in November. Mendota Mayor Victor Martinez even called Bredefeld and two other supervisors \u201cracist.\u201d<\/p>\n Advocates implored Bredefeld, the board chair, to call for a special meeting before Aug. 7. He refused.<\/p>\n It seemed Better Roads, Safe Streets were out of moves.<\/p>\n July 23, 2026<\/p>\n Dyer and Fresno City Council President Nelson Esparza were concerned that without a November vote on the countywide measure, the city would lose $54 million it receives from Measure C dedicated to road repair. More than 200 city employees would lose jobs; bus routes would have to be canceled.<\/p>\n The two Fresno leaders announced a stopgap measure<\/a>. The Fresno City Council would vote on July 30 for its own tax measure. Like Measure C, it would be a half-cent and would take effect on July 1, 2027, to ensure continuity in taxes. To make sure Fresno residents would not be double-taxed, the measure contained a unique sunset provision \u2014 either 10 years or if a countywide measure passed, the city measure would automatically cease.<\/p>\n Unlike the county measure, the city version would go to the general fund. While proponents said it would be spent on city transportation needs, there was no guarantee. A future city council or mayoral budget could spend it anyway it would see fit.<\/p>\n July 30, 2026<\/p>\n Anticipating the county delay, the Fresno City Council votes 6-1 to place a city-only half-cent general sales tax on the November ballot<\/a> that would raise an estimated $65 million a year.<\/p>\n During the debate, Dyer said he would veto the city tax measure if the county measure found itself back on the ballot. The mayor has 10 days to either sign legislation or veto. In reality, the mayor had until Aug. 7 \u2014 the ballot placement deadline \u2014 to sign if he wanted it on the ballot.<\/p>\n July 31, 2026<\/p>\n Dyer and Mouanoutoua send a letter<\/a> to Assemblymember Esmeralda Soria, D-Fresno, and state Sen. Anna Caballero, D-Merced, asking if they could help.<\/p>\n \u201cWe respectfully ask that you consider whether there are any legislative, administrative, or other lawful avenues available to preserve the ability of Fresno County voters to consider this measure. We ask for your assistance in protecting the integrity of the democratic process and ensuring that voters are afforded the opportunity to make this important decision under California law,\u201d the mayors wrote.<\/p>\n Mayors from nine other Fresno County cities sent a similar letter<\/a>.<\/p>\n Days earlier, on July 28, Better Roads, Safe Streets supporters hired Sacramento lobbyist Olson Remcho<\/a> to help fast track the legislation.<\/p>\n Aug. 3, 2026<\/p>\n Soria and Caballero gut and then amend AB 1923<\/a> to declare that any Fresno County initiative certified by July 8 would automatically go on the Nov. 3 ballot, bypassing the supervisors entirely.<\/a> The bill would be urgent, meaning it could forgo the required 72 hours in print and on the fast track.<\/p>\n Bredefeld and Pearce criticized the move, calling it election tampering and taking away local control.<\/p>\n Aug. 3, 2026<\/p>\n Dyer tells The Bee he supports the Soria\/Caballero move.<\/p>\n \u201cEither way, we win. If we get one or both \u2014 I don\u2019t really want to have both of them on the ballot because there is a good chance there that maybe people say no, no, on both,\u201d Dyer said after a speech to The Rotary Club of Fresno.<\/p>\n He expressed concern about two tax measure on the same ballot, hinting he might veto the city tax measure.<\/p>\n Aug. 4, 2026<\/p>\n Dyer tells the GV Wire podcast \u201cUnfiltered\u201d that voters may expect two tax measures on the November ballot.<\/p>\n Aug. 5, 2026<\/p>\n The state Senate elections committee approved AB 1923<\/a> by a 4-1 vote. An Assembly election committee holds an informational hearing, but takes no vote.<\/p>\n Swearengin, president and CEO of the Central Valley Community Foundation and former Fresno mayor, personally lobbies in Sacramento,<\/a><\/p>\n Former Fresno County Supervisor Henry R. Perea, a Democrat, breaks with his party to oppose AB 1923<\/a> as \u201celection tampering\u201d that usurps local control. He warns that the maneuvering puts Gov. Gavin Newsom in a tight spot given his stance against federal election interference, and says litigation is \u201ca possibility.\u201d He testifies in Sacramento against the bill.<\/p>\n Aug. 6, 2026<\/p>\n AB 1923 passes the full Assembly, 54-16, and Senate, 27-8, as an urgent measure. Governor Newsom signs later that day,<\/a> placing Better Roads, Safe Streets on the November ballot, despite Fresno County lobbyist Paul Yoder warning senators that litigation would likely follow.<\/p>\n Aug. 6, 2026<\/p>\n As the legislature took its votes, Bredefeld promises at a news conference to call for immediate litigation (VIDEO)<\/a>, describing the state bill as unconstitutional and pointing to potential challenges over state legislative procedure.<\/p>\n Supporters of Better Roads, Safe Streets in November call Bredefeld a bully and a threat to democracy.<\/p>\n Aug. 6, 2026<\/p>\n With the state bill approved, Dyer announces he won\u2019t sign<\/a> the city-only tax plan by the Aug. 7 ballot measure deadline. He again expressed concern with two local tax measures on the same ballot.<\/p>\n Aug. 7, 2026<\/p>\n With one hour to spare, Dyer reverses course<\/a> by the 5 p.m. deadline, signing it as a hedge against the county measure being knocked off the ballot by litigation. In a news release, Dyer said new legal concerns prompted his change \u2014 his fourth public reversal during the week.