Fresno County erupts as Gavin Newsom accused of overreaching with better roads tax

A California county is pushing back against Gov. Gavin Newsom after he signed legislation forcing local officials to put a controversial road tax before voters.

The governor signed AB 1923 last week, requiring Fresno County to place the Better Roads, Safe Streets initiative on the November ballot.

The move came after three Fresno County supervisors voted to order a 30-day review of the citizen-backed measure, a step they argued was allowed under state election law.

Critics accused the board majority of using the review to keep the proposal off the November ballot. But Fresno County Board Chairman Garry Bredefeld claims the issue is bigger than the proposed tax.

“This is bigger than one road tax,” Bredefeld said Thursday. “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.”

Bredefeld said the law effectively allows Sacramento to dictate how Fresno conducts its local elections.

“The bill undermines local control, turning Fresno County into a ward of the state, unable to control its own destiny,” he said.

The dispute centers on Better Roads, Safe Streets, a proposed half-cent sales tax intended to fund roads and transportation after the existing Measure C tax expires in June 2027.

The initiative was submitted by citizens rather than the county government — a distinction that could make a major difference at the polls.

Under current California court rulings, a citizen-sponsored special tax can pass with a simple majority, while a special tax placed on the ballot by a local government generally requires two-thirds approval. 

That timing is especially significant because Proposition 43 will also go before California voters this November.

If approved, Proposition 43 would require citizen-sponsored special taxes to clear the same two-thirds threshold beginning in 2027. A delay until 2028 could therefore make passage of the Fresno measure substantially harder.

Assemblymember Esmeralda Soria and state Sen. Anna Caballero backed AB 1923 after accusing Fresno supervisors of using the review process to delay the measure.

“This is a win for the democratic process, and it’s a win for voting rights,” Soria said. 

The legislation itself was also unusual. AB 1923 originally dealt with California’s Distressed Hospital Loan Program before lawmakers stripped that language and replaced it with the Fresno County election mandate. Newsom then signed the urgency measure. 

Bredefeld now says the county could take Sacramento to court. “If we have to sue, we’re going to sue,” he said. “That’s my intention.”

Fresno County has already hired an election-law specialist who is expected to brief supervisors Tuesday.

The county chairman argues the legislation may violate California’s constitutional restrictions on laws targeting a single county.

AB 1923 attempts to justify its Fresno-only provisions by citing the county’s “unique fiscal circumstances,” including the coming expiration of Measure C. 

“The fight has just begun,” Bredefeld said.

The proposed tax will now head toward the November ballot — unless Fresno County gets a judge to stop Sacramento’s latest intervention first.

Download The California Post App, follow us on social, and subscribe to our newsletters