<\/p>\n Critics emerge \u2014 especially from the Better Roads, Safe Streets camp \u2014 saying the city-only plan has no guardrails and cannot be guaranteed to be spent on transportation items.<\/p>\n Aug. 10, 2026<\/p>\n At a news conference, Dyer explains his reversals<\/a> and why he signed the city-only tax measure.<\/p>\n Fresno City Attorney Andrew Janz sent Dyer a legal opinion about the risks of the city not submitting its own measure, and the effects of a potential county lawsuit. \u201cAll of those were red flags,\u201d Dyer said. \u201cI remain hopeful that the county will do the right thing.\u201d<\/p>\n Pressure increases for Esparza to call for a special Fresno City Council meeting. State law for the city to withdraw its tax measure by Aug. 12.<\/p>\n Esparza said he has no plans to call for a special meeting.<\/p>\n Aug. 11, 2026<\/p>\n The supervisors voted 3-2 to place Better Roads, Safe Streets \u2014 now designated Measure S \u2014 on the March 2028 ballot<\/a>, contradicting AB 1923. Kus said would instead follow the state law mandating he would place it on the November ballot. Bredefeld, Buddy Mendes and Nathan Magsig voted for; Luis Chavez and Brian Pacheco voted against.<\/p>\n By the same 3-2 count, the supervisors voted to file a lawsuit against the state, Kus and the Better Roads, Safe Streets campaign.<\/p>\n Aug. 11, 2026<\/p>\n If the city council president does not call for a special meeting, Fresno city rules allow for four members to call for the meeting, as long as it is 24 hours in advance. At 1:08 p.m., Miguel Arias, Tyler Maxwell, Brandon Vang and Nick Richardson call for a special meeting the next day at 3 p.m.<\/p>\n There is one item on the open session agenda \u2014 to withdraw the tax measure. However, it would be a race against the clock. A vote, signature from the mayor and physical transmission to Kus\u2019 office would have to be completed by 5 p.m. \u2014 when the clerk\u2019s office closes its door for the day.<\/p>\n Aug. 12, 2026<\/p>\n The county officially filed its lawsuit. The county included Michael Der Manouel Jr. \u2014 a Fresno insurance executive and longtime conservative activist \u2014 and Fred Vanderhoof, former chair of the Fresno County Republican Party, as co-plaintiffs.<\/p>\n \u201cI am all for people deciding to tax themselves or not \u2014 that is not the question. The question is are we allowing the State now to come in and override our locally elected county supervisors in tax and other matters? If we don\u2019t defeat the State on this matter, are we giving the State license to essentially govern Fresno County on local decisions?\u201d Der Manouel wrote on his Facebook page<\/a>.<\/p>\n In 2023, the county sued the state over the law mandating the change of communities like Squaw Valley. A judge ruled the county did not have standing because it is considered a unit of the state. Adding plaintiffs may alleviate that hurdle.<\/p>\n The defendants are the state, Kus, Fresno County Residents for Better Roads and Safe Streets (the ballot committee), and the official proponents who attached their names when submitting the proposal \u2014 Fresno Mayor Jerry Dyer, Clovis City Councilmember Lynne Ashbeck, Veronica Garibay-Gonzalez of the Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability, and supporter Joan Easton.<\/p>\n Fresno County Superior Court Judge Robert Whalen, a former prosecutor and Clovis city councilmember, will preside over the case. As of Thursday afternoon, no date has been set.<\/p>\n The county is also asking for a temporary restraining order or an injunction. If issued, that could knock Measure S off the ballot until March 2028. The lawsuit notes that ballots start printing Sept. 9 (although Kus told The Bee the date is Sept. 8, but would not clarify because of the lawsuit) to meet the deadline to send ballots to overseas voters and members serving in the military.<\/p>\n Aug. 12, 2026<\/p>\n Three members of the Fresno City Council convened for a special meeting<\/a> at 3 p.m. at City Hall. The only problem was they needed four \u2014 a quorum \u2014 to conduct the meeting. While Arias, Vang and Richardson attended, Perea, Karbassi, Maxwell and Esparza did not.<\/p>\n Because the meeting could not legally take place, the city missed its 5 p.m. deadline to withdraw the measure.<\/p>\n Perea said she was out of town. She would not elaborate, citing security concerns. Karbassi said he had a last-minute family emergency. He also missed a regularly-scheduled city council meeting the next day. Maxwell said he had a pre-existing engagement. Esparza never revealed why he could not attend.<\/p>\n The following day, at the regularly scheduled Fresno City Council meeting, Esparza said: \u201cThe very short notice nature of yesterday\u2019s special meeting didn\u2019t allow for my attendance. But in case I have not been clear about my intention to leave the city fiscally solvent, in case anyone was still wondering where it stands, we are not going to recklessly leave the city\u2019s finances in the hands of our judicial system.\u201d<\/p>\n Aug-Sept. 2026<\/p>\n A hearing is likely to happen in front of Judge Whalen. There is no timetable of when arguments will be made or when a ruling may be issued. It is likely that whatever the ruling is, it will be appealed to a higher court.<\/p>\n Nov. 3, 2026<\/p>\n As of Aug. 14, city of Fresno voters will see two tax measures \u2014 the city-only Measure D, and the countywide Measure S.<\/p>\n The city of Fowler also approved a similar stop-gap measure as Fresno, a half-cent tax for the general fund that would expire in either 30 years, or if a countywide effort passed.<\/p>\n June 30, 2027<\/p>\n Measure C expires.<\/p>\n Melissa Montalvo and Liliana Fannin contributed to this story.<\/p>\n